39 Comments

There is only one sentence of your otherwise totally accurate description of mega churches with celebrity pastors who protect their image at all costs, usually by blaming women for their moral lapses, that I disagree with. It’s this one: “Had this actually been any sort of real act of repentance, he would have allowed the woman to speak or at least had her present on stage with him.”

That would only add to her victimization and subject her to public humiliation. The congregation would blame her for embarrassing their pastor and tarnishing his image no matter what she said. I think keeping her identity confidential unless she decides to reveal it and share her perspective on their DM’s is essential for her well-being.

What needs to happen in my opinion is that the complete text of all of the DMs should be made public, with her name redacted. Secrecy is one of the most destructive forces at work in most churches today. That would also help the congregation see who their pastor really is instead of the idealized image he has carefully cultivated.

Expand full comment
author

Yes, I can see that and she should certainly have the option of being there or not being there, but she would not have victimized if he actually publicly apologized to her, which is what he should have done - AND to her husband. HE is the person in leadership and authority, which means he should have taken full ownership and responsibility. I don't agree with their text messages being publicly disseminated, even redacted. There was probably a healthy way to handle this but this wasn't it, and again, I think it goes back to what so many have said - there is so much more going on here than they are saying and once again, women end up both the villains and the victims.

Expand full comment

I agree there is much more going on than is being shared publicly. I am curious why you think he should apologize both to her and to her husband. To me, apologizing to her husband comes across as reinforcing the idea that a wife is a husband’s property and therefore the real damage done was to him (or at least that he was harmed as much as she was, which I seriously doubt).

Expand full comment
author

I look at it as if the roles were reversed. I have a very good friend who is married. His wife loves me and frequently tells me how good our friendship is for her husband. She even calls me sometimes and asks me to go hang out with him and spend time with him. If I did anything to interfere in their marriage in any way, I feel I would owe both of them an apology. A marriage is a unit. when you come between a husband and wive in any way, I fell like it's appropriate to apologize to both. i think it would be sexist and reinforce the idea of women as property if you were to apologize to the husband and not the wife, but I don't personally think apologizing to both sends that message.

Expand full comment

Thanks for explaining that. I understand what you’re saying.

Expand full comment
author

Also, I'm not sure her shame or humiliation is any less great for her NOT being allowed to stand up and be publicly apologized to. It's a small enough community that I'm pretty sure those who haven't figured out who she is already will soon enough. Shit like this never stays hidden and he's made sure that when she is found out, she will be the villain, not him.

Expand full comment

OH MY. "Robin Thinks" is a platform of opinions and assumptions.

I am pleased you wrote>>what you wrote. We now understand how The Jezebel spirit is working through this Blog. I ask everyone to Pray for Robin. That is all that needs to be done.

Blessings to you Robin.

Expand full comment
author

Cool, thanks! Always appreciate prayers!

Expand full comment

And my question would be… what good would that do? Feed all of those

nosy people starving for gossip? Waiting anxiously for another person to mess up so they feel better about their own shortcomings? Pastors are people too. The only perfect one was Christ. So… when you say “help the congregation see who their pastor really is”… you mean… show that he is imperfect? Because… don’t we already know that? And if they don’t know that… then why are they putting him on a pedestal?

Expand full comment
author

Well, here's the deal. This was clearly considered to be a big enough deal that they make Chandler make a public confession and it was big enough somehow that the elders felt he needed to take a leave of absence. For me personally, I don't think what he did wrong really deserved a big public notification, but the fact that he had to give one says there is something vey wrong with the church and their expectations of him. That being said, since they DID do a big public announcement, then yes, all FOUR of the people involved in this situation should have also been involved in the resolution. Chandler's stepping over lines didn't just affect HIM - it affected his wife, his supposed "friend", and her husband. All of them should have been involved in showing that they were working this out together - which is literally what should be happening.

To your second point, this isn't about being perfect, but it is about being honest. That's why this should have been no big deal. We all slip, we all stumble, we all do stupid shit like this. Why did this have to be a big public announcement. It is further aggravated by the fact that they have previously covered up so much shit, it's like they are using this to atone for it, but doing it really really badly. But again, the problem is not perfection, the problem is honesty. When you are walking around not being honest about who you are, that means you are lying. And for some (including, I believe, Chandler) pretty much his entire life is a lie - which is a pretty serious problem for someone in leadership. It's pretty solidified for me when he said "what the H" on stage. Hell is a Biblical word I am sure he has said thousands of times, problably even in church, yet he is image managing so hard, so hyper conscious and aware, he couldn't even say Hell out loud. That is a problem. It is a character and integrity issue, and the Bible has a lot to say about how important the character of leaders is.

Expand full comment

They are putting him on a pedestal because they see his carefully polished public image as who he truly is. So I would argue that no, they don’t already know he is imperfect. As Robin said, honesty and transparency are needed.

Clearly, it’s about more than him not being perfect, which of course no human can be. If those DMs were inappropriate enough to make a woman confront him and the church’s board investigate him and require a public confession and apology for them, there are more serious issues.

Maybe the full content of all of the DMs shouldn’t be made public (though I still think at least the ones he sent that were considered inappropriate should be), but there needs to be a better explanation of the situation and what he did that was deemed unacceptable conduct.

Expand full comment
author

I actually wrote another article about it. I think what actually happened is even more disturbing than we think and I think he is very clearly trying to make it seem as if the problem is a man/woman thing all while claiming it's not.

Here are my further thoughts. If what I think is happening is happening, this absolutely needs to be called out and addressed for what it really is. https://robinthinks.substack.com/p/why-matt-chandlers-behavior-may-be?utm_source=%2Finbox&utm_medium=reader2

Expand full comment
Aug 29, 2022Liked by Robin Thinks

Thank you for sharing your thoughts about this. So proud of all the women raising their voices on this complex, hurtful and necessary topic. Proud of all the men too who are speaking out about this in support of women and against the poison of patriarchal church systems. Keep on keeping on, sister!

Expand full comment
author

Thank you!

Expand full comment

There is a certain “evangelical style” that comes across as manufactured and inauthentic.

Expand full comment
author

I absolutely agree.

Expand full comment
Aug 29, 2022Liked by Robin Thinks

Great article! Thanks.

Expand full comment
author

Thank you!

Expand full comment

You seem to be very comfortable making a lot of rushes to judgment about things you simply cannot know. For example, you make the assumption that the woman had to ambush him because he's a celebrity pastor. While what you said is true of some, how do you know that MC isn't available to congregants? And then you assume that because he went to his elder right away that he was thinking about his church rather than his wife. Besides you thinking you can read his mind, he actually stated his wife wasn't home at the time, implying she was out of town, and so going right over to talk is something to praise him for, not judge him for. He didn't try to hide it. Do you know how many celeb pastor/wife combos would conspire to cover this stuff up? Going to the elders provided him with the accountability to the church he needed.

If MC's "deepest, darkest secret" is that he says things in private that are unguarded, I'd say Village Church is in pretty good hands. What if we uncovered everything you had said to a trusted friend during your lifetime. Would you show yourself to be completely without sin? I doubt it. He has never painted himself to be sinless. I've heard him talk about his own sin. Frankly, the only thing that bothers me about the way he shared these things was the use of that "unhealth" word. That's therapeutic garbage that he should know better than to use. But I suspect it's because he's not fully clear on his sin, and that's probably why the elders are suggesting that he take time away to reflect on his own heart, where sin might have been involved, and to deepen repentance. I'd actually be surprised if when he comes back, he isn't able to publicly acknowledge the specific sins he's become aware of that he's now calling "unhealth". I don't think it's PR -- I think it's a lack of clarity on his sin and rather than making a fake confession, he's being honest about where he's at in the process.

I would suggest that MC isn't the only one in need of reflection on sinful motives and actions in their heart .

Expand full comment
author

He who has ears, let him hear.

Expand full comment

Article is A bit cynical. Matts an anointed teacher. He got to be a friend w her and both spouses weren't concerned. He prob said stupid silly things in conversations. Doesn't mean he is not who he appears to be. We are human ive said dumb things like "you act like such a turd at times, or you sound like an ass. Ok we are human and we laugh at things and if u are funny and any other person u talk to is funny too. It can get like when u think back u realize to say "know its not really cool i said that other day. Dont think God wouldn't expose if it was not so. Everyone is being exposed. I believe him. My 2 cents.

Expand full comment

It’s also interesting, too, why not just text? I do know with IG messages you can go into ‘vanishing mode’ and those messages disappear when you leave your chat… I’m sure someone at some point can retrieve them if they’re computer savvy…

Expand full comment
author

Yeah, I don’t know about that except to say that sometimes we message ppl in a specific format for a specific reason, such as if we “meet” them in a group on FB, let’s say, we might reach out to them via FB DM. Then, we may get to know them, meet them in person, yet we continue to communicate via FB DM because we are creatures of habit and all of our history is on FB. Similarly, he might have done like an Instagram live or something, which they talked about beforehand on Instagram DM and just kept using it.

As to making the DM’s public, I absolutely 100% hope they do not ever do that. There are not two people equally in the wrong here. I’ve also heard people speculating about the woman who confronted Chandler and I also hope they never, never, never find her. I am so tired of women having to pay the price for the sins of powerful men.

Expand full comment

These things meed to be discussed openly and I have no qualm with your discussion, but posting a picture of Matt's wife and children with your article is an awful standard of conduct that does more harm to them. Matt deserves the scrutiny, his family, however does not. Especially not his children. I ask you to kindly reconsider and post a picture of Matt alone in its place.

Expand full comment
author

Thank you so much Michelle! You are quite correct, bless you for pointing that out! Changing photo now. I'm not sure if it will change in all the links already posted, but I will change it and remember that note in future as well!

Expand full comment

If the church or Matt Chandler did not do anything, did not communicate with the church, or own things or apologize people would be upset. The leadership and Matt Chandler share, divulge, share, owned his stupidity, admitted his need to grow and learn in some areas, his need to do better, and apologize people are still upset. Only time will tell if he is genuine and will do the necessay work.

Robin, there is truth in the things that you say happen in “mega”-churches and celebrity pastors, troubling issues behind the heart and motivations, manipulating and playing audiences/members/, etc. Unless you have the super powers of reading minds and x-ray vision to see into the heart where things are coming from it is dangerous to assume what is motivating or the heart of the people who shared the information. It is easy to assume and accuse people of evil and it is far more challenging to actually know the heart and motivation behind some of the very huge assumptions about the heart , place, motivation, intentions, calculations, and plans of things you make and describe.

I saw someone in the comments call for revealing the actual messages between Matt and the lady. I believe this is a personal matter for the Village Church as a body to deal with and walk through. They don’t need to make the messages public. There is no basis nor need for that.

There is not one way, nor an easy way to walk something like this out. Any way you do it, it will be messy. Being, doing, and walking out faith in community is always challenging and messy. It is easy to think, process, and criticize from where we stand on the outside looking in, with rocks in hand and ready to hurl accusations and insults, criticizing how things are/were handled. It is a total different thing to step up and into the fray and mess, trying to honor God and people.

Expand full comment
author

I hear what you are saying but I think a lot of people - including myself - are sensing that there is something much bigger, darker and more disturbing going on here.

Here are my further thoughts and if I am right, this is absolutely something that needs to be called out and addressed for what it really is. https://robinthinks.substack.com/p/why-matt-chandlers-behavior-may-be?utm_source=%2Finbox&utm_medium=reader2

Expand full comment

I have no issue with calling Sin, sin and calling people to the mat over it but everytime something like "this" happens, I see long treatises mulling over each word and psycho analyzing each comment for it's deeper and truer meaning. Let me say I don't think that most of this analysis is incorrect but I never see what the right response should be? Should Matt Chandler be taken to the Narthex and stoned? Should churches only be allowed to get to certain level of fund raising and then forced to be stopped? It more often feels like articles like these are authors purging their own sense of hurt than saying, how do we restore the church and help it to reflect the Love, Majesty and forgiveness of God through Jesus Christ. If the author is a non Christian who cares nothing about God or the Gospel, then let the church listen and grow and show a repentance that reflects the Love of Christ.

Expand full comment
author

Have you ever known people to read the Bible more than once? Would you not say that we "psycho analyze each comment for it's deeper and truer meaning"? Is not the lesson of the Bible itself that every "comment," every word, every verse HAS a deeper and truer meaning? People "psycho analyze" things like this specifically because this is a play that is being put on to try and lead people to a certain conclusion. "Psycho analyzing" things like this, as you call it, helps us to not be controlled by people like Chandler trying to lead us to a certain pre-determined response. It helps us to recognize exactly what abuse of power looks like.

The correct response would involve ALL of the people involved in this situation. At the very least Chandler is guilty of the abuse of authority, which he only made worse by this "confession." One would assume that the person he was having these conversations with was a friend, but suddenly - as men in power often do - when their conversations threaten his power she becomes "that women." How would you feel if someone you thought was a friend turned on you and threw you under a bus to save himself? There are three victims here, and Chandler is not one of them. How "just" would you consider our court systems to be if the only people allowed to speak in court were the perpetrator and his attorney? Do you think only an accused rapist should be allowed to speak in court while his victim is silenced? Yes, speaking out against your rapist is hard and it takes courage, but it is also a RIGHT we are granted in the US.

Chandler "injured" three people in one way or another, yet none of them were allowed to speak or be a part of the solution. They were silenced. This is what churches do - they silence victims and platform perpetrators and it is wrong. There should have been four people on that stage, not one, and this should have been an APOLOGY not an admission that Chandler is embarrassed. There literally wasn't even an apology at all.

Expand full comment
author

Also, it doesn't matter whether I am a Christian or not. After Roe v. Wade getting overturned there can literally be no doubt that American Christianity has a significant impact on every single person in America, therefore it is literally every single person in America's business what it happening in American churches. Not to mention the fact that American churches basically just "cast the first stone" by being the primary driving force between getting Roe overturned because they consider abortion to be a "sin" so do you honestly think America is not going to be laser focused on the churches business?

You cannot say "we have our nose deep in your business, but keep your nose out of ours." Also, Matt Chandler is perfectly happy to broadcast HIS face and his brilliant sermons to the world. I am 100% sure he wants people to break them down and talk about them and anaylize them, but suddenly we should give him privacy when he screws up? He literally CREATED this platform - he put himself on it, so neither he nor you can cry when people use it to analyze his screw ups.

Expand full comment

You really call yourself a Christian? How can u hear what was said indept from all side..if you even bother to get the info..an still decided to run with your faulty narrative..an click bait title..you should be ashamed.

Expand full comment
Aug 30, 2022Liked by Robin Thinks

I don’t think Robin should be ashamed at all. I appreciate all like her who follow and report these stories because they keep these folks honest and accountable. We love the Truth, right? You seem threatened. Why?

Expand full comment
author

I love how you just assume I call myself a Christian and then immediately accuse me of running with a faulty narrative...

Expand full comment

That makes a lot of sense if you don't..an your narrative is fault..there are full details about what happened if u would bother to do some research ..maybe u should look for more info an not just watch a 10min clip before you start running with..I repeat a "faulty narrative" .. FYI: idk how I ended up on this blog..I was just late night scrolling an clicking.. an im very far from "threatened" lol

Expand full comment
author

Why is it important to you what I believe or don't believe. There is no "us" and "them," the fact that you think there is says more about your faith (or lack thereof) than mine. Jesus was not a Christian, so why would any followers of his be required to take that name? Christianity is a religion made by man, which Jesus never called us to be. You will never find any place in the Bible where we are required to call ourselves by a man-made name which didn't even exist at the time - yet Jesus' believers and followers did just fine without a name.

Expand full comment

The term Christian comes from the Greek word Χριστιανός which simply means "follower of christ" which also has other root word which means "anointed one"...so of course Jesus wasn't a Christian why would he tell himself to follow himself lol... that point made no sense...also the greek root which means "little anointed one" is mentioned in the Bible 3 times in the new testament...so I really don't understand your points ..no 1 is requiring u..but if you are a follower of christ why would u not use the term that means "follower of christ"....im done bye..

Expand full comment
author

Cool, have a nice day!

Expand full comment

If u r a Christ follower...be Christlike.

Expand full comment
author

Well that would be the goal of any Christ follower, right? From what I can see, however, seems a lot of ppl far more interested in being like Billy Graham, Mark Driscoll and Matt Chandler, but maybe that’s just me.

Expand full comment