TIME TO COME CLEAN

No honourable newspaper should delight in airing dirty laundry in public. This is particularly true of a Christian one. Not only because every believer is a sinner saved by grace alone (1 Tim. 1:15), but also because Christ himself gave clear steps for how local church gatherings should deal with scandalous sin (Matt. 18:15-17; 1 Cor. 5:4-5). en is not a church. Yet, as a newspaper, which represents many evan-gelical constituencies, there is a responsibility to call to attention influential individuals who fall (2 Thess. 3:14), lest we fall ourselves (Gal. 6:1, 1 Cor. 10:12), and to do so with a deep humility (Luke 18:9-14). This is particularly important given our society’s rightful and increasing sensitivity to the wickedness of abuse, and the sinfulness of those who cover it up.

On Saturday 22 June, the front page of The Daily Telegraph sadly reported the Revd Jonathan Fletcher, 76, had been ‘stripped of his Church powers by the Bishop of Southwark following complaints made to the London church where he used to be minister.’ This ban included permission to officiate and preach due to ‘spiritual abuse’ of vulnerable adults.

Well-known evangelical Anglican church Emmanuel Church Wimbledon, where Fletcher presided for thirty years (1982-2012), responded the next day. It confirmed that, although no police action had been taken, they were ‘appalled and saddened by what had been disclosed [to them in recent months]’ and had taken their own steps to ensure that Fletcher was prevented from ministering. Various websites and news outlets subsequently speculated on misdemeanours committed and past links with other disgraced vicars.

Explanations at EMA

Given Fletcher’s longstanding involvement with the Proclamation Trust, on 26 June at the Evangelical Ministry Assembly (EMA), such allegations were clarified. Sarah Hall (Safeguarding Officer at Emmanuel), Andrew Wales (advisory QC) and Rev. Vaughan Roberts (Chairman of the Proclamation Trust) read statements which highlighted the gravity of the situation.

Apologising for specifics, yet wanting to suppress speculation, Hall stated: ‘In early 2017, two sources informed Emmanuel of unnamed individuals making allegations… [then] in September 2018 concrete allegations had been made about conduct involving Jonathan and other men… allegations were made of the practice of physical discipline in the context of discipling relationships. One example involved men hitting each other on their naked backsides with a trainer … further disclosures … have largely related to … one to one massage, ranging from partially clothed massage to massage where both men are said to have been fully naked.’

Wales clarified: ‘Whilst there was no evidence of any significant sexual or physical risk to children, there was a risk of Jonathan behaving towards vulnerable adults seeking his spiritual guidance in a manner which may be harmful.’ And that they were ‘taking the allegations seriously [due to] the number of disclosures received [and] their consistent nature.’

Roberts concluded: ‘Sadly, it seems that he [Fletcher] has not yet accepted the seriousness of the situation, despite the efforts of a number of senior evangelical leaders.’

Such statements were effectively corroborated by Fletcher himself who, a few days later, released a statement saying: ‘I was involved in a system of mutual encouragement whereby we set ourselves targets in healthy and holy living and then imposed what I thought of as light-hearted forfeits… Although at the time we definitely did not think we were doing anything wrong, I’ve seen since that it could have caused much harm both to individuals and to the reputation of conservative evangelicalism for which I am profoundly sorry.’

Where do we look?

While Emmanuel has set up a website for those affected by Fletcher (www.walkingwith. uk), others are wrestling with a plethora of questions. ‘How could such a gifted evangelical leader do this?’ ‘Why hasn’t a man, who has preached for decades on purity, come clean?’ ‘Why didn’t the abused receive help far sooner?’ ‘Who covered up such dirt?’

The twin desire for transparency and justice is godly. Every case of abuse merits God’s judgement, but we are particularly angry when the impurity of one, so clean in our eyes, is uncovered. Such an exposé can feel like death, as feelings of aggrievement quickly turn to feelings of bereavement.

But when these initial emotions subside, where are we to look? Let me briefly suggest four places:

1. We look to those who ‘feel dirty’

All sin stains. One of the reoccurring comments from those who have been abused (whether physically, emotionally or spiritually) is that they ‘feel dirty.’ Biblical imagery frequently links uncleanliness with the consequences of other’s sin, and so there is a painful inevitability about such an outlook. As a result, every scandalised church should be a supportive church.

I am thankful that Emmanuel is seeking to care for those who have been harmed, but all momentous sin should cause us to look out for those who have been hurt by it. In a drink driving accident we run towards the injured; we do not, first, chase down or check on the perpetrator. Consequently, every church’s first port of call should be those who have been painfully wounded by the abuser. Weeping with those who weep (Rom. 12:15) is an important starting point; those closer to the situation may also offer practical and pastoral care. It takes time and effort to bandage deep wounds. That is time well spent.

2. We look to our own uncleanness

My primary school teacher hated children pointing. She always chimed, ‘when you point a finger there are three fingers pointing back at you.’ As Christian adults we point with far more dexterity. Some point verbally with immature brashness on social media forums, but most of us just point in quiet gossipy corners of our churches. A Trinity of fingers point back – ‘If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves’ (1 John 1:8) – but when news of the failure of a renowned Christian becomes known, the temptation to rebroadcast it to elevate ourselves is too great. This should not be. The sin of others should shut our mouths. We should pause, look within, meditate on our own impurity, and on the grace of God which has sustained us and caused us not to fall in similar ways.

Such meditation on the pervasiveness of sin should also cause us to look carefully within our own churches. We must ensure that those in leadership are given the time and resources to know (and know well) the people who come through our doors every Sunday. Safeguarding procedures and policies need to be regularly reviewed for the sake of UK law and the reputation of Jesus’ name. Our churches have a duty to protect the vulnerable and report sin. Love covers over a multitude of sins (1 Peter 4:8), but love is not covering up sin.

3. We look to those who have fallen foul

Yet, a righteous anger at an abuser’s sin must not tarnish our own understanding of the gospel. The Bible is full of flawed figures, like David and Peter, who sinned in heinous ways and yet were graciously restored (Ps. 51:12, John 21:15-19). We may look for godly repentance and find it woefully deficient in the short term, but we are not the ones who know the end of the story. We look patiently, in hope and prayer, knowing that ‘No one is too bad to be saved, or beyond the power of Christ’s grace. The door of hope which the gospel reveals to sinners is very wide open. Let us leave it open as we find it. Let us not attempt, in narrow-minded ignorance, to shut it… Hospitals discharge many cases as incurable. But there are no incurable cases under the gospel. Any sinner may be healed, if he will only come to Christ.’ (J.C. Ryle, Expository Thoughts on Luke, Vol. 2)

4. We look to Christ, the living water

Consequently, in the midst of all this, we ultimately look to our saviour. Christ, the living water, who convicts and cleanses of sin (John 4) and will wipe away every tear at the end (Rev. 7). Indeed, in a packed Westminster Chapel, stunned and saddened Christians were struck by the wisdom, meekness and Christological hope of the closing remarks made by Roberts at EMA: ‘In the kindness of God, I do see the possibility of good coming out of this awful situation – of deepened unity; of mature reflection on our own sin; of reassessing our own church culture; of humbly casting ourselves afresh on the grace of God in Jesus Christ, as we look to him, the one perfect man.’

Whether we knew the story already or are reading about it for the first time; whether we are the abused or the abuser; only He can make us clean.