Jordan Root has a problem. He has the sexual appetite of a pedophile and regularly views child pornography.

Jordan and Karen Root were members of a mega-church in Texas. So involved were they that they served as missionaries to South Asia for the church’s missionary organization.

When Jordan’s problem, and the fact that it had been going on for years, became apparent to Karen, she pursued an annulment of her marriage from their church. She saw her marriage as a series of continual lies and deception, resulting from many acts and not just one event. She would say later that this discovery was “an indescribable shock and triggered a thorough upheaval of every aspect of my life.”
Karen also resigned her membership from the church, not wanting to bring scandal to it.

In response, the church sent her an official response from a pastor: “We have been perplexed by your decision to file for an annulment of your marriage without first abiding by your covenant obligations to submit to the care and direction of your elders. As I mentioned in my first letter, this decision violates your covenant with us – and places you under discipline. Per (our) bylaws, you are prohibited from voluntarily resigning membership while subject to the formal disciplinary process. We cannot, therefore, accept your resignation.”

Now, there are multiple problems with this response. But what is so interesting to me is that this pastor frames the church’s response as “care.” This is not care, this is control.

Karen is an autonomous adult, capable of deciding for herself the care she needs. And if denying her the right to leave (think cult) were not bad enough, they placed her under church discipline — as if she were the culprit. Shockingly, Jordan Root was not placed under church discipline.

So, the church first placed Karen under discipline, and then stated she cannot resign because members can’t resign when they are under discipline. Brilliant.

Karen later stated that there was “an unwavering commitment to an extreme theology of church authority combined with a strong desire to control the narrative and maintain control of the situation.” And there is the essence of the control. It is not about Karen. It’s the narrative; protecting the church and what is said about the church. Control what is being said “out there.” And that is sad.

Karen was also told not to try to break her finances free from her husband’s because it would look “too much like a step toward divorce.” When she asked why church administrators felt any choices she made about personal finances were within the scope of their authority, she was told, “In a marriage separation, every aspect of your marriage is under the authority of the elders of the church.” Church gone down the wrong road.
Let me be clear that this is nothing short of spiritual abuse. And this is why people leave churches and never come back.

Certainly, it is very wise to seek Godly counsel when you are in crisis. But, it is your role to decide your fate and the fate of your relationships; it is no one else’s.

No pastor likes divorce, but we are kidding ourselves if we think that we are always the best arbitrators of the fate of a member’s marriage. And when you throw in secrecy and protection of reputation, seriously bad decisions can be made — decisions that don’t especially “care” for the member.

In an interview, Karen said, “The inclination towards minimization and secrecy that the pastors and elders of (the church) have displayed is inexcusable. And the spiritual abuse I have experienced at their hands is unacceptable from those who would represent Jesus Christ.”

Yep. Thank God Christ is bigger than our churches.