The second round of my virtual book tour occurred during the first weekend in May. It was a challenging weekend. I found myself debating with atheists while responding to comments about spiritual abuse at five different blog stops. It all started when I began promoting my blog stops by posting on Tweeter:

Problems with church started when I said I was uncomfortable with having a gay minister. Unitarian Universalists weren’t tolerant.

The problems followed me as clergy talked about me and allowed others to gossip. In the end the Lutherans didn’t want me either.

I have finally found a safe place among traditional Christians who walk the talk. Learn more at …

It is then that Taigitsune, a systems administrator for the Unitarian Universalist Association, asked, “In what way did you question it?”

I hesitated. What did he mean “in what way”? Was he asking if I was polite and respectful or was he asking what my specific doubts were about having a gay minister? Why did it matter? I replied by directing him to the day’s blog stop.

He replied he didn’t see any mention of Unitarian Universalists there and Unitarian Universalists weren’t mainline Christian. Some UUs are Christian others are not, I replied. In New England they are certainly mainstream. I was a UU for ten years. Taigitsune then wrote, that one of Unitarian Universalist’s seven principles is the inherent worth and dignity of each person including gay ministers. So who, he asked, was really intolerant?

The Unitarian Universalists I answered without hesitation. Tolerance is the practice of allowing or respecting the beliefs of others. In 1993 when I expressed discomfort but indicated I was willing to discuss the issue, my fellow congregants responded by refusing to talk directly to me. Instead they gossiped.

Taigitsune expressed the common UU conceit that they are more tolerant than other churches insisting they don’t place doctrinal demands on their members. But they do. There is an expectation members are political and social liberals with an interest in other religions except Christianity. Tagitsune also wrote that the scapegoating was merely my perception of things. Not so I thought. I was expelled. Told never to return. “No,” I replied, “Scapegoating is a set of behaviors. It is how people avoid taking responsibility for their cruel behavior.”

On the second day of the blog tour Shtole, one of Taigitsune’s followers, joined the conversation by retweeting Taigitsune’s, “If you think you’re right, you’re probably not.” I replied to both of them, “Then you must be wrong since you are so sure I am wrong and you are right.” Taigitsune withdrew and soon it was five against one. I am proud to say I held my own. I didn’t flinch. While not all of my arguments were strong and articulate I did not let them bully me. I demonstrated to other survivors how to stand up for oneself. During this exchange the number of my followers jumped confirming the more I am myself, the more people follow.

During this hot debate I was simultaneously discussing on We Survived Abuse recovery from spiritual abuse. On John’s Grace Walk we talked about why I didn’t leave the abusive churches sooner. On Sunday I stopped by T Michael Cart’s Truth in Ministry where people responded to my Letter to Spiritual Abuse Survivors. We talked about making church a refuge or safe place for all. On Monday at Under Much Grace we talked about patriarchal structures and patriocentricity where the family patriarch is central to family life and family members. We also discussed restriction of emotional display and speaking up for oneself.

Thank you to all the lovely people who have supported me by hosting a blog stop. Together we will plant the seeds needed to reform our churches making them better places for everyone.

With the help of my virtual assistant, Lee Drozak I have been planning a virtual book tour for Not of My Making: Bullying, Scapegoating and Misconduct in Churches. The tour will start on Monday, April 13^th at Aida Calder’s blog, Forgetting the Former Things.

In setting up the tour I have had the honor to correspond with and talk to a number of wonderful people dedicated to helping fellow survivors overcome abuse. Read Deena Springer’s post about our phone conversation at A Survivor’s Thoughts on Life

As I wanted, my book is promoting a discussion about abuse in churches. Below are my responses to some issues raised by John Weaver of  Against Biblical Counseling:

John wrote:

I think what your book does do well is provide an insight into the kind of doctrinal and internal in-fighting that goes on in mainline churches. I was shocked to find that Unitarianism can be so divisive. Coming out of the evangelical tradition, I had no idea that Unitarian belief – which many evangelicals (not me) believe is too vague to provoke disagreement – can provoke such profound disagreements among its members.

My response:

People argue about whatever they feel passionate about. While Unitarians insist they have no doctrine, in fact, they do. Some of its tenets are: man is good, there is no sin, morality is relative, all value systems are equal except Christianity which is the cause of most wars, homosexual behavior is biologically determined and is not a sin, it is wrong to be a Republican etc. If you step outside of this even a fraction of an inch you will be accused as I was of not being a real Unitarian. Unitarians tend to be far left ideologues who play with religion picking and choosing what makes them feel good from the world’s religions while condemning or ignoring the parts that they find too challenging. Often Unitarian churches are no more than left wing political organizations masquerading as religion.

John further wrote:

The situation you describe in your book is hard for an outside reader to judge accurately, especially when only presented with one side of it.

I replied:

I asked my adversaries to share their perspectives on the events I wrote about in my book. They refused. From what I can deduce, they believe I am unreasonable and bad and it is better not to help me. I hope and pray that they know at some level that what they did was wrong and are ashamed to have it out there in print. Maybe some day they will apologize just as my high school classmate has. You can read about that in my blog post, “Facebook Redemption”? Be sure to read Jeff Fisher’s comment. It corroborates my high school experience and will give you a glimpse of how I was viewed when I was a teenager.

John wrote:

I am not saying your church(s) did not scapegoat you, just that it would be impossible for me or any other blogger to be able to honestly say they knew the ‘truth’ of your story, even if the sole guidepost they were using is your text. In this, it differs, from, say, Renee Altson’s book Stumbling Toward Faith, where it is obvious to any reader that Altson underwent extreme abuse at the hands of evangelical church leadership. Similarly, too, the Mercy survivors I cover obviously were abused by their exorcists, as careful research into Mercy Ministries clearly demonstrates.

My response:

I suspect you and/or your readers are having difficulty accepting that emotional and relational abuse can cause as much damage as the severe sexual and physical abuse and/or you do not believe people who share your values are capable of being abusive. Psychological research has discovered it is the emotional abuse that accompanies most sexual or physical abuse which causes the most harm. That is why you can have a woman who has been raped by a stranger on the street and whose family rallied behind her, not develop PTSD while someone who has been neglected and emotionally abused by their parents develop severe PTSD. As for who is capable of being abusive, we all are. It is part of our animal natures. Watch videos on great ape groups. Alpha males will kill the infants of competing males. Physical abuse of weaker apes is the norm. As human beings we get to choose. We can be beasts or we can develop a sense of morality and learn to protect those weaker than ourselves. As a Christian I do not believe we can do this without God.

John:

Please note that I am not saying you were not scapegoated or abused by your church. I believe your interpretation of these events is very likely the correct one, especially after reading some of the crueler comments fellow church members made about you. But I simply can not prove this conclusively from the text, as I can with Stumbling Toward Faith.

My response:

I read through the reviews of Stumbling Toward Faith and see it is a memoir just as my book is. I do not see any mention that she presented any corroborating evidence to her story. So I am puzzled that you find her story more credible simply because the abuse she describes appears on the surface to be more severe.

John:

I also think you create a strong bond of sympathy with your readers. I felt greatly worried for your past and present mental health after I read the book.

My response

I am puzzled that you “felt greatly worried” for my present mental health. If you read through to the end of my book you should realize that I was on the road to recovery and that I received treatment from a competent and well trained therapist. I suspect you see me as weaker and sicker than I am now or ever was. This is a common error. To quote Elie Wiesel: “Their experience has set them apart: they are neither better nor worse, but different, more vulnerable and at the same time more hardened than you.”

John:

Please feel free to use any excerpt from this e-mail to help advance your book. I do think there are many good aspects to it, and the pre-Unitarian section is particularly strong.

My response:

Thank you for taking the time to read my book and providing me with a critique. I wanted to learn more about you but couldn’t find any information about your background. You will see from my websites I strive for openness and transparency. I want there to be no mistake as to who I am and what I stand for.