Sexual Abuse, Darrell Gilyard and the Southern Baptist Convention: Part 2

In Part 1, I argued contrary to many internet sources, tweeter feeds, and what one might rightly dub "Patterson haters" that Paige Patterson was a key player in dealing with the sexual predator and church destroyer, Darrell Gilyard, in 1991, forcing, as it were, Gilyard to resign his church and leave the ministry. Mainly through Patterson's influence Gilyard left the ministry so far as the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) was concerned. However, eleven days after Gilyard resigned, he started another church unaffiliated with the SBC,¹ a move Patterson had little say about. I concluded that rather than condemn Patterson as so many internet sources do, Southern Baptists should have commended Patterson for dealing with a destructive element in Southern Baptist life.²

A Long Period of Silence about Patterson and Gilyard

Little to nothing was mentioned in Southern Baptist circles pertaining to Darrell Gilyard from 1991 until 2007. And, as far as I can tell, no one in the SBC claimed that Patterson covered-up for Darrell Gilyard during that extended, sixteen year period. Apparently, SNAP advocate and litigation attorney, Christa Brown, was the first person who attempted to tie Patterson to sexual abuse cover-up in October 2007, but it wasn't the Patterson-Gilyard connection narrative. Instead she hinted that her predator, Tommy Gilmore, "may have even had some connection to Paige Patterson." Her only reasoning was that Patterson attended the same college as did Gilmore and was only two years behind him.

It was approximately two months later in 2007 that Brown penned what seems to be the opening paragraph of the Patterson-Gilyard sexual abuse cover-up connection that has recently re-surged in social media.³ In short, the claim that Patterson covered-up the sexual abuse of Darrell Gilyard did not begin with Southern Baptists. Rather from all indications, it began with SNAP and Christa Brown who has continued the Patterson-Gilyard cover-up narrative from 2007 until today, a narrative presently fueled largely by social media.

Critics Change their Claims in the Patterson-Gilyard Narrative 

Another vocal critic of Paige Patterson, insisting he covered up Darrell Gilyard's sexual abuse is Tiffany Thigpen. Claiming she herself was an early victim of Gilyard's sexual abuse, Thigpen often tweets concerning Patterson's alleged sex abuse cover-up for Darrell Gilyard. Below are two examples from Thigpen's Twitter feed (more might be easily added):

I was the victim of Darrell Gilyard that began the firestorm that uprooted the secrets. It was 1991, Gilyard was placed in our youth group by Dr. Jerry Vines although he and Patterson KNEW of years of abuses by Gilyard (as admitted in this video). Continued... 10:15 PM · Jun 18, 2019

There are more. It's just that my case involved 30+ victims from the same predator that Paige covered for and one he was caught red handed due to email sent regarding breaking the victim down and the current lawsuit regarding yet another ...there are more as well 11:57 PM - Dec 29, 2019

However, Thigpen's position toward Patterson's alleged cover-up of Gilyard has not always been so harsh. Nor has it been hardly as pronounced. In fact, as late as 2008, Thigpen appeared to be defending Paige Patterson against those like Christa Brown who were hell-bent on making Patterson out to be virtually complicit in sexual abuse himself.⁴  Sharayah Colter brought this out in a publicized piece she posted recently. "Tiffany Thigpen," Colter says, "wrote a blog reminding readers to avoid godless chatter and false knowledge in regard to Patterson and another pastor also involved in the handling of Gilyard." Colter goes on to quote directly from the little-known blog-post Thigpen posted on January 12, 2008. Then, Thigpen, reasoned:

“There are many things being said about Paige Patterson and Dr. [Jerry] Vines. I have my own personal feelings about what did and did not happen in the past, and even now,” Thigpen wrote. “However, to blast them on this or any other site only based on what we are being told by the media and the past allegations of cover up, would be wrong.”

After quoting the Apostle Paul's words in 1 Timothy 6:11-2, 20-21 against slander and godless chatter, Thigpen further acknowledged,

What we feel was cover up, and what we are reading (I am guilty of this too) is in effect godless chatter and false knowledge. We really don't know what either man said or did outside of what is being reported to us. I know that I wish they had done more at that time and even now (making a statement admitting mistakes) but, we have to remember they may be wishing they had done more, they have to live with that knowledge every day.

Giving Patterson and Vines the benefit of a doubt, Thigpen indicated that "no matter what they say publicly right now it can be misconstrued and taken out of context." Further acknowledging that while she wasn't "fully defending" the two men, she did "not want to be responsible for passing judgement" on them either; nor did Thigpen,

believe either of these men condoned the behavior of DG [Darrell Gilyard], nor did they feel what he did was o.k. If they did, there would have never been an inquiry in 1991 - and I know personally they pursued all of the allegations that were brought to them in June 1991.

Thigpen offered insightful commentary on Vines' initial response to the Gilyard revelations: "I know Dr. Vines was sick over it and shocked. I met and talked with him during that time." Vines' own words later concur with Thigpen's. After Gilyard's trial and conviction, Vines told the Florida Times Union on January 15, 2008:

I extended forgiveness and mercy to him [Gilyard], and evidently he trampled upon them. No minister, if guilty of sexual improprieties, especially with underage children, should ever be allowed to stand behind the sacred desk again. Let the truth be found and let justice be done.⁵

On whether Gilyard was later promoted by either Patterson or Vines after he was definitively confronted and forced to resign, Thigpen assured readers the answer was an unequivocal no.

Should DG have ever had the ability to speak in a pulpit again? Absolutely not, and both of these men told him this to his face, and Paige Patterson stripped him of his seminary license to preach (whatever it is titled) he went on to preach without the license of a Pastor. And the last time DG contacted Patterson (one year ago), he again told him he washed his hands of him and because of his past and his divorce, he biblically was not worthy of Pastoring and he would not talk to him again.

We agree wholeheartedly with Thigpen's conclusion in 2008. Knowing who the "real criminal is [i.e. Darrell Gilyard]," she reasons, and since "[n]either of these men condoned the behavior of DG, nor did they feel what he did was o.k [...] to crucify these two men over the sins and problems of DG would serve no purpose." Therefore, Thigpen rightly concludes, "I do not want to be responsible for passing judgement on these men."

 

Amen, Tiffany, amen!

 

We could not agree more with your mature, biblical, and gracious Christian posture in 2008 toward two men doing the best they could with what they'd been dealt in an excruciatingly difficult situation. 

 

Even so, we confess we're unsure what adequately explains the stark difference between Thigpen's responsible and non-judgmental description--and in some ways, honorable defense--of Patterson and Vines' dealings with Gilyard in 2008 and her more acidic musings presently concerning both men. It's been my experience as a pastor that persons who experience traumatic events improve over time as they healthily process the suffering they undergo rather than so visibly regress. Upon further reflection, perhaps we may be seeing in some ways the first-generation spill-over of the so-called #MeToo movement that has culturally devolved into overt anger, ambitious vengeance, chaotic gender-relations, apparent unforgiveness, and the insatiable appetite for public shaming.⁶     

 

The Rise of Public Shaming in the SBC   

 

Indeed it's becoming more prevalent in SBC life to feed the vindictive beast of public shaming. Only recently did the president of the SBC, North Carolina pastor, JD Greear, publicly call on Southern Baptists to shame and shun Paige Patterson. Patterson is presently scheduled to preach in a February 2020 conference at a Florida church. Greear responded in a Houston Chronicle article:    

“Trustees terminated Paige Patterson for cause, publicly disclosing that his conduct was ‘antithetical to the core values of our faith,’ ” Greear told the Chronicle. “I advise any Southern Baptist church to consider this severe action before having Dr. Patterson preach or speak and to contact trustee officers if additional information is necessary.”

While Greear cited Patterson's release from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary based upon conduct "antithetical to the core values of our faith" as the reason for the shunning, the Gilyard connection cannot be outright dismissed as a presumed backstory to Greear's words.⁷ Even so, objections to Greear's call for shunning Patterson were raised in various quarters of the SBC and mostly based on traditional Baptist ecclesial polity of local church autonomy.

 

SBC critic and Patterson's personal nemesis,⁸ Ben Cole, defended Greear's pronouncement citing Patterson's own purported public shunning of Darrell Gilyard in 1991. 

Eventually, Patterson wrote to trustees at Southwestern Seminary that he had not only advised Gilyard never to preach again, but had actively tried to discourage churches from hosting him.

So much for autonomy, eh?

Of course, likening what Patterson did in Gilyard's case to what Greear did in Patterson's case is hardly warranted. Patterson was taking responsibility for personally promoting Gilyard in SBC circles by calling and writing pastors whom he had led to trust Gilyard and invite him to speak. Greear was doing no such thing. Instead he was publicly appealing to the authority of the trustees and their supposed authoritative judgment about the character of Paige Patterson for the purpose of shutting Patterson down.⁹

 

Had Greear valued historical sense before answering, he could have followed the example of Florida Baptists when Darrell Gilyard attempted to sneak back into SBC life after a prison stint in 2012. The Jacksonville Baptist Association had received word that one of its churches, Christ Tabernacle Missionary Baptist Church, had called Gilyard as pastor. Though the church had long since been financially unsupportive of either the association or convention, it nonetheless was still listed in association and convention records as a participating church.

 

Christ Tabernacle church was dismissed from the association and ultimately from the Florida Baptist Convention. Convention spokesman, Don Hepburn, explained clearly the process Florida Baptists pursued. 'Hepburn said the Florida Baptist Convention "affirms the role of the local association as the theological guardian of theology, faith, practice and polity."'

 

Florida Baptists followed what has historically been the norm among autonomous but cooperating Baptist congregations. Local Baptists are far more efficient and effective in dealing with matters of "theology, faith, practice and polity" and therefore are rightly the theological guardians of cooperative associations among Baptists. Apparently, Greear never received the historical memo in his studies of free church history.

 

Nashville is neither Geneva nor Rome. However, the ever, creeping Presbyterianism in SBC life known for its rigid, top-down leadership, a "creeping Presbyterianism" Al Mohler once lamented, continues to saturate and dilute Southern Baptist ecclesiology. Greear's public call for churches to shun a leading Southern Baptist remains indicative of a rapidly fading free church tradition.  

 

Conclusion

 

I conclude with an appeal one last time for Southern Baptists to end this self-righteous, virtue-signalling effort to publicly shame its leaders--past and present--when the evidence we possess is either inconclusive or ambiguous at best  We fudge history, overreach with our inferences, and make rock-hard judgments to prematurely condemn men and women for actions we judge wrong based upon an obviously incomplete assembly of the hard facts necessary to rightly indict the person. It's almost as if we're waiting for a much coveted attaboy from the culture at large, curiously seeking its approval and admiration rather than the glory and honor of our Lord.

 

Southern Baptists, it's time to look deeply and earnestly at exactly who we want to be.

 

Sure, when we've got hard evidence, corroborating evidence, and clearly enough evidence to stand in public judgment, then, fine. Do so. Indeed perhaps we ought to do so. Just like Paige Patterson did with Darrell Gilyard. But when the evidence remains insufficient to substantiate the indictment proposed, or the indictment for which the social media mob demands, then, from my standpoint, it's morally better to stand down and patiently wait.

 

"Won't that mean a person might get away with a crime whether moral or civil?"

 

It does not.

 

No one morally "gets away" with any act no matter how secretive or without collaborating evidence the act is. "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says the Lord" (Romans 12:19; Hebrews 10:30).

 

Thus, while we do what we can as honorably as we can to ensure as much justice takes place as possible in a fallen world, ultimately God will take matters into His own holy hands.

 

¹ Gilyard resigned Victory church in Richardson, Texas July 10, 1991. Victory church reportedly was only loosely connected with Southern Baptists originally but, under Gilyard's leadership, was progressively strengthening those ties. After Patterson confronted Gilyard with what was called a  '"a mountain" of circumstantial evidence pointing toward sexual misconduct, Gilyard resigned from Victory Baptist Church on July 10. However, he returned to a pulpit 11 days later to launch a new congregation saying he wanted to help others "who have fallen into crisis situations"' --BP, 8/13/1991

² While it's true, some may sincerely question whether Patterson should have detected Gilyard's failure sooner than he did, it nonetheless remains unreasonable, gratuitous, and, in some cases, flatly dishonest to insist that because Patterson did not move on Darrell Gilyard within an identical time-frame as would we, it amounts to sexual abuse cover-up. Far too many variables exist to jump to such dismal conjectures. Nor is it fair to Patterson who, when the criteria he insisted upon was visibly met to publicly charge a gospel minister with the moral crimes alleged against him, he wasted no time in acting quickly and decisively on the evidence ascertained. Furthermore, those today who argue Patterson was dragging his feet either to boost the college over which he presided or held out as long as he could before his own name would be tarnished are begging the question. They presume Patterson's guilt for covering-up Gilyard's sexual abuse and are proposing reasons for the cover-up, reasons they impose apart from any evidence to substantiate it--hardly an honest approach to the question.

³ Brown also suggests then First Baptist Church pastor, Jerry Vines, as an accomplice in the cover-up. I find it interesting that although the present president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Danny Akin, served closely with Patterson and was present when he dealt with Darrell Gilyard in July 1991, no one to date has connected Akin with the alleged cover-up of Gilyard's sexual abuse. Fortunately for Akin, perhaps they just haven't thought to... yet. 

⁴ Today, Thigpen also repeatedly indicts her former pastor, Jerry Vines, in the cover-up with Patterson. In the 2008 blog-post, however, Thigpen couples Patterson and Vines together counselling critics not to engage in godless chatter about things we don't know about. 

5 Vines, Jerry. Vines: My Life and Ministry. B&H Publishing Group, 2014. 224.

⁶ In no way am I suggesting this most certainly is what is going on with Ms. Thigpen. Nor is it to downplay the real abusive experience she claims. Rather it is an acknowledgement that, as fallible human beings, we all are vulnerable to the effects of the broader culture at large and therefore may be subject to its sub-Christian entrapments.

⁷ Trustees fired Patterson over two alleged events of so-called "cover-up" having taken place at Southeastern and Southwestern seminaries. Neither event has been proven. And while trustees clearly have the authority to fire the president, it does not follow that the firing is just. That they could fire him does not necessarily imply they should fire him. Therefore, Greear's appeal to the trustees reduces to just another appeal to authority.

⁸ Cole at one time was a close Patterson associate but due to a breach of trust, Cole was let go. Since the early 2000s, Cole has harassed Patterson by various methods attempting to embarrass, shame, and destroy Patterson's ministry and influence in SBC life.

⁹ One wonders what Southwestern seminary trustees would share about Patterson that was not already publicized. Almost in every case, trustees respond to inquiries about personnel matters by declining to answer any details about a present or former employee. Once again, we run into the take-our-word-for-it obstacle. In other words, leadership by Authority.                 

 

MORE IN THIS SERIES

Sexual Abuse, Darrell Gilyard and the Southern Baptist Convention: Part 1

Sexual Abuse, Darrell Gilyard and the Southern Baptist Convention: Interlude

  

Comments

[luke]

Peter,

To what would you attribute the "creeping Presbyterianism" into SBC life? And, would it be fair to say that Chuck Kelley was prescient in his rejection of Sole Membership Model? I think both of these questions are relevant due to the Greear quote and why this seems to be happening now.

Thanks
Luke

[peter lumpkins]

Hey Luke,

Undoubtedly, the Calvinist Resurgence over the past two decades must be part of the reason. The 1st generation YRR advocates were unpologetic about their admiration for Presbyterians and Reformed heroes. Read enough in Presbyterian theology and it only makes sense Presbyterian ecclesiology will not far be behind.

I think also 9Marks influence and its rigid focus on the plurality of elders has made it's contribution to the issue.

As for Kelly's insistence on Sole Membership Model I honestly have fairly well forgotten most of the debate around that issue.

Hope you're doing well, brother!

Peter

[Lydia]

One of the things I noticed, and forgot to mention in previous comments, on survivor blogs over years is the idea that the government should intervene in churches over politics (they always forget the Civil Rights movement), Labor/employment issues, membership issues, etc.

This blows my mind. That is the very antithesis of separation of church and state. I think they forget that church is voluntary. If individuals are suspected of molesting children in your church you must report them. if the church is not handling the situation in a proper way and has no intention of doing so because the members won't push it, what other choice is there but to leave? Lord knows I have left over such.

That is part of the increasing outrage and vitriol coming from these people. They aren't using reason and logic. They are like children demanding Big Daddy government come and fix everything. And they aren't even paying attention that government is just as bad. Look at Rotherham,Epstein, etc.

Another problem these people now face is the prevalence of hoaxes. And they have gotten progressively worse over the last 3 years. that is a good reason not to jump on every bandwagon while you are being extremely careful with the information that you have.

With all that said, I believe every victim has a right to tell their story. but I wish people would understand that the accused has a right to face their accuser... when it gets legal. Well, at least it used to be that way but I'm not so sure anymore. Due Process, presumption of innocence, etc, is being turned on its head by a large group of people in this country. These days you are obstructing justice if you proclaim your innocence. Chilling stuff. But I find it ironic that it has a lot in common with Calvinism.