Wade Mullen Quotes

Many abusers coerce victims into silence with threats meant to give the victim the impression that telling anyone will cause some kind of destruction.

Your best defense is to know as much of the language of abuse as possible.

I could oppose the abuse without the motive of personal revenge. The act of forgiveness didn’t shut down my advocacy. Rather, it spun me back into the fray with a clearer mind and a strengthened resolve.

Abusers and abusive organizations may concede the basic reality of the wrong—“Yes, this happened”—but quickly add statements that either soften their responsibility or promote their integrity: “We value all people and only want what is best for everyone involved.” If these concessions do their job, the accused will stay in power, stay in favor with the community, and stay far from the shame their actions deserve.

In a safe community, grooming is confronted before a person is victimized. In a safe community, truth telling increases as the strategies of deception are more easily spotted, first in ourselves and then in others.

Out of a desire to clear the air, you might be the first to acknowledge what you perceive to be the mistakes you made, might be the first to apologize because you’ve been made to feel as if you are the flaw in the equation. A concession can allow you to remain plagued with shame-based thoughts like, Maybe I am making too much of this. I shouldn’t have made such a fuss. They don’t deserve this. After all, I could have done more to prevent it.

Elie Wiesel powerfully said, “I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormenter, never the tormented.”[2

Elizabeth Heyrick believes that “we furnish the stimulant to . . . injustice . . . by purchasing its produce.”[3] I agree. Many people want to continue to enjoy what the abusive community produces—things like teachings, works of art, or services. By doing so, they provide the nourishment that the abusive community needs to grow stronger.

Consider these words from Judith Herman: “It is very tempting to take the side of the perpetrator. All the perpetrator asks is that the bystander do nothing. He appeals to the universal desire to see, hear, and speak no evil. The victim, on the contrary, asks the bystander to share the burden of pain. The victim demands action, engagement, and remembering.”[1]

Though the statement was labeled an apology, Monica was actually on the receiving end of what I call a concession. The reason something seemed off was that the board’s apology was not being offered out of a concern for what was right (as a true apology always is), but rather as the next tactic to achieve their goal: quelling the scandal. They were willing to say, “We are sorry,” as long as it would result in Monica’s retreat;

People who hear the words “I’m sorry” and observe what appears, on the surface, to be a new kind of response must remember the deceptive nature of abuse. While you should always hope for truth and advocate for change, you should expect deception and consider the possibility that these new words and actions do not reflect a genuine apology but are the predictable next steps in the direction the abuser has always been moving—a course that takes the abuser as far away from shame and as close to legitimacy as possible.

This is really what it comes down to when abuse is exposed, when darkness is brought to light: Who will do whatever it takes to overcome a scandal, and who will do all they must to pursue what is right? Those who are governed by integrity will do whatever it takes to establish the truth and correct wrongs, even if it means giving up their power. Those governed by power will do only what is necessary to prevent or quell scandal so as to not risk losing that power. They are crisis managers, first and foremost, not truth seekers.

Abusers also deny ability when they claim they did not possess the authority to make a certain decision or take a different course of action. This is similar to the person who says, “I need to stay in my lane” or “It’s not my place” or “It’s none of my business.” Again, sometimes there is a need to recognize the limitations of authority. However, it is always necessary to ask, “Is this a legitimate excuse for this situation?

The parable of the Good Samaritan, told by Jesus in Luke 10, exposes fault with the excuse that says, “It isn’t my responsibility.” As a Christian, my ethic demands I consider all possible ways to overcome obstacles instead of using those obstacles as an excuse. Victims suffer and are left to perish when those in positions to help suggest they lack the ability. It is extremely painful—not to mention rejecting and devaluing—to witness others step by and over you while you are suffering.

Walls of excuse, justification, and comparison can be challenged by asking the question, “Is this a legitimate excuse, justification, or comparison?” Even if the claim itself is true, it is not always the case that the truthfulness of the claim is an adequate defense. For example, when a mandatory reporter of child abuse fails to report suspected abuse and then claims, “I didn’t know what the law was,” that excuse can be challenged by saying, “You had an obligation to be familiar with the laws when you accepted the duty to care for children.” In this case, the excuse of ability is not legitimate.

A common excuse of ability that organizations use is the suggestion that those in positions to respond were not prepared through education and training. “If we knew then what we know now, of course we would have responded with care and competence.” Typically, the reason they are receiving such information to begin with is that others view them as able to respond intelligently, or at least to have the wisdom to defer decision making to those who can. Once an organization assumes the responsibility that comes with being in charge, they assume the obligation to make sure they are adequately equipped to exercise their authority. Insufficient training or lack of foresight is not an acceptable excuse for leaders charged with the duty to protect the organization’s members.

An integral clue that a person is using flattery to coerce you is how they respond when their flattery isn’t accepted or returned.

Abusive leaders who resign might suggest they are doing so to avoid becoming a distraction and burden for the other leaders. They hide behind others’ experiences, knowing people will be more inclined to avoid a confrontation with leaders they still admire and respect.

Sometimes there are higher values we must adhere to than the value of respecting authority, especially if that authority is asking us to be complicit with evil.

Every time a victim is called a “Jezebel” or people comment, “She knew what she was doing” or “She’s not innocent either,” the spotlight is wrongly put on the victim, and the scales are tipped toward the abuser. Similarly, abusers may draw attention to circumstances around the abuse that suggest it wasn’t really a big deal.

I’ve learned to see more of the beauty in the natural world as well and to pay more attention to the wonder all around. Each spring I spend hours planting hundreds of flowers. I’m a novice for sure, but something about the planting, pruning, and watering of a garden brings life, and each year I learn new methods for cultivating the beauty in nature. Gardening has taught me lessons about growing in the midst of pain. Healing isn’t as easy as replacing old ground with new territory. We have to work with what we have, and some roots and structures are not going anywhere, so we learn to grow beauty around them. Recovery is like that. It’s not a strict replacement of parts—a new piece in place of the broken piece. It’s more like taking a feature that by itself is ugly and unwanted but is repurposed when placed within a larger context of beauty.

It is very tempting to take the side of the perpetrator. All the perpetrator asks is that the bystander do nothing. He appeals to the universal desire to see, hear, and speak no evil. The victim, on the contrary, asks the bystander to share the burden of pain. The victim demands action, engagement, and remembering.”[1]

I hope you find a new lens for understanding your situation. You are not crazy; you are not alone. You simply need new language for your experience, for with language, you can speak. And when you speak, you can regain what has been taken from you.

they are able to release their secrets and say to abusers and their enablers, “I am no longer yours.” Each time we believe and advocate for victims, walls are broken down, truth is revealed, and hope is restored.

The abuse you endured was finally brought to light, but instead of an authentic apology, it felt like you got the opposite: an insincere concession followed by a barrage of displays and reassurances that the church was still good and thriving.

It takes great courage to be one of those people not so easily convinced. Because what happens when the organization’s quest to positively influence public perception does not end with the success they had hoped for? They turn their attention to managing the impressions others are forming of the critics, labeling them as malicious, hateful, and arrogant. The deceived who support the organization’s efforts then condemn those they are led to believe are worse than they really are. Sadly, the very people who were repeatedly ignored are now publicly scorned.

after the dust settles and the crisis has abated, will the community have succeeded in becoming a safer place? How can they when they have yet to turn to the truth?

It’s true: we should be discerning and supportive of good-faith efforts. But it’s equally important not to blindly accept the mirage they offer. Whenever an organization apologizes for its unethical behavior but then goes on to promote its values, successes, and contributions to society, you can be sure it is more interested in repairing its image for its own benefit than it is in making amends for the good of the wronged.

They desire to be seen as good without having to meet the demands of goodness. They want to be granted trust without having to earn it. They want to be seen as agents of healing without repairing any wounds. They want to collect a following without stopping to serve those they’ve trampled over.

Demonstrations are used to win your favor, and because they appear good, you naturally want to believe they are free of hidden agendas. And because you’ve likely been through a difficult crisis, it will be tempting to welcome and support a demonstration that signals a new beginning. I want to encourage you to remain discerning and willing to confront abuse so you do not fall for the final ploy.

Rather than consider the merits of the accusation itself, or commission an independent investigation, they seek to offer demonstrations of their own values, procedures, and history as the only evidence the public should need.

narrow-mindedness, arrogance, and an insistence on leading are telltale signs the demonstration of change is only for the sake of repairing an image, not a genuine change.

A person must know what it is they have done and the harm they have caused before they can even hope to offer an apology that heals. Truth must always precede confession, and an apology offered without a full acknowledgment of the truth is more likely a concession—a tactic designed to disarm a threat.

An authentic apology, especially when it is offered in response to significant and long-term harm, will be so clearly distinct from every prior experience that it will be unquestionably received. It will appear like a flash of light in a darkened room, like an exploding clap of thunder in the dead of night, like the unveiling of a hidden treasure, like a resurrection from the dead—not because of any of the apologizer’s qualities but because of the innate power of truth.

Intrinsic motivation—the will fueled by internal factors like integrity and compassion—is required for an apology to be authentic.

When you start to exercise your voice and agency, those who would prefer you to stay silent and powerless might try to use your past trauma against you by suggesting you still have a lot of healing to do, are clouded by bitterness, are emotionally unhealthy, and so forth. They want you to doubt yourself and stand down. Knowing that, doing the opposite would then be to believe in yourself and stand up. Your past might actually be the reason you see so clearly now, insist on fairness, and get rightly upset over injustice.

And if you have been enabling abuse, or are a part of a community or an organization in crisis, I want to encourage you that you still have the power to stand with victims and advocate for truth. You can choose not to celebrate a demonstration of change if an actual change hasn’t followed truth telling. You can choose to voice your concern and call the powerful to do the right thing. You can dissent, even if it might seem as if everyone else is ready to applaud the demonstrations. It is never too late to speak the truth about a wrong that was never made right.

A truth-filled apology will contain a majestic quality. A concession, on the other hand, will lack that freeing quality. It does more to confuse than heal because it doesn’t name specific wrongs, so you are left feeling unsure of what the wrongdoer is taking responsibility for. A concession is frustrating because it makes you wonder if they really “get it.” And it traps you because refusing to accept the “apology” will likely lead to further tension.