The situation surrounding Julie McMahon and her allegations of emotional, physical, and spiritual abuse against Tony Jones have weighed on my heart the last few weeks. I have been discouraged by how prominent members of the progressive Christian community responded to the outcries of abuse survivors. I have been shocked by the callous and thoughtless defenses given by Jones and his compatriots. My heart breaks to think of what messages are being sent by these leaders to those who have suffered abuse in the Church.
At the same time, I have been encouraged by how many people have rallied together to give Julie the chance to share her story and to speak up about their own experiences of abuse. The Twitter teach-in #NotMyProgressiveSanctuary encouraged a vitally important dialogue about how progressive Christians can make their communities and sanctuaries more welcoming for domestic violence survivors and victims (and other marginalized groups).
Throughout the last few weeks, I have sat quietly on a pile of documents several sources have sent me. These are the sources I have referenced in my responses to the statements issued by Tony Jones and Brian McLaren. I was given these documents after agreeing to strict confidentiality and I desired to respect those conditions.
Now, however, I have been released from those conditions. So I have decided to selectively share what I have so that the record can be set straight once and for all — and with evidence, most importantly. I will be citing from a total of 8 official documents. These documents are:
- Fairview Health Services’s Pertinent Information Report of Julie McMahon Jones’s Assault Complaint from September 4, 2008;
- Hospital Report on Julie McMahon’s Injuries from September 11, 2008;
- Fairview Health Services’s Medical Report by Bradley Robert Williams of Julie McMahon’s Injuries from September 17, 2008;
- Hospital Follow-Up Report on Julie McMahon’s Injuries from October 22, 2008;
- Email from Tony Jones to Julie McMahon from December 27, 2008;
- Denise Wilder’s Psychological Evaluation Report of Julie McMahon Jones from February 2, 2009;
- Denise Wilder’s Psychological Evaluation Report of Anthony Jones from February 3, 2009;
- Hennepin County Family Court Services’s Custody and Parenting Time Evaluation from May 28, 2009.
The psychological evaluations and the custody recommendation will be the primary sources for this article.
As these documents contain highly personal and sensitive information about all the involved parties (many times unrelated to the issues at hand), I have decided that I will not release the documents in their entirety. I desire to respect the privacy of Julie McMahon, Tony Jones, and their children as much as possible. So I am redacting all references to their children’s names, I am redacting any unnecessarily personal references, and I will only be sharing excerpts from the documents that are relevant to the current controversy. Since I will not be providing the entire documents, I figured I should share a gallery of the front pages of the three primary documents as evidence that I truly do possess them:
What I desire to do in this article is set forth evidence of the actual facts involved in this case — to set the record straight, as it were. So that purpose we turn:
Fact #1: Julie McMahon felt abandoned and neglected in her marriage to Tony Jones.
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of McMahon:
Fact #2: During Wilder’s psychological evaluation, Julie McMahon claimed Tony Jones assaulted her in front of their children.
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of McMahon:
Fact #3: 2 of Jones and McMahon’s children testified that they saw Jones assault McMahon and are frustrated that Jones has lied about the assault (and other actions).
Excerpts from the Hennepin County Family Court Services’s Custody and Parenting Time Evaluation:
Fact #4: The police report filed concerning Jones’s alleged assault against McMahon mentions the children testified that Jones did assault McMahon.
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of Jones:
Fact #5: Julie McMahon visited Fairview Health Services a total of 4 times from September 4, 2008 to October 22, 2008 to document and receive treatment for the alleged assault. Fairview found that McMahon did suffer from a shoulder injury.
From Fairview Health Services’s Pertinent Information Report of Julie McMahon Jones’s Assault Complaint from September 4, 2008:
From the Hospital Report on Julie McMahon’s Injuries from September 11, 2008:
From the Fairview Health Services’s Medical Report by Bradley Robert Williams of Julie McMahon’s Injuries from September 17, 2008:
From the Hospital Follow-Up Report on Julie McMahon’s Injuries from October 22, 2008:
Fact #6: Wilder’s official conclusion of McMahon’s mental state was that her reactions to Jones were “normal and appropriate under the circumstances” and she was right to feel outraged over being termed “mentally ill” for suspecting Jones’s affair.
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of McMahon:
Fact #7: Wilder found that McMahon does not suffer from bipolar or borderline personality disorder, as Jones and others had alleged.
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of McMahon:
Fact #8: Tony Jones repeatedly pressured McMahon to perform sexual acts she was uncomfortable with; he continued to pressure her despite her being clear about her discomfort. He also lied about his pornography use to McMahon.
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of Jones:
Fact #9: Jones ignored McMahon’s cries for help as “theatrics” that could “wreck his career.”
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of Jones:
Fact #10: After finding out about Jones’s alleged affair with another woman, McMahon claimed that Jones told her “you will pay” if she revealed the relationship. Jones outright denied saying that.
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of Jones:
Fact #11: Jones did in fact make such a threat, thus he lied outright in his psychological evaluation.
An excerpt from Tony Jones’s email to Julie McMahon on December 27, 2008, which included information about Jones and Courtney’s relationship and sexually explicit dialogue between them:
Note that Jones is threatening a frivolous lawsuit. Defamation of character does not involve sharing emails of public interest.
Fact #12: Jones was diagnosed with an Axis II Narcissistic Personality Disorder, not an Axis I Disorder as he claimed here.
There is a vast difference between Axis I and Axis II diagnoses. Axis II diagnoses deal with personality disorders, not mood disorders, and thus take on a very different significance.
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of Jones:
Fact #13: Denise Wilder’s conclusion to her psychological evaluation of Jones determined that “he did little, if anything, to save the marriage,” “showed no recognition of the impact of his absence” on his children’s lives, demonstrated “a serious and profound lack of awareness,” and even demonstrated a “sadistic side.”
From Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluation of Jones:
Fact #14: Tony Jones refused to act when his children were being bullied by a foster child.
From Hennepin County Family Court Services’s Custody and Parenting Time Evaluation:
Fact #15: The Hennepin County Family Court Services found McMahon was honest in her answers and Jones was not.
From Hennepin County Family Court Services’s Custody and Parenting Time Evaluation:
Fact #16: The Hennepin County Family Court Services recommended that Julie McMahon have sole legal and physical custody of the children.
From Hennepin County Family Court Services’s Custody and Parenting Time Evaluation:
It is my hope and prayer that those who have denied the serious damage inflicted by Jones on his ex-wife and children, and turned a blind eye to his lack of accountability, will take this evidence to heart. If you care about abuse in the Church, then you — and all of us — need to start listening to those who have been hurt. We need to center their voices and take them seriously. It is tempting to believe our celebrities, but as the above evidence demonstrates, our celebrities are awfully good at disguising the skeletons in their closets.
“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”
~ Desmond Tutu
No real surprises in here (given the foreknowledge of NPD). All these divorce/custody battles, with one of the parties having NPD, seem to read the same.
I, like you, hope the leaders and friends will adjust their responses befitting someone who calls themselves friend and leader. So far, many leaders have done the worst thing possible for both their friend and Julie by posting public support and accolades for their friend on that scibed site.
That site only feeds into NPD and while simultaneously calling the victim a liar. As I’m mentioned elsewhere, it’s like supporting your recovering alcoholic friend by buying them a drink. It’s ignorance or self-serving behavior but it is definitely not friendship or leadership.
Currently they’re not supporting either party. Instead, they are merely inflicting more pain on both.
Exactly. True friendship to Tony does not mean enabling him in his outright documented lies just as true friendship to Julie does not mean shutting her down when being silenced is the source of her frustration.
When I saw this website post, I cried. I cried for the children of these people and I cried for myself.
I was born in 1981. I lived in a town in the Southwest where people of color were often dismissed by appearance alone. Even if you were educated as my parents (one white one Latino) were, you were lumped in with immigrant communities (hard working people!) who had no education. It was never assumed your voice had any value. It wasn’t even assumed you could speak English, let alone speak it fluently with a large vocabulary.
On top of this my family was troubled with deep psychological issues. Therapists have spent years telling me these things aren’t genetic, but I am not always sure, since one of my grandparents, both of my parents, and one of my 4 siblings all have diagnoses which share some similar traits.
My dad suffered from NPD and my mom from Paranoid PD. Those are both personality disorders, not character disorders, which is something my therapists stressed a lot as I grew up.
I am not going to lie. It was a hard childhood, emotionally. We had many advantages financially and educationally, but much was repressed and there was little to no emotional health during large stages of my childhood.
It took a long time for me to understand that not everyone’s parents were like my parents. My dad, at times, seemed impossible to please. Other times, I would even say the majority of times, he was the kindest man you ever met. The problem was you could not predict when his stress would elevate to a point where he became unhealthily self-absorbed. When this happened, he became more worried about how people would think about us as a family and how I and my siblings reflected on the family. During these times, I felt a lot of pressure and anxiety related to being good enough. He was always encouraging me toward top schools, toward top classes, toward top achievements until it got to the point where it sometimes barely seemed if my own preferences mattered. He had a very specific idea about what made for a good or successful family and that mattered, in these moments, more than anything else. I felt like I was hindered from being myself at times and that I existed as more of an accessory than a human being. He would enlist other people like his aunt or my soccer coach to push me toward the same goals he had for me. Lots of people knew my dad and liked him, he had lots of long-term friends, and they knew he could be a perfectionist about himself and others. I think they pitied him for how hard he made his own journey. But there was also no doubt in their mind he was a good man.
My mom was similar in that she was a really caring person most of the time. She was not only compassionate and emotional, but she sometimes was excesively emotional on both positive and negative things. She could cry or speak in a breathy teary voice about a burnt piece of toast and the world would come to console her. In her most stressed moments then, especially after my fourth sibling was born, she became much more hostile and suspicious of everyone. She mostly directed paranoia at my dad, but sometimes it was directed at us, and sometimes she seemed to think everyone was somehow working together to make her life harder. Mostly she kept this to herself, but in her stressed out moments, she was always campaigning. She was always trying to build alliances, first with people closest to my dad and then with her own family and then with (really) the grocer and the woman who cut my dad’s hair. She would tell them about her elaborate suspicions about my dad, taking real things and exaggerating them and connecting them in plots like someone writing a novel, and for a while they would believe her and campaign with her until it always unraveled when she eventually became erratic and demanding toward them too.
I can think of a three moments where it seemed like a physical altercation might happen. One was when my parents were fighting over a garage door opener because my mom wanted to leave during a fight and was threatening to wreck my dad’s car. One was when my mom tried to block the door to prevent my dad from going to work one day. The other one was when my siblings were fighting and my parents disagreed on how to intervene. In most cases, they could be civil people, but in their hardest moments when their disorders pitted them against each other, they could become enraged. They would yell and make threats, each of them manipulating and positioning to win the argument, and occasionally emotion would overcome them and it would result in some scuffle that left us kids crying. The whole thing was a bad combination of the two of them, sick, sick, sick with their mental illnesses and not healthy enough to help each other.
As I got older, my parents eventually got a little better. They got divorced when I was in middle school. My dad went to therapy, and he was able to reduce his NPD behaviors with treatment as he aged. He died a very kind man I was glad to know. My mom was very bitter for years. She maintained her skewed story about my dad for years, but when she finally remarried, all of the sudden that stopped. She had someone and found some ways to be happy again. She didn’t seem as concerned with convincing us of our dad’s failures. By the time my dad died, she went to his funeral and said good things about him. She apologized for how she had spoken ill of him for years and took more ownership of her own role. Her PD is still there, and she sometimes latches onto little things about her new husband and becomes convinced he’s doing little things to bother her. She once became convinced he was cheating on her, when he was actually helping one of her children with his car (not his) but didn’t want my mom involved because she can make things harder. Her traits still comes out in stressful moments, but now that she’s not caring for small children and is financially stable, and because my step-dad and her relatives insisted she stay in therapy, her burden is smaller and her heart is lighter. She is a different woman without the vengeance and bitterness.
Sometimes it seems like they moved on more than I have even been able to do. I sometimes feel like that kid, stuck back in the past, with no power and trying to navigate the expectations and paranoia of the people around me. It makes me less trusting of others.
I will say this. The best thing anyone (my uncle) ever did for my family was to get us involved in therapy and the second best thing people ever did for my mom was to get her involved in a Bible study. I don’t even over spiritualize it and think it was necessarily God or faith that changed her. I think it was women who could kind of help her find reality and get her head on the ground again. Who gave her things to look forward to and who could empathize with the hardship of raising four kids.
The worst moments of my experience happened when things would be quiet and calm for a while. Therapy was helping and growth was happening. And then my dad would do something dumb to try and document my mom’s erratic behaviors, which would set her off. Then she would enlist people to fight back against my dad for being controlling. And suddenly there were strangers, people who didn’t know a single thing about our family (a second cousin in another state, the assistant secretary at school, an old college friend) who had NO IDEA about what our family had been through or what we were trying to go through who would suddenly burst on the scene and take sides, often having about 15% of the information they thought they had.
The worst year of my life was my sophomore year of high school when my mom told the people at church a bunch of her paranoid ideas about my dad. It was terrible. Suddenly I had moms constantly asking me if “I was okay” and looking at my dad like he was a monster. Their kids, who were in youth group with me, started telling me about stuff they heard and I spent almost all of that year trying to disappear in shame. The insensitivity and ill-equipped status of those church people make me sick to think about it even to this day.
When my dad found out about what my mom had said, and how word had spread about him, he just pushed back harder. Harder and harder and harder. It threatened his specific ideas about what a good family looked like. He became more controlling. And in turn my mom tried to break even more free from his control. The more he tried to quiet her, the louder she would yell. The louder she would yell, the more he tried to use her mental illness against her. The more he did that, the more exaggerated her accusations became.
My siblings and I were used as pawns and the local community was the audience who seemed to love indulging in the lastest act of our family drama. I wanted to die from the public’s ill-fitted attempts to intervene which made my siblings and I feel much worse.
I know I’ve taken up way too much space here, but I have actually never seen a forum that was talking about something so similar as to my family. I’ve talked about this in individual therapy and group therapy many times. I’ve talked about it with my spouse, my siblings, our cousins, and my best friend. I’ve never tried to talk about it with strangers though. I am not sure I will have the courage to even return here or read the responses because I still have a lot of fear and mistrust of strangers and I am afraid that I won’t live up to expectations (thanks, Dad) or that you will all be suspicious of me (thanks, Mom) and it will make me re-life that weird stage of life when strangers tried to do what only therapists could. But when I heard there were two (or three?) kids involved here, I had to say something. I had to.
These people need therapy. They need the safety of nursing their wounds in a private community of support. They need good people in their neighborhoods to be part of their everyday lives and encourage them forward. I promise you. I beg you to believe me. This is what they need. Raise money for therapy. If you live close, take them meals, invite them to play dates (if the kids are little?), babysit their kids so they can go out and have some quiet time to renew themselves. Encourage them to be in therapy and stay in therapy. Help them be stable enough to keep jobs so they can afford to do that. Find them advocates or financial aid if they can’t afford it. PLEASE. I wish to God…it is truly truly truly my greatest wish in life…that people would have done this for us.
Sometimes you just got to get your story out of you. Sounds like it was your time. 🙂
Tell your story! And just for clarification Julie was not diagnosed with BP, a personality disorder. Living or working closely with an NPD can make folks look crazy. In a way, that is good because it means they can actually “feel” when the NPD is doing their evil. And we should hold them accountable for their destruction of people’s lives.
It’s been a couple of days since you commented, Olivia, but I just wanted to thank you for being brave, and being open and telling your story. I believe you, and I value your advice as coming from someone who ‘knows’. You are an inspiration!
It is true that the publishing of these documents and the attention surrounding them is likely to only entrench both parties in ongoing harmful behavior.
Let’s draw a partial comparison between certain features of personality disorders and alcoholism, for example. Researchers debate a few possibilities. People are either born with predispositions to PD and alcoholism, they are conditioned to them, or their diagnosis is a result of both genes and conditioning.
The alcoholic does not choose to have preconditioned or inherited vulnerabilities concerning alcohol, but she does make choices about how she engages alcohol. Being an alcoholic does not render her a worthless human being. In her worst moments, she can be pathological, abusive, etc. However, she can learn to control her environment, to choose to expose herself to things that are healthy, to avoid her triggers, to sense when she is particularly weak, and so on.
This is indeed similar to some of the most successful known models for treating NPD, for example, which are newly emerging. Patients are help to be reconditioned or resocialized to adopt new awareness, expectations, and coping skills that help them manage their vulnerabilities. Although they will never be able to be cured (at least according to our short history of current findings related to NPD), they can (if they are willing to undergo long-term treatment) learn to manage their weaknesses and make more appropriate and healthy choices.
It is true many of those suffering from NPD do not choose to stay in treatment, but when someone stays in treatment and is (again rarely) open to medication when recommended by their treating doctor, there can be much hope and progress.
All very good points, Davis. I know Julie and their children go to family therapy weekly, and I know that Tony has stated that he is in therapy. I have my doubts about Tony’s therapy since, after six years, his public conduct alone seems to indicate very little change, if any. That said, I do sincerely hope that he manages either to dedicate himself to therapy with a professional who has experience with his disorder or to discover whatever appears to have eluded him in his therapy up to now.
I’m glad that Julie is finally being heard, and that those who have worked so assiduously to keep her silenced seem to have failed utterly to keep her story hidden. I would be just as glad to see Tony come to terms with his disorder and learn to lead a life that will benefit his children and the thousands who have admired him. I think his learning to overcome what is without a doubt one of the most pernicious and implacable mental disorders would offer a great deal of hope to those who either suffer from a disorder themselves or who love someone who does.
Beyond the benefits to those who have followed his writings or who are close to him personally, however, I would like to see him overcome NPD because it would provide him with hope and peace in equal measure. As one who has had to work scrupulously for almost 15 years to learn to manage bipolar disorder and OCD, I hold a deeply intimate understanding of what it is to be ceaselessly tormented by one’s own mind. Relief from that sort of exhaustion is priceless. I hope he finds it. If I had it to offer, I would freely give it.
And the NPD’s response to his friends will be, “Who are you going to believe? Me or your own lying eyes?” And that is assuming the “friends” even bother to read the documents.
Hi R L Stollar,
I think you may have missed the documentary excerpt for this fact:
“He also lied about his pornography use to McMahon.”
Otherwise, well done, an excellent summary of the facts from these very concerning documents.
Thanks for pointing that out! In Fact #1, Tony denies pornography use to Julie. Then in Fact #8, Tony admits to Wilder pornography use. So it’s a combination of those two pieces of evidence.
I’m going to shoot straight with you. I think Tony screwed this one up bad. I think he threw away his marriage to chase celebritydom. I think he didn’t give a s*** about the marriage at that point and tried to push her around with his klout and go for the throat. I also think he moved onto wifey #2 before the divorce was inked but maybe after they were legally separated. That’s still too soon in my book to fly, especially for a religious leader. I think there’s a whole lot he should have morally done to get well and get his family well before he jumped into the next thing. I also think we all know the guy writes blog headlines to make people spitting mad so they’ll argue about some famous name he dropped or some issue he’s riling them up about. And I think he accumulated a lot of enemies with that strategy and they now hate him and are all piling on his failure now. It’s a whole lot of ugly.
All that said, I think it’s sleazy for you guys to carry on about porn. I’m not sure why you cut and pasted anything about the man’s sex life to begin with. Your case didn’t need it and now the two of you are commenting on it like you’re celebrating a man’s demise. Taking the low road and trying to humiliate a man in public for his family and friends to see says more about you than it does about him.
I never said anything about celebrating his demise. In fact, I have repeatedly expressed that I mourn for all parties involved. The main emphasis in the sexuality section wasn’t the porn (I don’t care much about that, other than that he was lying), but the disregard for Julie’s consent. Someone who repeatedly pushes someone to do things sexually they are not comfortable with is an abuser. That’s my main concern.
Thank you for sharing these documents, but I have to confess that I’m a little confused. By Julie’s own account, they had ONE incident where she tried to grab his recorder and he pushed her away, causing her to fall down and hurt her shoulder. Is that enough to make someone an “abuser” now? Is it okay to just throw that term around so casually – to label someone as that even if it is clearly not part of any kind of ongoing pattern of physical abuse?
As for other kinds of non-physical abuse, the picture that emerges for me from these documents is a severely broken marriage in which both participants emotionally abused and manipulated each other for a very long time. I guess if we want to slap a label on Tony for that, then we’ll have to apply it equally to Julie as well at this point. So again, thank you for bringing that to light through these documents.
Responding to emotional abuse in an emotional way sure as hell isn’t the same as being emotionally abusive. If you’re looking for a “perfect” victim, you’ll never, ever find it.
Thank you! It is so ridiculous. If my husband spent half of the year away from me and our kids chasing fame, it would probably make me behave a little crazy too from time to time.
Is it enough for a spouse to touch their significant other in anger causing them to fall and injure themself abuse?
YES!
that question alone terrifies me…..how badly must one be hurt, pushed, hit before it’s abuse? Dear God.
Exactly. A grown adult doesn’t need to knock someone down in a fight. It really just shows that not having power and control pushed him so far over the edge that he responded in a physically abusive way.
thank you, Lily Dawn.
Tony has a diagnosis of NPD. Do you not understand what that means?
There are many more instances. This is the one I could prove. Drive over my foot, grabbed me by the neck and shoved me up against a wall, slammed a minivan door on my leg, shoved me down a hallway to name a few.
💙
Let’s be clear. This “one incident” was a discrete instance of physical abuse. Under no circumstances is it acceptable to physically accost one’s spouse, and Jones didn’t merely “(push) her away”. His own children were testified to the fact that Jones shoved (their word) their mother under a chair. She didn’t simply fall, and her injury was a direct result of Jones’ actions.
So before you start accusing people of casually tossing around the term “abuser” it would be wise to make certain you are not casually dismissing abuse by diminishing it to a simple unfortunate occurrence. Likewise, suggesting that Julie McMahon was emotionally abusive to Jones because she was reacting to his narcissistic provocations is precisely the same thing as suggesting that a woman who ended up on the floor with a swollen and quickly blackening eye had the punch that caused it coming because she was saying things to her husband that he didn’t like.
Your attempt at drawing equivalencies between abuser and abused says a great deal about you. None of it good.
Ryan A., I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt here. You might want to learn about NPD. NPD is probably the only condition where the patient goes off alone and everyone else goes to get treatment… due to the damage wrought by the abuser.
And DV… for every incident where there is a witness, camera (Ray Rice), or physical evidence (Adrian Peterson) there have been 10+ incidents with none of the above. DV is by far the safest crime to commit in the US. Rarely reported. When reported, rarely charged. When charged, rarely convicted.
When this happens daily in our broken courts system, it is traffic. When church leaders join in, it is reprehensible.
This is very common in Borderline Personality Disorder and symptomatic of some phases of bioplar disorder – particularly during hypomanic states. What we can be absolutely sure of is this: No amount of mental illness excuses this sort of behavior. We can also be clear is that T. Jones is indeed the one who is mentally ill – if that is a true diagnosis. That is sufficient cause to see where the egg hatched.
As someone who works in child protection services, I agree to an extent. Permanently identifying any of us by our worst acts appears unfair. However, would we say that a person who murdered someone is unfairly referred to as a murderer? Not likely. How many times does someone have to be physically abusive before that label applies?
Labels aren’t the issue. If a man hits a woman, he is abusive. The effect of a single incident is often that it demonstrates the willingness to use physical force such that the abuser does not need to do it again and will maintain control. The victim knows he is capable and attempts to avoid such repercussions. The subsequent threats and attempts to control Julie reek of abusive behaviour.
Have mercy on us, Lord Jesus.
I’m still confused though. Why does the one incident with the recorder make Tony “abusive,” an “abuser,” etc., but the earlier incident in February 2008, related by Julie herself in her own psych eval above, admitting that she “grabbed his neck and shoulders and shook him” (with Tony reporting additional physical assaults during the incident) not count as abusive behavior on her part? What is the difference? Why apply the label to him and not her? I don’t understand.
Ryan A, It’s not that either is “right” but that only one is abusive. One is done from desperation and failure and the other is done from a desire to assert power over by any means necessary.
Plus, while I can’t find it right now, Julie has also said there many smaller physical cruelties inflicted, such as slamming the car door on her leg while watching.
I’d like to explain something more, Ryan A. What makes domestic physical abuse so rotten isn’t primarily the physical damage, which, unless it is terrible, will heal. It is that someone with whom you are intimate violates you, expressed contempt for your person.
That is why emotional and spiritual abuse are the same as physical abuse. All are actions of derision, disgust and destruction to the center of yourself by someone to whom you are vulnerable in attachment.
And how do you know, Patrice, the intent behind which either party inflicted their physical abuse? How do you know that Tony’s desire was “to assert power over by any means necessary,” and that Julie’s action was solely from “desperation and failure”? Who are you to claim to know their inner thoughts and motivations in those intimate moments? And is it really only intentions that make the difference when it comes to abuse, not actions?
The definition of “abuse” here seems to be increasingly slippery and that’s very disturbing. Apparently abuse is only abuse when it’s done by someone we’ve already decided to condemn. If it’s done by someone we’ve already decided must be the innocent victim in all circumstances, it’s perfectly acceptable. Does that about cover it?
Oh, Ryan A., analyse the power dynamics in the relationship, please!
I know it’s hard to think that way if you’re not used to it, but it makes a huge difference when interpreting allegations of abuse. Julie simply wasn’t ever in a position to abuse the straight, white, male police chaplain with a national platform and powerful allies, and get away with it. But Tony was, and did get away with it for many years.
Ryan A, psychology is a messy endeavor. It is a soft science and the truths in it cannot be discerned cleanly/clearly as in a good research lab. Psychologists study emotions/thoughts/behaviors in various contexts and find patterns in them. Some delineate ill health, other better health.
These patterns have been found to stay remarkably consistent across broader ranges of contexts. Still, humans are not stone and there is a great deal that is culturally influenced/bound.
It is from these patterns that the Diagnostic Manual makes diagnoses.
There are patterns for abused spouses, and for abusers. Among the abusers, there are patterns for Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
I was raised by a narcissist pastor-father and later became wife to an abuser. When I finally collapsed, I went through the long arduous path to healing. I also did a great deal of reading. Thus I am intimately familiar with many of the patterns I’m seeing in this situation.
If you insist on not giving attention to my and others’ offerings of long-fought knowledge, you will remain ignorant of some vital humans issues in this world. It is up to you.
This is sOrt of weak. While it does contain a few things we should be concerned with it is mostly repackaging of things Tony has already brought up and a lot of ‘Julie claims’ but and documentation proving she maid a claim, not evidence that it happened.
Testimonies from the children and from the licensed psychologist are not evidence to you?
So the fact that these “claims” were entered into evidence in a court of law, where the penalty for perjury is steep, is “sort of weak” in your book? If documentation provided under oath by professionals is insufficient for you then I cannot imagine what might convince you.
What is presented here is weak. We have claims from Julie, but not evidence. This does not mean abuse didn’t happen just that what we have here is not helpful in that regard. #5 needs to be investigated and backed up with police reports. His kids statements are damning. But the rest of it is not evidence of abuse but the debris of a broken marriage.
Fact 11 doesn’t seem true. Jones was denying that he had said “if you say anything about Courtney and my relationship you will pay.” In the email you posted, this is not at all what he said. His claim appears to be that he did *not* have an affair with Courtney. And while he does threaten her, he doesn’t say she will pay. He simply states what he will do and be unable to do.
While Jones looks pretty bad after all this, I’d suggest revising fact 11 to something like “Jones did threaten McMahon with litigation in an email about him and Courtney.” (Your readers are intelligent enough to draw conclusions about Jones’ status as a liar without your assertion in 11.) That is a fact; what you have stated may not be.
And what result of successful litigation is there beyond being compelled to pay a penalty? Seriously, you say the readers here are intelligent enough to draw conclusions about Jones, but you seem to have failed entirely to understand what happens when litigation occurs. The fact is that Jones has repeatedly taken Julie to court with lawsuits and motions he had no chance of winning simply as a means of making her spend money to defend herself. Whether that is an official result of litigation or not, Julie still pays for her legal representation, and that’s one more way to make her pay. Not to mention making the children pay, as well.
Do try to see the forest here. It’s the thing composed of all those trees.
That one struck me as a particular dick move (no pun intended) on Mr. Jones’ part. He has evidence that he didn’t have an affair and his relationship began after he filed for divorce? Me thinks the male doth protest too much. To tell the mother of his children that he will sue her for forwarding an e-mail (her property) is the act of a controlling jerk. To suggest that any damage to him reduces his ability to support his children is the act of a controlling jerk. Seen it a million times.
Furthermore, McMahon does appear to have lied in at least one instance, when she stated “I will show you the MRI with the Doctor notes and you can see the tear on the X-ray I have.” According to the documents here the MRI showed no tear and the X-ray was negative.
Again, I’m not trying to defend Jones here; I’m, on a whole, sympathetic to your view of all this. But: I do think outright honesty on the part of us observers is called for, and the facts should be stated as they are.
I have several other medical records other than the ones I posted, but honestly I know nothing about medical issues so I don’t feel comfortable making any interpretations of what I have. Hence why I limited my own claim to “Julie suffered a shoulder injury,” but not specifying what type. There seemed to be conflicting analyses of whether the shoulder injury was a tear or not.
There are a *lot* of details in this case, and trauma often impairs the ability to accurately remember details. On that basis, I think the relatively minor inaccuracies in McMahon’s recollections may actually add to the evidence that Tony’s behaviour traumatized her.
Let me say this again, the Emerging/Emergent conversations are not connected to the Progressive Conversation. Those who have been speaking out against Julie, in support of Tony, are not “Progressive Leaders” – many in the Progressive Conversation have no idea who those “leaders” are.
I’m only referring to individuals as “progressive” if they claim that term themselves.
John – you can TRY to distance the Progressives from the Emergents, but Convergence makes that a bit difficult. Seems that you and they are bedfellows. http://www.convergenceus.org/initiatorsimg.html
Wow. If these documents are as authentic as they seem, they are appear to be quite damning.
Their release has probably increased the likelihood that Tony will now use the “nuclear” option. He claims that he has homophobic communications sent by Julie. It is 2015, and political correctness rules public discourse. In the court of public opinion, statements perceived to be homophobic would likely be devastating to the author of them. Now, do such statements actually exist?
In the event that Tony is deemed to be unfit for ministry due to his actions and subsequently diminished reputation he will probably suffer a severe loss of income. If and when his child support contributions are diminished by the court I hope that folks won’t quickly forget about Julie’s financial needs.
Ironically, the biggest PR winner from all this turns out to be Mark Driscoll. Julie has stated, ” . . . . it was Mark Driscoll that sent us money for groceries and prayed for us. I know a very different Mark.” People can be complicated, huh?
What a bizarre claim. There are constant tirades by right-wing American Christians claiming that homosexuality is evil, LGBT people are agents of Satan conspiring to recruit children and have Christians locked up for expressing their views, same-sex marriage will destroy the country, identifying homosexuality with pedophilia and bestiality, etc. ad nauseam.
I wouldn’t call all of these (or even many of these) facts. Statements from Julie for sure. You can’t call a fact something that isn’t certain, even if a psychologist writes it down. They are just a scribe and doesn’t establish the statements as fact.
These are court-ordered documents (with the exception of the medical records) which have been entered into evidence. The court found them compelling enough to accept them as findings of fact. So how is it that these documents fail to meet your requirements for being called factual? What are those requirements, by the way? I’d be interested to know.
Yesterday my pastor told me about these abuse allegations. She also told me they had prompted a family’s medical records to be published and scrutinized over the internet. After familiarizing myself, I was alarmed to find she (my pastor) did not exaggerate how free some members of the public were in sharing their opinions about these very complex diagnoses.
This is troublesome to me and my colleagues. Narcissistic Personality Disorder (which I saw attributed to one individual) and some bipolar traits or behaviors (attributed to another) both reference serious personality disorders that are complicated and daunting for even those who have been practicing psychology for several decades. Diagnosing and treating these types of illness is a precarious task that is sometimes problematic for even trained professionals.
The opinion I have seen flippantly offered that gives me the most concern is one of extreme vilification, in which the person speaking broadly dismisses the patient in question as if someone with their diagnoses is literally hopeless and should be considered a second class citizen incapable of good behavior. I have seen this attitude conveyed by both supporters of Tony and supporters of Julie. In both cases, however, I find this blatant disregard for the rights of a mental health patient to be one of the most extreme cases of prejudice toward those with PDs that I have witnessed in my 30 years in this field.
It grieves me that this extreme manifestation of prejudice is surfacing in the religious community. I forwarded this URL to a researcher I know who was astounded at the breach of confidentiality and uninformed speculation that has taken place.
I strongly object to those who act as if someone with either of these descriptors, be it NPD or showing tendencies of BPD, should simply be seen as “guilty as charged” because “after all, they have BPD” or “obviously if you don’t think they’re guilty be default of having NPD, you don’t know NPD very well.”
Do you know what my colleagues call people who hijack psychological terms and use their limited personal experience and research about psychology to inflate and interpret the diagnoses of the medical community? HOGWASH. Dangerously toxic hogwash.
As a person of faith and a professional in this field, I have great hope for the individuals being discussed here and I adamantly object to those who attempt to project “guilty until proven innocent” onto either of these parties.
If you do live local to this couple or their apparent children, and have these specialized degrees or experience, offer your services pro bono to this broken family who has not been made vulnerable and stripped bare by careless internet commenters.
I would ask all those who do not have a doctoral degree and clinical experience treating personality disorders as a psychologist or psychiatrist to refrain from trying to interpret the mental health of the individuals spoken about here.
Instead do whatever it is you are qualified to do for them. If you are a clergy member, welcome them to their fold. Familiarize them with the types of programs in your church that could benefit their family. Invite them to recovery groups. Embrace them, love them, pray for them, baptize them, counsel them, marry them, bury them with the same care and concern you would any other person endowed with worth by their Creator.
If you are a police officer in the local community, take a look at these case files. Go over the reports carefully. Suggest they may need to be re-opened and re-examined. If you are an advocacy professional, review the records related to this family, examine what other services or routes of support might have gone uninvestigated or unoffered.
If you are a teacher in the local community, pay special attention to their children. Encourage their natural inclinations and applaud their strengths. Inspire them toward good self-case and make your support extra evident in your daily interactions. See to it that school counselors or social workers who could provide additional support are notified.
If you are a person reading this on the internet who is grieved as I am by abuse allegations and whose blood boils at the thought of vulnerable women being silenced, be a listening ear on a phone call, offer ongoing encouragement over social media, discreetly offer donations. Pray all you can. Encourage these people to build local support systems and be professionally treated LONG-TERM. Support advocacy programs in your local community, volunteer at shelters that provide services to abused spouses or those suffering from mental illness, teach your children to speak about mental illness with care.
The disorders being discussed here are serious issues that deeply impact real human beings who are more vulnerable to depressive episodes, alcohol abuse, eating disorders, and many other harmful expressions of stress and sadness. Imagine these people were your family, that each of them is someone’s father or someone’s son, and are not casual fodder of tabloids.
Act toward justice and mercy without committing acts of injustice or becoming merciless yourself.
I think Tony’s in the wrong no matter how you cut it, but I agree with you on the hogwash.
People need to focus on what’s central and stop going down rabbit trails they know nothing about. It sounds like a bunch of middle schoolers trying to yell insults across the lunchroom. Instead of exchanging loical points, they just yell, “Oh yeah? Well, he has NPD!” It’s undermining your argument to keep falling back on NPD-this and NPD-that. You can do better. You’re not a bunch of shrinks. You’re betraying how little you know and discrediting your own side.
Tony didn’t get it right. He might not have done everything alleged against him, but he screwed his reputation as a religious leader for his own selfish gain and he’ll pay for that for a long time to come. You’re helping his side with your ignorance about medical matters.
There’s a huge difference between emotional abuse (what Tony did repeatedly) and emotional RESPONSE to abuse (Julie). Julie having very emotional reactions to being emotionally and physically abused isn’t somehow also emotional abuse of Tony. That’s bullshit.
It reminds me of the game people used to “play” with me in junior high, where they’d tell me I was angry when I wasn’t. They’d tell me so often and gleefully and I’d deny it and deny it…until I got angry that they wouldn’t just leave me alone, then suddenly I could be dismissed for my anger. Except this is on a MUCH larger and WAY worse scale.
“It’s undermining your argument to keep falling back on NPD-this and NPD-that. You can do better. You’re not a bunch of shrinks. You’re betraying how little you know and discrediting your own side.””
Not to those who have had up close and personal dealings with an NPD. They get it. It is pure evil. On steriods. The more power and public acclaim they have, the worse they are. In private, of course.
The only thing you are trying to do is discredit personal experiences. Are you a priest?
“[Tony] claims that he has homophobic communications sent by Julie.”
That’s funny, because Julie claimed that Tony was homophobic a long time ago. Seems like a bit of defensive blame-shifting at this point.
Also, not wanting to have anal sex does not make one homophobic.
Regardless of the genders of the participants.
twilsonb — absolutely agreed.
And, while any alleged comments like that by Julie would severely disappoint me, she’s not the one parading her support of the LGBTI community at every opportunity. She doesn’t claim to be a progressive Christian leader. She didn’t make a big deal of the timing of her second marriage, gay marriage laws, and getting married with a gay couple.
Tony did all these things, so he should be held to a much higher standard.
I really feel for Julie.. Imagine investing so much of your life into a marriage, forgoing career development to take care of children (solo it seems), only to be put in this position of extreme insecurity and power/financial disparity. Truly sadistic. And he gets to appear like the stoic victim after tearing her life to shreds because she is, understandably, emotional.
One thing that stood out to me were his efforts to hide his finances and reduce his child support responsibilities, as well as litigate Julie into poverty. Who would do this to the primary caretaker of their own children? Unless he wanted to be the rich parent with all the resources, so he could manipulate them with gifts/travel/education that Julie would be unable to provide.
WhyChristian?? Why Christian indeed.. This is all so gross.
[comment removed at the request of the poster]
Thanks for the comments! I appreciate you joining the conversation and providing your expertise here.
As far as the Axis I and Axis II conversation goes: I am aware that with the DSM-5 in 2013, the axial system was eliminated. The Wilder report was from 2009, though, so that’s why I mentioned the distinction.
Your point about feelings vs. expressions is fair and important. And to clarify, by “reactions” I was meaning her emotional reactions. Much of the debate over this whole situation has been around whether Julie was mentally unstable because of her emotions, and my point here is to highlight the fact that, no, her emotions were rational and justified. But I do think the distinctions you made are important.
Finally, I understand your concern about only providing excerpts from the report. But while I have permission to post the whole report, there is a lot of personal information in it that I think is irrelevant to this particular situation and would unnecessarily violate the individuals’ privacy. So I decided to only provide excerpts to respect everyone’s privacy to the highest extent possible.
I do find it unfortunate that you won’t release the whole report. That sort of requires us to just take your word for it that the rest of it isn’t relevant or might not add some helpful context or balancing perspectives. For instance, much of what you posted seems to be Ms. Wilder relating what Julie had told her about why the marriage dissolved. Would you at least be willing to post the part of the report where Wilder relates Tony’s version of events? I think that would be helpful in at least showing how the two people involved were interpreting things differently.
Thanks for considering it.
You’d need to ask Tony for that, right?
Great care has been taken to block out the names of Julie’s kids. Thank you. Can the foster child’s name also be blacked out? He deserves the same respect / privacy
Yes! Thank you for pointing that out. That was a bad oversight on my part and I apologize. I have re-done the image and redacted his name as well.
On top of everything, I do feel for the kids here. I can’t imagine all of this being thrown out in the public sphere. But that burden is T. Jones’ to bear based on how long this had been going on. There are so many places where things could have just stopped. In my own divorce I was advised early on that if I shame the parent, I shame the child. What is clear is that career came before them. I am certainly not perfect and have had to wash loads and loads of my own dirty laundry, but I have done it with a lot of pain and also a lot of healing. But at some point you have to fall on your own sword for your kids’ sake and dump the career ambition for their sakes. To do what’s right for the kids, we have to sacrifice what seems right for us. Through the lens of their welfare we find truth.
“If you attempt to destroy my career, I will be unable to provide for the children.” As a dad who went through some shit a few years ago, I find that to be weak and cowardly. As a dad, you do everything to provide for your children. If I had to clean porta johns I would. I was unemployed and not sure if I would be able to have the same kind of job I had. But I worked hard to find a job and would have given anything to make something work.
Tony, please stop the bullshit and do right for your kids and get brutally honest. Nothing adds up and what you’ve presented is almost entirely bullshit based on everything I have read above.
I have pleaded the “cut the bullsh&% for years. Seems unable. Kids suffer. You are a bigger man who gets the whole “shame the co-parent, shame the kids,” Children are 1/2 mom, 1/2 dad and we need to cooperatively and civilly co-parent for them. He. Can’t. Do. It. And, the enablers he has surrounded himself with are a major part of the problem.
Do you really want him co-parenting with you considering that he’s abusive? Most victims of abuse can only dream of not having their kids exposed to the abuser after the divorce.
Thank you for posting these documents. It’s a shame that people demand proof rather than believing the victim, but hopefully this is proof enough for those people.
Fancy,
Proof is a must, otherwise anyone who claims anything has to be believed, and we’ve seen many people get wrongly accused over the years. This evidence, while not completely damning of Tony Jones for some of the reasons mentioned above, does strongly support much of Julie’s case. Straws in the wind, one might say.
…, and we’ve seen many people get wrongly accused over the years.”
Can you provide “proof” of that statement. And please do not list the media sensations. Statistics, please. Proof as you demand.
We are dealing with an NPD and NPD’s use gasllighting which is a form of wrongly accusing someone of something/anything/all the time. The lengths an NPD will go to in order to bring doubt on a person are bold and shocking.
The diagnoses has not been around long enough for there to be adequate research on the lifespan of those with NPD or the efficacy of existing and emerging treatments. Along the same lines, the journal articles related to this issue are still largely abstract. The complicated and changing understanding around this diagnosis has been well-established by researchers like Ronningstam, Pincus, and Miller & Campbell.
One cannot responsibly lump every NPD patient under one stereotype either. Narcissism diagnoses can range from a baseline to extremely severe manifestations. This is why psychologists with expertise in this diagnosis identify many sub-types of the disorder. This is also why they employ severity scales which clarify to what degree specific NPD traits manifest and how often they manifest.
There is also budding research about short-term or transient narcissism which results in NPD manifestations triggered by traumatic life experiences. Behaviors associated with this have a much shorter life span than someone diagnosed in their youth or diagnosed after years of treatment under a single psychologist.
Additionally, there is a growing body of research that shows those with NPD who undergo psychiatric treatment can improve with age.
One more question while I’m here: much of this information above is from Denise Wilder’s psychological evaluations of Tony and Julie, yes? And her evaluation basically relates the versions of events told to her by each of them, correct? That being the case, does it really count as “proof” that either of their interpretations of the events are correct? In the end, isn’t this still just Tony’s version and Julie’s version? Just because a psychotherapist writes it down and says “this person said this,” doesn’t add any more (or less) credibility than either of them already had, right?
Multiple court hearings have found these documents credible evidence.
To suggest that a psychologist conducting a general evaluation of any individual is simply reporting what was said to them is a profound misunderstanding of what constitutes a psychological evaluation. Honestly, if psychological evaluations were nothing more than what you represent them to be then there really would be no need for a psychologist. A stenographer could do what you describe.
Psychologists do not simply believe whatever they are told. They are highly trained professionals who have spent years learning how to perform these admittedly complex and difficult evaluations so that they might draw worthwhile, reliable conclusions from them. There is a reason why they are admissible as evidence, and that reason is that they are a dependable means of cutting through exactly the sort of he said/she said you seem to believe they perpetuate.
Professionals can be mistaken, to be certain, but there is no indication in the record that Dr. Wilder’s evaluations have been challenged. In fact, Tony Jones has publicly acknowledged the narcissistic personality disorder with which she diagnosed him. That sounds like a significant endorsement of Dr. Wilder’s evaluations from the one person in all of this with the most to lose by them. Likewise, there is no evidence that Dr. Wilder has ever been censured by her licensing board, and I can find no evidence anywhere that would suggest that her competence has come under scrutiny.
Your questions thus far seem crafted to cast doubt upon Julie’s case under the guise of inquiry. Otherwise, they appear to indicate either that you really don’t understand enough of this subject to ask informed questions or that you have a bigger question and are afraid to ask it. So what is it you really wish to know?
I’m not questioning the validity of Wilder’s diagnosis. I’m questioning the account of events that she records. Her conclusions are likely accurate, but her conclusions are about the personalities of the individuals, not about whether or not their version of events is factually accurate. That is the job of the court to determine, not the court appointed psychologist. So when we get above Julie’s account of their early marriage and why she things went wrong, that’s still just Julie’s account, not an independent third party. I’m concerned that presenting this as “Wilder’s” neutral, third-party account of what went wrong and who was at fault is therefore misleading.
You do realize that courts often order evaluations in these situations. Why would they do this if they are just “scribes”?
I have trouble accepting most of this as evidence of any kind. #5 is serious and needs to be investigated but without a police report it amounts to not much more than she made these claims. My understanding is that an MRIS and X-ray were inconclusive. The claim the kids made of assualt needs to be taken seriously. But much of the rest of what is presented Is not evidence but the debris of a failed marriage. So many people are jumping on Team J or Team T but what has been presented here breaks my heart but proves nothing.
Jason,
Did you ever make these kind of comments on Tony’s statement?
(Well, it’s too late now, he’s taken it down. And I don’t think he allowed comments, anyway.)
Or the statements of his supporters?
Could it be that your are part of the problem?
Part of the abuse?
You are trying to look neutral, but you are instead contributing to silencing Julie.
Go make your comments about “neutrality” and “the debris of a failed marriage” on the blogs of those who have large platforms to put their views, and have done so for the past 6 years. We will continue to listen and believe the abused, and identify silencing tactics here.
Hi
I have a download of Tonys statement and have several concerns there which i have directed to him and severak if his followers.
I am in no way saying abuse didnt happen. Im saying what is presented hete is not evidence, but grievences. I have also identified two areas where i think investigation MUST occure per Jumies claims.
Im not on a Team.
What is presented here just does make the case.
(Sorry, Jason, I can’t reply to your reply. So I’m posting here instead.)
Jason, you just don’t seem to be familiar with, or accept, best practice in handling allegations of abuse[1], which is deeply concerning given your work with adults with disability[2]:
* believe the victim immediately, and by default (you’ll be right 90-98% of the time)
* analyse the behaviour of the alleged perpetrator for abusive patterns
* don’t re-victimise the person by demanding evidence (many abused people don’t have evidence)
* don’t make the story about your need for proof, your position, your neutrality, or your opinions
[1]: https://rlstollar.wordpress.com/2015/02/13/tony-jones-and-why-the-documents-shouldnt-have-been-needed/
[2]: http://www.wcsap.org/disability-community
“Reflect back on what I said earlier about the release of his statement and keep the power differentials in mind. On the same day that he published it, who shared it and went to bat for him? Rachel Held Evans, with almost 60,000 Twitter followers. Jay Bakker, with over 16,000 followers. Jeff Chu, with over 6,000 followers. David Sessions, whose tweet was favorited by Zach Hoag (who previously “stood with SGM victims”), with 12,000 followers. Also keep in mind that Jones himself has over 14,000 followers as well as a nationally recognized blog and a respected speaking circuit as a pastor and progressive Christian thinker.”
https://rlstollar.wordpress.com/2015/01/28/a-response-to-tony-joness-statement/
” have trouble accepting most of this as evidence of any kind. #5 is serious and needs to be investigated but without a police report it amounts to not much more than she made these claims. ”
Police reports from the police chaplain’s police friends in the force? Is thatwhat you are looking for?
I appreciate your act of resisting the impulse to make a couch diagnosis about other people’s mental health.
If any of you actually know this couple, there is promising new research around the use of psychotherapy related to personality disorders.
This helps individuals understand their own abilities and limits so they can better internalize criticism or failure. It helps people regulate their emotions so that unhealthy emotional patterns do not prevent them from being able to nurture healthy romantic and platonic relationships. It also helps them release unrealistic goals or expectations for how their life events will resolve so they can move on with the process of “moving on.”
There has also been hopeful progress for PDs when Schema Therapy, Neurolinguistic Programming, and modified 12-step-programs have been engaged.
I’ve also been interested in the writings of Dr.Craig Malkin who does believe those suffering from personality disorders can change and progress over time. His thoughts around helping NPDs and others overcome insecure attachment styles is truly optimistic!
http://thedegree.org/abouteau/faculty/jason-derr/ Curator/Director of the Emergent Theologians Group.
Yea those people. Helped with a project ages ago but was uncomfortable with some of their liberterian stuff. Ive asked them to take that bio down but have never heard back. Id love to have a university to work at as a home base but, sadly, that is not the case. I must be content as a caregiver to adults with didabilities and occasional fiction writer. Not sure why you posted that, other than to remind me of how ugly my photo is. I think it says i was part of an emergent theological group butwe never got that off the ground, just lots of conversations about trying to do a project. Ah, the life of a failed scholar.
Julie
In full disclosure McLaran is a friend.
Ive interacted wiith your ex 3 times and found him to be an asshole each time. He is not a friend and i find his scholarship lazy.
Im not discounting that abuse may have happened. I am saying that the claims here in #5 and in the claims your children witnessed an assualt MUST be investigated. That is serious shit.
But most of what you have posted here are grievences and not evidence. You can make a stronger case with police reports, xrays, MRIs and documentary evidence of affairs, not just a psychologist report.
This will strengthen your case immensely.
Many prayers for healing for you, Tony and the kids.
Jason
I am not telling my story to prove anything to anyone. You can choose to stand with a victim when they say they’re abused or you can put them on trial. I am not on trial here. I am telling my story because it happened, it was covered up, and it’s wrong. The fact that Christian male Emergent leaders enabled and were involved, makes it that much more heinous. The female leaders who now have chosen silence is disappointing to say the least. The out pouring of encouragement and support from those exclusively outside the Christian Industrial Complex is telling.
“This will strengthen your case immensely.”
Why does she need to strengthen her case for you? This is about being silenced for years by an NPD and his cronies who claim they are for the oppressed. For them, it is about business/dollars/celebrity.
Jason Derr-You say, “not on a team” but a quick google puts you commenting on his blog since 2010. Then there is the role of Curator/Director of the Emergent Theologian Group and I have seen your comments on other blogs, so….maybe not so neutral, and that is fine. Don’t believe me. No one is trying to convince you of anything. I can tell you this, as a survivor telling my story and speaking my truth has been more than enough! I would tell anyone who has been abused and undergone what I have been through to keep talking and don’t let anyone try and gas light, shame, shun, threaten or badger you into silence. Keep talking.
Ive commented on his blog, most likely. But im not on a team. I find your ex to be an ahole. The emergent theological group was ages ago – 3 apartments and 2 countries ago. Im not discounting your claims and have named the areas you have the strongest case. But the rest of wgat you have posted are grievinces, evidence of a failed marriage but not proof or evidence.
Emergent Theological group was a thing we tried to put together but it never gelled. Im a failed scholar working for 20 grand a year now. Brian is a friend but im nit part of any movement or conversation.
After reading your comments here and on Matthew Paul Turner’s Facebook post (which has since been deleted by Mr. Turner for reasons not yet known), I’ve formed what I suspect is a relatively good view as to why your career as a scholar stalled. Namely, you are simply unable to accept evidence for what it is. You nit-pick everything in what can only be called some sort of state of hyper-scrupulosity until you finally decide that more information is necessary before any conclusions may be drawn. Only, you seem all but incapable of accepting anything other than a direct witness as reliable, and even then one is forced to wonder if you could accept any witness other than yourself. Either trust the investigation which has already taken place or start your own new investigation from scratch, but stop implying that there has yet to be an investigation of this matter. Otherwise, calling again and again for an investigation which has already taken place is as useless as a new investigation would be redundant. Just because these facts are new to you it does not then follow that they are either new or new-found.
I will tell you the same thing I used to tell my students. Define your terms; identify your objections; represent them concisely and clearly; and, prepare yourself for the inevitability of never answering every question. I would hasten to add that repeating your questions doesn’t make them relevant, and repeating your objections doesn’t make them accurate. Both simply make it increasingly difficult to interact with you.
Good comment! The kind of proof I have seen demanded in xtian circles whether fundy or now emergent is ridiculous. I have come to believe that followers will only believe something if the celebrity admits to every detail. Not. Going. To. Happen.
Words here really seem to have lost their meaning. So now simply to question Julie at all or ask for more evidence is “silencing”? In what way has Julie been silenced? She continues to post her comments here and elsewhere. I have seen dozens of posts at numerous websites in recent months repeating her grievances against Tony. And if she wanted her story out there sooner, what would have prevented her from starting her own blog and putting it all out there for everyone to see? She has the same access to the internet as the rest of us.Tony and his friends don’t own that. No one can stop her from saying what she has to say. That doesn’t mean everyone will automatically believe without question what she is saying. But being asked to clarify statements or provide corroboration for serious accusations is not the same as being silenced. Not at all. It’s not even silencing when some people ultimately choose to doubt or disbelieve what she is saying. Even then, she still gets to say it. And she is. And she has been, for years. So how is that “silencing”?
As I stated in my most recent reply to you, Ryan, it appears that you simply have failed to inform yourself adequately regarding the dynamics of abuse and silencing. While your intentions may not have been to silence Julie, that does nothing to change the fact that what you’ve been doing in this comment thread is precisely what people do to silence survivors of abuse.
You ask: “So now simply to question Julie at all or ask for more evidence is ‘silencing’?” Yes, Ryan. It is. Because exactly none of this is happening for your benefit or to satisfy your personal requirements for believing serious accusations. You speak from a position of privilege (as one who has not suffered abuse) to those who have survived that which you have never experienced, and you demand that they prove themselves to you. Not simply that they provide evidence, but that they provide evidence which you find satisfactory and sufficient.
That’s the objection to your questions. No one is suggesting that you should never ask questions. We’re suggesting that answering your questions is not the point of everything that’s happening. You are not owed answers, and yet you have become increasingly demanding of answers.
Before you start typing your next comment, take a few minutes to consider what you wish to know and how best to ask for that information with some semblance of respect for those you’re asking. Avoid addressing yourself to the people here as though anyone owes you anything at all, and ask straightforward questions with some degree of humility. I think you’ll find the responses far more enlightening and helpful to you.
Again with the double-speak. You say I’m not owed answers or evidence, and yet this whole post was about supplying evidence. Why else did Mr. Stollar post all these documents?
But I still call bullshit. I think we ARE owed evidence and that the evidence presented deserves serious scrutiny, not just passive acceptance of a singular interpretation. Because why else has Julie gone public with all of this in the first place unless she intended for it to be examined publicly? If all she wants is support and uncritical acceptance of her story, then let her find a therapy group, not a blog full of strangers. But since she has come online to make serious accusations again both Tony and many others – and then supplied “evidence” to support her case, then yes, we are in fact justified in debating its meaning and significance and in asking for more clarification or support for her interpretation of the facts.
Of course my own posts above weren’t actually asking for additional evidence (that was Jason Derr’s request, I believe). Personally (if you’ve been paying attention), I’ve simply been questioning the spin that’s being given to the materials above, and especially the way we’re using words like “abuse” and “silencing,” not to mention questioning whether psych evals are necessarily the same thing as “evidence” in the first place. I agree with Jason – at most what has been posted here is evidence of a bad marriage: evidence that Tony was an asshole and an absentee husband that had at least one physical altercation with Julie, as well as evidence that Julie also has a volatile personality (a “pre-existing tendency” toward “dramatic and aggressive [emotional] expression” was the phrase I believe the psychologist used) and has had incidents of violently lashing out at Tony too. I’m sure it can’t have been easy for Julie to be married to a person with NPD like Tony. I feel for her. I’m sure it wasn’t easy being married to an emotionally aggressive person like Julie either for that matter. But this evidence of a mismatched and mutually dysfunctional marriage still doesn’t fit with the kind of ongoing and one-sided abuse that has been claimed.
But again, I’m not asking for more evidence. I’m suggesting that some here are misinterpreting the evidence that has already been given.
Again, im not saying abuse didnt happen. Ive pointed out where i think her strongest case is. But what is here presented as evidence is nothing if the case – what we have are grievences. Tonywas mean to a foster child. Evidence of poir parenting yes, of abuse no. Tony did not work hard to save his marriage. Evidence of poir husbanding, a rocky and broken relationship yes, abuse no. Tony pressured his wife for sex, sighn of a bad marriage but not of abuse. I am not sating abuse didnt happen. Obviously trauma is driving Jies actions. She is hurt and angry and still has feelings for her ex. But what we are given here is nit evidence. A psychologist referencing a psychologists report is not evidence, show us the police report, go back to the cops who were present and get new statements. The psychologist referencing an affair is not evidence, but a claim made in a therapy session. Show us evidence of an affair. Her strongest case is the medical records and the kids saying they saw an assualt. Julie obviously has trauma and living with a persin with undiagnosed NPD cod not have been fun.
The workings of a logical mind:
1. I’m not saying abuse didn’t happen (passive voice)
2. Julie lived with an undiagnosed NPD.
3. The above docs show NPD diagnosis, to which Tony agrees.
4. The above docs are not evidence.
5. Julie obviously has trauma (passive voice)
6. Go find us some evidence.
Yes. Serious claims are made in this list of evidence which must be investigated. Nost of what is here is not evidence of anything other than a broken marriage. If she is trying to prove abuse happened these dont work. If she is trying to prove her ex was an ass, job well done. I am not discounting abuse happened, just saying this documentation is not helpful. Living with a person who is undiagnosed NPD must have trully been difficult, but that alone is not evidence of abuse. Read through what is presented here #5 warrants an investigation. Children saying they saw abuse warrants investigation. The rest of it is… Ugly, sad, broken.
What part of “these are documents ordered by the court and accepted as findings of fact under penalty of perjury” are you having difficulty grasping, Jason? What you’re calling a list of grievances are excerpts of evidence accepted by a court of law as factual. It would be acceptable to any court in any jurisdiction in the U.S., and any reasonable person should have no difficulty accepting it. Can you offer us some idea as to what might count as evidence for you besides going back and repeating the same investigation all over again?
You keep demanding evidence and investigation despite the fact that what you’re calling grievances are the result of a court-ordered investigation. The fact that you refuse to accept this investigation as sufficient does not make it so. As evidenced by the fact that you insist on repeating the same objections without clarification or counter-point, you simply wish to continue flogging the deceased equine. Have fun with that. I think the rest of us can safely ignore you from now on.
I will leave you with a parting thought, however. Just as I pointed out to Ryan A. above, what’s happening here is not about you. It’s not about what you find acceptable or unacceptable as evidence of abuse. No one owes you answers. (It appears you are unwilling to accept answers, in any case.) You don’t get to demand anything. If you have actual questions, ask them. Do it with some respect. Think them through.
More logic by Master Jason:
1. The police are the only ones who can provide evidence.
2. A real NPD diagnosis would be evidenced by police.
3. There is no police report that Tony has NPD.
4. Therefore, Tony has undiagnosed NPD.
5. Tony was wrong when he wrote that he had NPD diagnosis because the police didn’t provide evidence.
Good thing Tony is no longer police chaplain, or they’d have to fire him for disrespecting police non-evidence, and there’d be even less child support for Julie. Whew, dodged a bullet!
I no longer need to be in this conversation. I truly hope that Julie finds some peace and if abuse happened some justice. If these documents were submitted to a court i did not see that in the above info. It wpuld help to include that info, what the hearing pertained to and the veedict. Regardless prayers for all.
Logic is a good thing, Patrice. Always.
This is not ‘proof’ of anything. Is this really how adults act towards one another regardless of their distain for the other? While there is no court finding nor police report here, even if there was, all of you engaged and enraged are making a mockery of goodness, kindness and even justice.
http://www.randybuist.com/2015/01/standing-with-friend-even-if-perhaps.html?m=
Oh, Randy, you have no credibility in this conversation with me. I have seen how you behave towards women in private, and it creeps me out. I can understand why you identify with Tony in this scenario.
Hi R.L., I was wondering if you’d be willing to communicate with me via email? I am unfamiliar with the faith communities related to the individuals whose treatment you’re dissecting here (my family is Catholic), but I am licensed as a psychologist in the state of New York and I have some deep concerns about this post on several fronts. I don’t want to disparage your efforts publicly, as you appear to be very well meaning, but I do want to express some strong reservations about what is happening here.
Sure! (Got your email, too, btw.) I’ll respond later today or tomorrow.
Thank you for your prompt reply. I later stumbled across your email address, so I did send you a note just a bit earlier. Have a good night.
Randy- “is this how adults behave toward each other?”
I thought the *same thing* when I read the psych eval detailing Tony’s plan for how to end his relationship with Julie without ever talking to the kids about it! It’s in his own words to the evaluator!
There is no police report concerning the “discernment” group that met to “pray” about having Julie committed. Is there a police report about spiritual vs legal wife? Is that a norm for progressive xtians? There is no police report about Tony spreading the lie his wife is mentally ill as in bat s***t crazy. And being silenced by the celebs, where does she go get her reputation back? Perhaps even his police friends were told this. So where does the single mom go get her reputation back? Could that damage her ability to get a good job in her community? After all, the police chaplain said this.
There is no police report about the silencing, demanding bloggers take down comments where Julie speaks up.
The imbalance of power here is the real problem. But people love their celebrities.
You’re right, no evidence has yet been presented for those other accusations – so why are you all so quick to assume that you KNOW for sure that they actually happened exactly the way Julie claims? After all, we’ve already gotten numerous other testimonies from those in the discernment group showing that Julie’s original version of what they actually did was untrue or at least highly misleading. Others have weighed in to say that they never saw any evidence of an organized cover-up or deliberate gaslighting campaign as Julie has repeatedly claimed. Can anyone provide links to a place where anyone related to emergent ever publicly called Julie “crazy” or “bat-shit” or whatever? Where did that happen and when? Also, as far as I know, Julie has not yet responded to Tony’s assertion that it was she, not he, who first used the term “spiritual wife.” Can she provide examples of anywhere else in their writings that they argue for anything like that concept? (BTW, I’ve read Tony’s writings on gay marriage and that’s not what he’s talking about there.) Neither has she specified whether the sexual email she claims to have between Tony and Courtney was sent by them before or after she and Tony had already begun divorce proceedings. Nor has she been willing to name the emergent leader she says was shocked and angry to discover that email along with her. Perhaps that person could clear up exactly when Tony and Courtney’s relationship began?
With all of these discrepancies in Julie’s original claims, and with no further corroborating evidence to resolve the difficulties, some of us, I think, are indeed justified in withholding judgment until further clarity is gained.
“You’re right, no evidence has yet been presented for those other accusations – so why are you all so quick to assume that you KNOW for sure that they actually happened exactly the way Julie claims? After all, we’ve already gotten numerous other testimonies from those in the discernment group showing that Julie’s original version of what they actually did was untrue or at least highly misleading”
Is there a good and proper way for a spiritual wife/legal wife to happen? Is there proper way to enlist ministry cronies to try and have your wife committed?
It was glorious to see some commenters on nakedpastor say there were told the crazy meme about Julie and believed it (because Tony was the celebrity and would never lie?) and were now coming to say they were sorry.
I do understand why you need to believe what you believe. Many are caught in movement cult of personality in many segments of Christendom. Evangelicals have a very hard time breaking with their cults of personality. There is another focus that helps. Injustice almost always comes from an imbalance of power. Power is invested in things like fame, followers, money, platforms of communication, etc. People tend to view those things as being more credible for some reason. They like what a leader says on stage and tend to map that to their character. I liken it to soap opera characters people tended to relate to as real. NPD’s are masters of gaining those things and using them to their advantage.
Disappointed that instead of providing answers to some of the questions I’ve raised, you instead decided to go the ad hominem route. Perhaps instead of making assumptions about the character or motivations of the people asking the questions, you might try simply responding to the issues themselves?
For instance, Brad Cecil, Danielle Shroyer, and Brian McLaren have each provided detailed descriptions of their actions in regard to the discernment group back in July 2008, and none of what they describe sounds anything like Tony trying to “enlist ministry cronies to try and have [his] wife committed.” I’d recommend going back and reading their comments at Naked Pastor’s blog, as well as McLaren’s description of those events and his subsequent interactions with Julie after that.
So my question remains, if Julie has already been shown to be “spinning” those particular events in misleading ways to fit her list of grievances, why shouldn’t any of us want to be more cautious before blindly accepting the rest of her narrative as well? Right now I don’t “believe” (as you put it) anything in particular from either one of them. I’m withholding judgment until less biased accounts are available and some of these problems I’ve raised have been answered. I think others would do well to withhold judgment as well.
I should also add that I noticed similar discrepancies in Tony’s account that he posted a few weeks ago. So again, with both sides spinning the evidence to fit their version of events, why should any of us outside observers dogmatically claim to know exactly what happened or who (if anyone) is definitively in the wrong? None of this adds up to what is being so confidently and unquestioningly claimed.
I think any family court judge’s blood pressure is going to go through the roof knowing this was put out for public consumption, especially without the approval of one of the parties. Clearly Julie approves, but did she run it by her attorney first? Your efforts to help may end up causing major, unforeseen problems.
Please give some examples of major unforeseen problems.
Are you familiar with any Family Court Judges? I think you give them way too much credit. They just want to clear the docket. Some of them in my neck of the woods are in and out of rehab constantly. Lots of court postponements. And they have heard it all, anyway, in every shape and form you can imagine.
Was your comment meant to be a scare tactic?
From a Family Court perspective the 800 pound gorilla in the room is the June 28th, 2013 arrest. Not every arrest that occurs is deserved. The reality is that many judges are drowning in work, and an arrest of one party can provide a lazy shortcut when adjudicating. It all depends on the luck of the draw when getting a judge.
On the one hand it seems great that information is being released. Sunshine can be a fabulous disinfectant, and it is liberating for victims to watch someone take on the establishment with a “we’re not gonna take it” attitude. On the other hand, “Guest” might actually have a bit of a point. Blog posts and comments might be used in court. Who knows? Standard legal advice is usually to stay clear of media, but perhaps Julie has an attorney with a different perspective.
Hopefully, any judge who might happen to read my comment will decide to not take lazy shortcuts when adjudicating. 🙂
Seth, Julie’s explanation for that arrest is that she was entrapped into violating a mutual protection order between her and Tony.
Tony kept her children, then, after several days of no communication, when she said she was coming to pick them up, made sure the police were waiting to arrest her.
Here is the reference, and relevant portions of Julie’s story:
http://nakedpastor.com/2014/09/tony-jones-on-mark-driscoll-what-came-first-the-thug-or-the-theology/#comment-118319
So, years later a plan to take yet another run at flipping custody was launched. Numerous failed prior attempts.
Fast forward to June 2013. The children were having visitation with their dad. I had just recovered from a surgery. I asked if they could stay a day or two more, if I needed it, because I was not supposed to drive. I felt better the next day and asked for their return. He refused. I let it go….smelling the gas fumes from the gas lighting a mile away. The next morning, I asked for them to be returned immediately. Your visitation time is over and they have dental appointments. Before I left the house I called his cell phone and said, “I’m on my way. They have dental appointments.” When I arrived 3 Edina police cop cars where there waiting. He was waiting with a recording in his hand and said, “Arrest her now she just called my cell.” Officer Joy Frogadt, his friend from police chaplain days, and ride-a-longs, and chili fests was the arresting officer. I did not know it but I had violated the OFP from 6 months prior by calling his cell instead of internet communication. A humane cop there said, “Do you really want to do this in front of your kids?” All 3 kids watching in the window. “She broke the law, arrest her NOW. Do your job!” THAT is why he would like you all to google the public records….the arrest has been continued for over a year without conviction, because its bogus. The courts amended the OFP and that could never happen today.
THE KICKER??? He had a pre written an Ex Parte Legal document in his hand asking the family courts to “Immediately change custody because their mother is in jail.” This was written BEFORE I arrived to pick up my children. Bone chilling…I know! Sociopath behavior. Luckily, the wise judge saw straight through it immediately and with a red marker x’d it out and wrote DENIED.
So, a person up top said, “What about the children?!” This is the person so concerned with the children?!! My 8 year old asked what happened to mom? The answer? “Your mother is a criminal. You are with me now.” Through therapy my 8 year old shared he had planned when school started to ask his teacher if she could please help him see me. I know….that made me want to be sick.
I spent 12 hours in jail. Post op with no pain meds. my gauze was ripped off in a strip search and I was bleeding. It was on a Friday and planned as such so I would have to spend the weekend maybe, and no lawyers would be available. Luckily, there was. So, this story gets more amazing….
Cornerstone a battered women’s shelter was called by him and he told them he needed this conviction because he and his wife do not feel safe. Further, the Edina prosecuting attorney told us he wrote her letters touting the “crazy campaign” and please help me I AM THE VICTIM. This very young advocate woman with presumably little experience with diagnosed narcissist, wrote a letter to the prosecuting attorney on his behalf stating you must convict because she is crazy….JUST because he said so.
Then we sent the psych evals and the 15 court proceedings instigated by him and suddenly he wasn’t a battered woman after all.
Was it meant to be a scare tactic? No, not in the sense of trying to whip up *false* concern in order to protect Tony and wrongly silence Julie.
I am trying to point out what is, IMO, a *valid* concern to me and I think should be to others. That is that a Family Court is not going to look kindly on this public release of information. Remember, they look out for the best interest of the children, not the best interest of the parent, and they are much less concerned about a parent finally being able to tell her story. It was not in the best interest of the kids for all this information to be made public. They will consider that, among many other pieces of information, when deciding custody.
Seth said:
“Standard legal advice is usually to stay clear of media, but perhaps Julie has an attorney with a different perspective.”
I have little doubt that once her attorney knew what has been happening online, especially that Julie had agreed to this release of info, s/he had a fit. And if not already informed, Tony’s attorney will be making sure s/he knows shortly.
So you’re assuming that these documents were released without having sought legal counsel regarding the potential ramifications?
Randy – your *actual, literal words* are
“If we want to believe accusations over police reports and court documents as well as witnesses present at many turns along the way, we deceive ourselves.”
So in light of the police reports, court documents, and eye witness testimony revealed here … in continuing to stand with an abuser, you are “deceiving yourself”.
Could the hypocrisy and double standard be any more clear?
Also. You say you are a missionary and Christ follower. But you are also a liar. You told me you do not know Tony Jones personally. And then you talk on your blog about how much you admire him and how you are friends.
Also, pm’ing a woman, a stranger, on Facebook and asking her to “call” you is really, really creepy. Also creepy – posting pictures of yourself with ‘brown African babies’ when you spend most of your time in America. Also creepy – finally leaving the woman you are pm’ing alone when a *man* asks you to.
It does not surprise me one bit that even the face of mounting hard evidence, you continue to defend an abuser. (I don’t use that word lightly – but a man who pushes his wife to ground in front of his kids … yes, technically and legally, that is an abuser)
This post was recently reported to an online advocacy community of psychological professionals who submit complaints of ethical abuse.
While it is acceptable, and sometimes even admirable, to challenge other forms of online abuse by sharing details from one’s personal experience or from the experience of those abused, it is never acceptable and is in fact against the law to publish private documents which release personal information of psychological patients.
United States law has set clear precedent that publishing private medical records is considered a serious abuse, which has been linked to consequences such as depression, hospitalization, and even suicide. It is known to have inflicted severe harm that the law views as equally unacceptable as physical abuse.
As a member of the advocacy community, I would ask you to please consider removing the posts related to a patient’s private treatment above. This would be a more ethical action than requiring an inquiry and investigation. It also appears it would be an action congruent with your stated intentions of fighting abuse.
This is a really strange comment, that raises more questions than it answers:
What is the name of the “online advocacy community of psychological professionals who submit complaints of ethical abuse”? Why didn’t you post its name?
Do you have any contact details for them?
(While I don’t expect your personal contact details, some way of engaging in conversation or seeking further information would be helpful.)
How do you know these documents are private? (Weren’t they submitted into evidence in a public court hearing?)
Does a court-ordered assessment make someone a psychological patient? What psychological treatment is described above?
What law is being broken here? (Please be specific.)
Why is an inquiry and investigation unethical?
(It sounds like you’re trying to silence the victim. That’s been done for 6 years.)
I am deeply concerned that you have not read this post or understood the context.
Twilsonb,
The online advocacy group is a private forum for individuals who are committed to supporters of medical abuse. At your request, if we choose to file a complaint about this site, I will have the appropriate parties contact R.L. Stollar directly and, at that point, he can release the group’s title and any other information he chooses.
I reached out ahead of any formal complaint because I thought there was a possibility that Mr.Stollar may not understand the definition of medical abuse, or how it has led to other more serious harm coming to patients, or how it is protected by U.S. laws. Since he seems to, in my opinion, genuinely care about victims, I wanted him to have this information so he could use it, if he chose, to protect himself.
These documents referenced/excerpted above represent medical records that pertain to two adults and several minors and are thereby automatically protected by law and sealed from the public. They are not accessible via any channel connected to the public. The testimony in the documents may have been presented in a court hearing, but the documents themselves may only be accessed by the patients (and any family members they gave permission via the treating psychologist’s permission form). As this progresses, someone will make an attempt to contact the patients and find out if they provided these forms with the expressed consent of everyone treated. I think we all know that is highly unlikely, as most individuals do not consent to posting excerpts from their medical records–especially excerpts that are selected to portray their vulnerabilities. This is specifically what the law protects against.
Yes, the court ordered psychological assessment conducted by a psychologist operating under the APA absolutely, without question makes those assessed “patients” under the law.
The laws being broken depend on who released the documents. If the therapist released the documents, then HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) laws apply. If one of the patients released them, it violates Invasion of Privacy laws which have different titles and bill numbers depending on the U.S. state where the patient lived at the time and the U.S. state where the person releasing the information lives. Invasion of Privacy laws only require that one be able to prove that the matter at hand contains private facts, which the average reasonable person (or judge) would consider not public (for example, notes from someone’s treatment papers or comments about their sex life raised in therapy) has been disclosed to the public. If the party releasing the documents is a lawyer for one of the parties, then this would include involvement by the National Bar Association who participates in advocacy, and it it involved a judge, it would be investigated and brought to court by the Judicial Qualifications Commission.
Multiple charges could also be filed if others, using images or documents posted above, re-posted them elsewhere. Each “publication” of private documents that came from the source could warrant a separate charge.
Not only is there nothing wrong with an inquiry and/or investigation either by state agencies or professional organizations, that sounds like a worthwhile route for you to pursue. As I have read some of the allegations presented here and linked in R.L. Stollar’s previous and more recent posts, I concur an investigation by judges, victim’s advocacy groups, police, custody officials, and other similar parties would be appropriate. Investigations should be carried out by those who have professional expertise in investigative procedure and understanding of/access to all the channels to ensure they are able to review all the documentation available from all parties. It would be illegal for anyone–whether that be one of the investigative parties mentioned above or a blogger or social media user–to publicly publish someone’s private medical records in any way.
I would NEVER silence a victim. I have spent my lifetime working on their behalf. It is my pro-victim philosophy which also leads me to say: I would also NEVER endorse victimizing others by holding internet court with partial docs and/or breaking the law in a way that vilifies a party in the public’s eye.
I didn’t come here to offer any fear-based tactics. Only information about how this choice to publish inflicts psychological damage and abuse on the patients in question. Regardless of whether the blogger deems these individual client’s lives to be valuable, and regardless of whether the blogger would care if the individuals here were harmed or self-harmed as a result of his actions, it is abusive (legally and ethically) and also irresponsible to select a couple treatment records from a small window in a person’s lifetime psychiatric history and publish them publicly.
If you are correct, Twilsonb, and this therapy record is from a court ordered assessment, it is actually protected by more laws not less as there are more public policies in place to protect the court from participating in violating the rights of its citizens. In addition, court cases, especially if there have been multiple cases, usually call for and acquire multiple court ordered assessments by therapists sometimes selected by both the prosecution and defense. Often, the findings from opposing teams’ therapists are different (because legal teams sometimes seek out doctors whose track record is most friendly to their side; unfortunately as someone working in this field I can tell you psychology is also a monetized field). In addition, such court ordered assessments are conducted to provide specific information relevant to a particular question of the court. This means they should only be viewed by the proper authorities in the context of all other psychological treatment, which often extends to years of paperwork with conflicting diagnoses, opinions, and information from a wide variety of medical professionals. To publish anything private from someone’s medical records is a tragic error. To neglect to contextualize the nature of the court ordered assessment and how it fits into a patient’s lifetime history is an abuse of both ethics and logic. It is my suggestion that readers rely on those licensed to investigate such complex matters and do not participate in trying this case using this small sampling of documents which seem to be presented to play on the vulnerabilities of only one party.
Never silence someone who raises abuse allegations. Never allow your frustration to raise someone’s voice to victimize others.
I don’t know where this goes from here. It will have little to do with me if it’s further investigated or processed. Once a formal complaint is filed, it will be my duty not to participate in outside communication, but I wanted to offer some information about healthy and unhealthy, legal and illegal ways of conducting investigations for both the blogger and readers.
So your medical abuse group believes that victims are not allowed to tell their own story and back it up with documents even if they paid for them? So who owns Julie’s evaluation, for example?
Would privacy mean that the public cannot be warned about a psychopath, for example? A pedophile?
Just how far does your medical abuse group go in protecting evil?
And unless the court hearing was closed, not sure you have a leg to stand on.
Thank you. I was horrified when I read those documents. People are getting drawn into things that are beyond their scope of experience. This has never been as simple as has been presented, IMO, and now more damage is happening. Please, please, be careful people.
Tony is thrilled you think that. Julie has every right to get her reputation back as NOT “bat s***t” crazy that Tony floated publicly. Remember, he started down this road.
And she has the documents to prove she is not the one with the dangerous diagnosis.. That does not sit well with an NPD at all.
boy oh boy is the campaign in full swing. Be careful shilling for an NPD.
Danyelle, I’m replying here, because I can’t reply to your reply.
I find it strange that you’ve written enough material for an entire blog post, but you still haven’t given the name of any organisation or linked to any outside information. Please tell me this was an oversight, because it makes it look like you are posting your own opinion.
‘What is the name of the “online advocacy community of psychological professionals who submit complaints of ethical abuse”? Why didn’t you post its name?
Do you have any contact details for them?
(While I don’t expect your personal contact details, some way of engaging in conversation or seeking further information would be helpful.)’
Are you kidding me? Do you really think this place is perceived as a safe place when they are publishing private medical treatment related to someone’s sex life without so much a glitch in the conscience? No one should be stupid enough to give out their identifying information unless they want to get harassed by Twitter parodies and hashtagged into oblivion.
No thanks, dude. Again, I agree with you. I won’t waste any breath defending Tony Jones. I have no doubt that his attitude was to bury his ex-wife and the fact that he’d try to go for blood like that tells me everything I need to know about a man.
But let’s be real. People aren’t going to spell out their contact info. And you’re only demanding they do that selectively if you don’t like what they’re saying. You’re going to find out if this one is legit or a poser in time. Don’t make people feel uncomfortable by acting like a blog is a place where you have to show your ID at the door.
“Are you kidding me? Do you really think this place is perceived as a safe place when they are publishing private medical treatment related to someone’s sex life without so much a glitch in the conscience? No one should be stupid enough to give out their identifying information unless they want to get harassed by Twitter parodies and hashtagged into oblivion.”
Very well put FatherFrank.
Danyelle, first you say: “This post was recently reported to an online advocacy community of psychological professionals who submit complaints of ethical abuse.”
Then you say, “The online advocacy group is a private forum for individuals who are committed to supporters of medical abuse. ”
So what are you, like a reddit group or something? If you can’t even offer your name, or a website, or some sort of credentials then you’re not a legitimate oversight group.
Are you a psychological professional? Are you a lawyer? If not, your attempts to declaim on legal precedence and laws relating to medical records are inappropriate
Come off it. Be fair. Half the people on here right now fighting for my own side of this argument are unofficial watchdogs themselves. You’re not here representing some national organization. You and your friends decided you had too much Tony Jones and you took it to the streets. You’ve created an army of anonymous parodies that aren’t giving out their names and addresses on Twitter. Tell me you’re not arrogant enough to think religion is the only sector where people are noble enough to form their own watchdog groups online to police abuses in their niches.
There’s a Facebook group or a Reddit group for everything because every niche has their abuses and every niche has their whistleblowers.
Tony Jones is living out the natural consequences of his big talk over the past few years right now. I guarantee it. You’re getting what you want. You don’t have to attack every person who comes in here respectfully and makes an obvious point about how medical records are private.
We all know, even the people who posted them know, that it wasn’t really on the up and up to post this stuff. They must’ve weighed it all out and decided it was still worth it in order to bag Tony. That’s gutsy. But this woman would be crazy to give you her info.
If no one ever comes to allege some sort of rights violation, you’ll know it, right? The burden of proof is going to come soon enough.
“On the other hand, “Guest” might actually have a bit of a point. Blog posts and comments might be used in court. ”
That is why Tony has launched a internet blog comment campaign and his ministry cronies and fellow travelers are helping. Did you honestly think Tony would not use the scribd site to his legal advantage? There is also the fact he took down the 12 page document and conference vid where he told attendees he was not there because his son needed him. He left out the fact he was breaking a legal agreement by not returning him from visitation.
Then there is the fact that bloggers who have allowed Julie to tell her story are being pressured to take down posts by “Progressive/Emergent” Christians. Even Julie was “softly” threatened with legal action by the wordsmith McLaren.
Of course this stuff will be used in court if allowed. Tony hopes so. He has the entire Progressive/Emergent “Christian” leadership big names on his side. I wonder if RHE really thought this through. She will be used to support an NPD “ministry” leader with a once “spiritual wife” whom he tried to get committed. That will be her ministry legacy for the abused.
I was originally outraged by claims a parody was making that Jones had kidnapped his son during the conference. However, I looked into this the following week, and also again after I saw the allegation raised the day before yesterday, and this story about the custody of the oldest son is actually incomplete where I read it.
I found out it is true that Tony’s oldest son did not return to Julie’s house, but after the police were called, the investigating police officer did not remove the son from Tony’s home. On Feb. 2, Julie filed a request for an emergency hearing, an emergency hearing was scheduled and held, and the family court referee who heard the case last week ALSO chose not to remove the son from Tony’s home.
I don’t think this proves anything about the larger issues here. I have spoken out against Julie’s silencing and fought for her right to be heard, but it is obvious there is more to this story than what is being shared. Since Jones’ address is readily available online, it is clear to me that he isn’t breaking the law by having his older son live with him or the courts would have already removed him. It has been almost a month now.
You clearly have far more faith in the legal system than I do, and perhaps do not understand typical narcissistic personality disorder behaviours.
BethanyAnn, You have been playing both sides on TWW and called out several times.
You are shilling for an NPD. The NPD knows exactly what he is doing. This was all on purpose and he will use the kid until he is no longer needed for cover.
I am not playing both sides. I have consistently said the same thing in all my comments here, elsewhere, and on TWW. Julie should never have been, should not be, and should never be silenced.
I do not hold this opinion, as firecely as I do, to the exclusion of other opinions and facts however. I subscribe to the belief that we should shed as much light from as many sources as is possible.
If Tony is telling the truth, he and his supporters would not be afraid of more light, more documents, more testimony from other sources. If Julie is telling the truth, she and her supporters will not be afraid of more light, more documents, more testimony.
If the truth is somewhere in between, then the light from all sides shining in every corner and through every cobweb and shadow, is what helps us see that.
Very well put BethanyAnn. More light indeed!
Replying to Ryan A. here since I can’t reply to his comment. If you’re so invested in the idea that more light is what’s needed then go campaign Tony Jones to sign off on releasing the records in full, with appropriate redactions to protect minor children. Julie has consistently said that is her desire. The investigations have happened. The records exist. Julie has been calling for their release. Tony is stonewalling on the whole thing.
And RHE is trying very hard to position those who allow Julie a voice, “cyberbullies”. She really has dug a deep hole. Her credibility as a voice for the oppressed is toast.
“I am trying to point out what is, IMO, a *valid* concern to me and I think should be to others. That is that a Family Court is not going to look kindly on this public release of information. Remember, they look out for the best interest of the children, not the best interest of the parent, and they are much less concerned about a parent finally being able to tell her story. It was not in the best interest of the kids for all this information to be made public. They will consider that, among many other pieces of information, when deciding custody.”
Nice try. It was not in the best interests of the children to spread the word to your cronies and followers that their mom, the legal wife, is “bat sh**t” crazy and convene a “discernment group” to get her committed. To leave the mom for a spiritual wife. And in dire financial circumstances. It is not in the best interest of the children to violate a legal agreement and refuse to return them. We could go on and on concerning the best interests of the children but then we are talking about an NPD. That seems to get lost in all this. They are evil.
We were way past “best interests” of the children years ago. Court also looks at who had done the lions share of care and under what circumstances.
http://subversiveinfluence.com/2015/02/tony-jones-the-new-emergent-manifesto-part-i/
Julie,
My heart goes out to you. I, too, have survived the infidelity of my former wife and subsequent divorce. My experience was that most Christian leaders in my life were not helpful to me but rather part of the abusive problem sadly. So little existed out there–as I discovered–for faithful spouses who were Christians that supported us and did not participate in the blame-shifting or minimizing games inherit in adultery. As an ordained evangelical minister and professional chaplain, I have decided to fill that void with a blog ministry (Divorce Minister: Taking Adultery Seriously—www.divorceminister.com). I couldn’t help but see commonalities in tactics used against you that I saw in my own story with my cheating ex. Glad you are getting your story out there and not letting them silence you!
Big Hug,
DM
My heart breaks for Tony’s and Julie’s children in the middle of all of this.
http://subversiveinfluence.com/2015/02/tony-jones-the-new-emergent-manifesto-part-ii/
Thank you, Mary. They are doing very well. The physical abuse they witnessed was processed in therapy years ago and they are actually thriving. They are not “in the middle” as you state. I would never put them there. If there was a peaceful and private avenue I would have taken it. He and his colleagues shut that down at every turn for years. The story went viral. That was their choice for attempting to bury it for over 6 years. I appreciate your care. I reject your pity. My children are strong, resilient and aware, compassionate individuals. They know and have dealt openly with their dads self-professed and diagnosed mental illness with a specialist for years. I encourage my children to stand up and speak out for injustices wherever they occur.
Reblogged this on exileinfundyland and commented:
Tony Jones should be DONE after this. But he will pop up again, I’m sure.
Julie, can I ask: a “peaceful and private avenue” to what exactly? What is your goal in all this? What end are you hoping to reach? What, in your mind, would be an ideal resolution to all this? Genuinely curious.
Ryan, your smarminess drew me out of lurkdom. Julie is in no way obligated to satisfy your ‘curiosity’. Yours is a classic passive-aggressive comment that attempts to portray yourself as genuine and Julie as false if she doesn’t respond to your faux-sincerity. Stop it. No one here is fooled.
Again with the ad hominems instead of actually answering the question… I think part of the skepticism that Julie and her supporters tend to produce in others is this inability to answer a simple question without resorting to attacking the people asking. I want to believe her, and yet it’s hard to get past this overly aggressive/defensive behavior whenever someone tries to get her story straight.
Ryan, Something I learned quite a while back is to NEVER allow the meme uttered by a public figure about someone else— that the person is “mentally ill” or emotionally unbalanced or whatever….to go unanswered. And often it starts out as a whisper campaign and the subject of the campaign may not figure out why people are avoiding them or not hiring them– for years.
I have seen people financially ruined over such things done by “Christian” leaders and their sychophants.
In fact, I encourage those who have been victimized by this sort of slander to deal with it legally. It is not a “trivial” matter.
Why would emergent/progressive leaders in a “discernment” group not have a problem with Tony leaving his 3 small children with a mentally ill mother while he goes on tour? You would think that would have been their first concern about Tony’s character. Evidently not. Now, why can’t they say they were wrong all these years later? Did they not connect the dots with the spiritual wife/legal wife matter? Is that a normal position in the progressive/emergent world?
As a matter of fact, the discernment group WERE very concerned about Tony being away from his family, and as soon as any of them learned about the severity of the situation they sent him home. Did you read any of their accounts of what happened?
(It should also be noted that they also removed Tony from leadership of Emergent Village not long after. Isn’t that exactly what y’all have been saying they should have done: that Tony should have stepped down from active ministry to deal with his family issues? Looks like that’s precisely what happened.)
Second, has any proof been offered that Tony or Doug ever did actually use the term “spiritual wife” or have ever argued for such a notion? Tony says he never said it, that in fact Julie first used the term to refer to herself. Has Julie responded to this or provided proof to the contrary?
Also, for that matter, shouldn’t the timing of events matter? Was Julie and Doug’s conversation about this before or after she and Tony were already separated? And was their discussion about a relationship between Tony and Courtney that had begun PRIOR to the separation, or about the relationship Tony and Courtney developed AFTER the separation? If it’s the former, and Doug actually did say that Tony was justified in cheating on Julie before their separation because of some alleged doctrine of “spiritual wives,” then I agree, that’s awful and I doubt anyone in the emergent movement would support anything like that. HOWEVER, if the conversation was about the legitimacy of Tony dating someone AFTER divorce proceedings were already underway, that’s much less of a problem IMHO. I think there are lot of people who would agree that separated spouses don’t need to wait until a divorce is legally final to begin dating again after a separation, and wouldn’t consider such behavior cheating. Of course some may disagree, but it’s still much less problematic than the former scenario.
So again, who will clarify these questions? Can we at least have some unambiguous answers and clear evidence before being asked to give our unquestioning support to one side or the other?
Oh, Ryan A., Tony wrote and sells a book called “There Are Two Marriages”. It’s a rather transparent attempt to theologically justify his own behaviour.
http://tonyj.net/portfolio-view/there-are-two-marriages/
If you don’t want to pay, you can read most of the content here:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/tag/two-marriages/
I don’t think splitting hairs between “Spiritual Marriage” (Tony Jones’ term) and “Spiritual Wife” (Julie’s term that she reports Doug Pagitt using) is really helpful.
NO Ryan, I don’t see any of that at SCRBD site WhyTony. Strange and curious.
Yes, I have read Tony’s book on that Tim. That wasn’t what he seemed to be saying at all in it. Can you point me to where in the book you think he says it’s okay to cheat on an existing spouse pre-separation if one has another “spiritual wife”? Because I didn’t see that in there at all. The book is about something else entirely.
I can’t help but see the goalposts shifting here, Ryan.
Tony’s behaviour demonstrates that he thinks it’s OK to cheat on your legally-married-to-wife if you have an upcoming-spiritual/sacramental-wife.
The Two Marriages books and blog posts demonstrate a theological justification for a pair of divorces and a remarriage (the public manifestation of his behaviour), not an affair (the private manifestation of his behaviour, which it is alleged that threats have been used to cover up).
Are you aware of the timing of Tony and Courtney’s sacramental marriage, Courtney’s legal divorce, and Tony and Courtney’s legal marriage? Apparently in that order. Interesting that the justification was the LGBTI community and gay marriage, though.
In my opinion, it appears that Tony acts, then provides theological or activist justifications for his actions.
Lydia, let me help you out. Here is what Brad Cecil had to say about his involvement with the discernment group: http://nakedpastor.com/2014/09/tony-jones-on-mark-driscoll-what-came-first-the-thug-or-the-theology/#comment-127156
Here is what Danielle Shroyer had to say about her involvement: http://nakedpastor.com/2014/09/tony-jones-on-mark-driscoll-what-came-first-the-thug-or-the-theology/#comment-128929
And here is what Brian McLaren had to say about his: https://www.scribd.com/doc/254082913/Statement-by-Brian-McLaren
I don’t see any of the nefarious conspiracy that you or Julie claim. What all three of those separate individuals relate is very different than the way she tells it. So if she can be shown to be spinning and twisting her version of events in regard to that incident, how are we supposed to trust that she’s not doing the same with the other parts of her story as well? This is why I am withholding judgment and am not willing to speak with the same level of dogmatic certainty that you apparently are on these matters.
“Are you aware of the timing of Tony and Courtney’s sacramental marriage, Courtney’s legal divorce, and Tony and Courtney’s legal marriage?”
No, I’m not aware Tim. That’s exactly the information I’m asking for – proof of WHEN exactly all these things occurred. Are you aware of proof that I haven’t seen yet? If so, please share. Where do you find evidence that the relationship between Tony and Courtney definitely started BEFORE his separation with Julie? I’m not saying it didn’t, I’m not saying it did. I’m not saying anything because I haven’t seen any real evidence one way or another. But you seem much more certain that you know exactly the order of events and how it all went down. So please, if you have hard evidence of the timing, please do share it. I’d like to be as certain as you are too.
Hi Ryan,
@futuristguy has done some excellent work collating records, and I have just reviewed the timing of the divorces, sacramental, and legal marriages. I apologise – I was incorrect about the order:
January 2009: Courtney Perry / Hamilton divorces her husband
November 2009: Tony Jones divorces Julie McMahon
2011: Tony and Courtney sacramentally marry
2013: Tony and Courtney legally marry
As for the affair:
Julie McMahon claims to have emails evidencing an affair between Tony and Courtney. As far as I recall, she says these are from 2009. (See the futuristguy article linked below.) The psychological evaluator called whatever evidence available to them or presented by Julie or Tony “compelling”, despite Tony’s denial. (See the excerpts above.)
https://diagnosingemergent.wordpress.com/04-personal-issues-between-tony-jones-and-julie-mcmahon/
Thank you for clarifying that timeline Tim. I have already seen Julie’s posts about those “sex emails” on Naked Pastor’s site, but she doesn’t specify there when the emails were actually sent – whether before or after the separation. I’ve followed the links to Brad Sargent’s blog and to The Wartburg Watch, but neither provide any more clarity on that particular question. If they were from 2009 as you say, or even late 2008, that would have been AFTER Tony and Julie were already separated. But again, until I know for sure, I’m not going to pass judgment on the alleged affair one way or the other. Yes, the psych evaluator’s comment is important, but without knowing what the evidence is that she is referencing, I’m still not willing to just take her word for it.
Quote: “(It should also be noted that they also removed Tony from leadership of Emergent Village not long after. Isn’t that exactly what y’all have been saying they should have done: that Tony should have stepped down from active ministry to deal with his family issues? Looks like that’s precisely what happened.)”
Removed?
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/january/6.13.html
“As one-time leaders of the emergent movement have recently distanced themselves from the term, the network itself dropped its organizational leader. The decision of Emergent Village’s board of directors to eliminate its national coordinator position marked the latest sign that the movement is either decentralizing or disintegrating.
Board members said they eliminated Tony Jones’s position October 31 in order to reclaim the Village’s founding purpose as an “egalitarian social-networking organization.” “
Note the date – “October 31, 2008”
That would be 2 months after Tony filed for divorce.
Are you suggesting that Emergent Village leaders were deceptive in what they asserted was the reason for eliminating the position?
I’m sure the EV board had all kinds of reasons for eliminating Tony’s position, some of which probably had nothing to do with him personally. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if allowing him more time to focus on his personal family issues was one of them.
Their motivation, whatever it was, wasn’t really my point though. My point was that Tony did in fact step down from ministry leadership shortly after his marriage ended – which, again, is exactly what y’all have said he should have done.
Quoting: Danyelle
February 16, 2015 at 6:14 am
The online advocacy group is a private forum for individuals who are committed to supporters of medical abuse.
Committed to *supporters* of medical abuse? Do you want to rephrase that?
An unnamed online advocacy group that exists only as a private forum?
How does one report a possible case to your secret online group?
Or do the forum members swoop throughout the internet looking for possible cases?
And do these individual members of your private online forum have authority from said group to land on random internet threads and announce their possible interest in accusing individuals of “medical abuse” as you have done?
Does the following have any application?
From: “The Mental Health Privilege in Divorce and Custody”
http://www.emilymiskel.com/pdfs/AAML.pdf
“In family law cases, the most common exception
to the privilege is for court-ordered evaluations.
Obviously, in court-ordered evaluations, there is no
expectation of privacy at the outset. Communications
between the parties and the court-appointed therapist are
not confidential and are not privileged.”
Quote: “Second, has any proof been offered that Tony or Doug ever did actually use the term “spiritual wife” or have ever argued for such a notion?”
Perhaps you could delineate the detailed differences between “spiritual wife” and “sacramental wife”?
Are you arguing that Jones did not set forth arguments regarding TWO kinds of marriage?
Are you arguing that Jones did not purposely make a public statement regarding his beliefs regarding marriage by his refusal to make Perry his legal wife initially?
I don’t understand the inability to see that Jones has by word and deed promulgated the idea that he believes there are two types of spouses.
Unless you can define the vast differences between “sacramental” and “spiritual” wife, I don’t grok your quibble.
However you attempt to define it, Jones had made reference to “legal” spouses and “FITB with a religious word that sounds more special than legal” spouse.
See my reply to Tim above. I did read Tony’s book about that and no, it doesn’t seem to be talking about what you are claiming at all. You seem to be reading into it what you expect to find instead of what is actually there.
Quote: Also, for that matter, shouldn’t the timing of events matter?
Evidently, the evidence of extramarital activity was sufficient enough to be called *compelling* to the author of the report.
“Mr. Jones wondered whether he shares his mother’s Messiah complex, thinking he could singlehandedly save the marriage. In actuality, it appears he did little, if anything, to save the marriage, opting instead for the gratifications of minor celebrity, including sexual gratification.”
“Despite what appears to be compelling evidence that he has been engaging in an extramarital affair, he has insisted otherwise, blaming his wife for her suspicions and distress. ”
Anyone who is unaware of the devastation that an adulterous spouse bestows upon the faithful spouse while attempting to hide their affair should read the adultery forums at marriagebuilders.com for a quick education.
So what is the compelling evidence? I’m not closed to the possibility that an affair actually did occur, but if Tony is adamant that there wasn’t one, and Julie says that she has proof that there was, then let’s see the proof so we can decide for ourselves rather than having to take someone else’s word for it.
Whatever evidence she had was evidently provided to the therapist, who then described said evidence as compelling.
That is a court appointed third party who labeled it as compelling evidence that an extramarital affair was going on.
Have you seen a similar level of third party corroboration for Tony’s dissenting assertions?
You do realize that this third party analysis could have been: “Despite what appears to be NO compelling evidence that he has been engaging in an extramarital affair, SHE has insisted otherwise, blaming HER HUSBAND for her unsubstantiated suspicions and distress. ” ?
Do you have data that would disprove the therapist’s evaluation that the evidence for an affair was compelling?
No I do not. Nor do I know what the evidence was that this psychologist found compelling. Which is why I’m withholding judgment either way. Instead of continuing to say “just take our word for it,” perhaps Julie or her supporters, who are apparently privy to more solid and specific evidence than I’ve seen so far, could simply answer the questions.
Quote: Can anyone provide links to a place where anyone related to emergent ever publicly called Julie “crazy” or “bat-shit” or whatever?
Have you not read the multiple public apologies to Julie from people who had been told that she was b*t-sh*t crazy?
What does “publically called” have anything to do with it?
Multiple people from multiple venues have PUBLICALLY stated that they were told this.
That means that a smear campaign was initiated against Julie. Oh, I don’t think that there was a smoke-filled room with secret plans. But there was somebody who started it and fed it5, and that someone shared it with his co-fellows.
Julie wasn’t out 250+ days a year in the public emergent eye. Some of those folks who apologized to her had never even met her.
So, you tell me – just why did that very persistant rumor get promulgated from one side of the country to another? The lower-level emergent peons didn’t have personal knowledge of her, so they couldn’t make such an assessment.
That rumor was passed on quietly, behind the scenes, and its source was someone or someones in the emergent leadership.
It didn’t have to be pronounced publicly from a pulpit to be alienating and destructive to Julie.
“Multiple people from multiple venues have PUBLICALLY stated that they were told this.”
Let’s analyze this claim a bit.
I’ve read the comments on the Naked Pastor post pretty thoroughly. There I did see that Jenell Paris said someone at C21 told her that Julie was mentally ill, when she asked about it. She didn’t specify who, but it definitely wasn’t Tony, since she goes on to say that Tony refused to talk to her about the situation and chastised her (rudely, which seems typical for him) for even asking. Which is interesting since it means that at least in that case Tony actually did NOT take an opportunity to spread any negative stories about Julie.
It’s also significant that Jenell was told this at C21, since I have heard comments by others who were also at C21 and who did witness the incident between Julie and Doug that occurred there, and they have said that their PERSONAL impressions of Julie was that she was very emotionally volatile, at least in that instance. Those were their own opinions based on what they saw of Julie’s behavior, not what anyone told them to say about her, which makes me wonder whether the person who told Jenell this was actually part of any deliberate gaslighting campaign, or whether they were simply reporting their own opinions based on their own observations?
(BTW, I know that Julie has already explained why she was so agitated at that event in her interaction with Doug. I’m not saying she wasn’t right to be. Just pointing out that given her self-admitted behavior, it is quite possible that some outside observers, not knowing the whole situation, may have formed their own opinions of Julie without being coached to them by anyone deliberately trying to smear her.)
The only other instance I saw where someone was told by someone else that Julie was crazy was Andrew Jones, who also is the only person I’m aware of that actually took down a comment by Julie from his blog. And I agree, whoever told him that was wrong to do so. That was an awful thing to do. At the same time, one (maybe two) incidents does not a campaign make. Are there others besides Andrew and Jenell who have come forward that I am unaware of? If so, please supply the links. I am eager to have my knowledge expanded.
On the flip side, I also noticed several people on NP’s blog say that their opinions of Julie and her mental state were entirely their own based on their own interactions with her, and that they were not coached to these opinions by anyone. Both Mike Morrell and Mike Clawson said as much. They both also said that they were never part of any deliberate smear campaign or even observed one happening.
Brian McLaren said the same in his scribd statement, and I quote: “I have never covered up anything or been asked to cover up anything. I have never participated in or been asked to participate in a smear campaign. People who know me know that this kind of behavior is completely foreign to me.”
So let’s recap: out of these “multiple people” you claim have come forward to apologize, three say they never were part of any campaign, one was told something that may or may not have been personal opinion and not anything deliberate, and only one was clearly told that in a deliberate way. Again, what was told to Andrew Jones’ was awful, and he has since apologized for believing it, but I still don’t see the evidence for a sustained and wide-spread smear campaign. Am I missing something? Additional examples that I have overlooked would be very welcome.
http://emergent-nightmares.tumblr.com/post/108728609672/hugh-l-hollowell-apologises-to-julie-mcmahon
Hugh Hollowell: “I heard, more than once, that you were “batshit crazy”, from multiple folks.”
http://nakedpastor.com/2014/09/tony-jones-on-mark-driscoll-what-came-first-the-thug-or-the-theology/
Todd Hiestand:” It was never directly told me to that you are crazy (that I can remember) but it is something that I inferred pretty clearly. I confess, I’ve repeated that same thing (that you are “crazy”) to at least two people when your marriage/divorce came up in conversations. I’m sorry I did that. .. I do not know you at all and its not likely that I ever will. ”
Andrew Jones: ” As you know,I was told you were crazy, vindictive and lawsuit-happy. ”
Mike Morrell: “I’m so sorry that I called you “batshit crazy” in that private correspondence four years ago, Julie. ”
Bill Kinnon: ” I had one interlocutor email me to tell me Julie was “batshit crazy” — except, when I confronted him, he admitted he had never met Julie. ”
Nathan: “I wasn’t an EV inner circle person, I had the chance to be around some events and some people. I can say that I remember picking up in the ether the “difficult/crazy/mentally ill” vibe from people. And I’m sure, if I remember correctly, that it was a passing intimation in a passing comment from some person 3rd or 4th hand. So that narrative was definitely out there. ”
Jenell Paris: “I saw Julie’s reputation smeared, and her attempts to speak silenced…The marriage ended, so I heard, because Julie was destructive and mentally ill. It didn’t add up – why is the crazy person doing all the child care? ”
Steve Knight: “(That’s a whole other story that is being conflated here, I’m afraid, with the accusations of mental illness by Tony towards his ex, Julie. “
http://nakedpastor.com/2015/02/why-do-our-leaders-want-us-to-be-silent/
David Hayward: “I didn’t even know Tony or Julie, but in 2010 one of these leaders told me face to face that Julie was bat-shit crazy, and like everyone else probably did, I just nodded my head and continued listening to the official account of events. “
Thank you for those additional examples Julie. That’s very helpful. I do note that most of them don’t seem to have a clear idea where the Julie is crazy meme started, that they were already receiving it third or fourth hand. So yes, there’s no doubt that claim was floating around in emergent circles at some point.
So I guess the next question is, who started it and why? Was it maliciously voiced by someone who knew it to be untrue and was deliberately trying to harm Julie and protect Tony? Or was the “Julie is mentally unstable” meme started by someone who genuinely believed that to the be case based on their own experiences of her, and then it just went viral from there?