Friday, June 02, 2017

RC Sproul Jr Pleads Guilty To Avoid Prison

RC Sproul Jr DUI drunk driving

Having failed to meet the legal criteria of having his criminal case accepted by the Allen County Drug Court, RC Sproul Jr appeared on June 2, 2017 in Allen County Indiana Superior Court before Judge Samuel Keirns for a pre-trial status conference. In that hearing RC Sproul Jr plead guilty to one of four criminal charges against him:
9-30-5-3(a)(2)/F6: Operating Veh. While Intox or Controlled Substance: Passenger Under 18
His three other criminal charges, two misdemeanors and one other felony, were dismissed under a plea agreement in exchange for his pleading guilty to the one felony.

He was sentenced to 1 year and 183 days incarceration. That prison sentence was suspended and he was remanded to "1 year active adult probation."

RC Sproul Jr was facing up to 7 years in prison and $21,000 in fines. Under this plea agreement  he will face no prison time, provided he successfully completes the requirements of his probation. However, he does now have a permanent criminal record, and a felony record, no less.

No doubt RC Sproul Jr is breathing a huge sigh of relief that he will not have to face a full criminal trial before a jury. That trial had been scheduled for June 6, 2017. The odds of his being able to convince a jury of his innocence was remote.

No doubt he's also breathing a sigh of relief that he won't have to serve any prison time. Now begins the phase of his compliance with the terms and conditions of his probation. Failure to comply could result in his having to serve the original 1 year and 183 days sentence on the felony he plead guilty too. 

At the time of this publication we have no details on what the specific terms of his probation will be. As that information becomes available we'll post it as an update here.


H.A. said...

I'm not surprised. No jail time for a first time DUI. If he killed someone it might have gone different. Still, he's got a felony record. So that's not good. His family seems happy. RC-Lisa Sproul Facebook just posted around lunch time "It's a GREAT day." With a felony record it's hard to see how they could think it's a GREAT day. Weird. He'd better get some professional help and never go near the booze again.

William H. Smith said...

Mindin' other people's business seems to be high-toned
I got all that I can do just to mind my own
Why don't you mind your own business
(Mind your own business)
If you mind your own business, you'll stay busy all the time.
Hank Williams

Carverelle said...

I've long had a dim view of Sproul the Junior, but I never would have wanted things to turn out this way for him, being a convicted felon and all. He'll have a tough row to hoe now. No employment prospects for him in ministry anymore, and who in the business world will hire a felon?

He's lost his voting rights, the right to travel abroad. He won't be able to own a gun. Maybe that at least is a positive. Didn't I read something somewhere a long time ago, maybe even on this blog, that Sproul once carried a concealed gun into a church meeting because he was planning on confronting one of his parishioners?

RC 2.0 said...

@H.A., we're not at all pleased things have turned out this way for RC. Had he repented long ago it would have brought glory to God and could have brought some healing to the many he's harmed. But we ultimately gave up on that hope and came to the realization that he would probably make shipwreck of his life before he came to his senses. It's not a "great day" at all and the outcome is no cause for celebration, least of all by Sproul and his wife. It's a very sad day. The only thing that's great about it is nobody died or was maimed. That potentiality was a genuine concern of ours for years. God has been very merciful to the public by preventing RC Sproul Jr from killing anyone. So we'll sleep a little better now knowing at least one drunk will be sobering up, perhaps even permanently (though we don't hold out much hope of that).

RC 2.0 said...

@Carverell, yes, you read about that here. RC Sproul Jr carried a concealed handgun into a St. Peter Presbyterian Church men's breakfast meeting. He had no permit to carry, nor did he have the permission of the restaurant to bring the gun on the premises:

Only recently was I informed of something else that had happened at that meeting which only further confirms to me that St. Peter Presbyterian Church is not a church, but a cult. One of the men at breakfast with R.C. and Laurence just prior to my meeting with them, Rick Saenz, says that he was present when one of the men asked R.C. about the contents of a plastic carrying case R.C. had on the table in front of him. R.C. responded, "Oh, that's my gun. We're having a meeting later with Dennis. I want to be ready for him in case anything goes wrong." I guess I'm just unfamiliar with the practice of pastors taking guns into meetings with them in public restaurants. Does the RPCGA condone this? Considering the fact that it was R.C. and Laurence that told me to stop taking my meds, perhaps they thought that I would be unstable and perhaps even violent (why else would R.C. have had the gun there?). But if that were their concern, why did they tell me to stop taking my meds in the first place?

Not that we're anti-gun here but we are emphatically opposed to pastors carrying guns to meet with their parishioners, particularly on an undisclosed basis. If RC Jr was genuinely concerned about his personal safety he should have made other arrangements. The reality is, however, that he had already made the best possible arrangement -- a meeting in a public restaurant surrounded by a number of his friends. He couldn't have been any more safe than that. Carrying the gun was either just macho bravado or outright cowardice. However, Dennis Cochran was as tame as a kitten, had no history of violence (even without the medications), had never harmed anyone, and Sproul knew it. So the gun was completely uncalled for, and hardly pastoral.

What we find even more alarming is that RC Sproul Jr had instructed Mr. Cochran to stop taking his medications which had been prescribed to him by his medical doctor. Because of all the spiritual abuse he'd been subjected to by Sproul RC Jr he complied, at least temporarily. That was just one of several demands which had been made by Sproul Jr as a condition of Mr. Cochran becoming a member of St. Peter Presbyterian Church.

That was not an isolated incident. RC Sproul Jr had also instructed a married couple that wanted to join St. Peter that the wife would have to stop taking her prescription medications. When the RPCGA was informed they became greatly alarmed, recognizing that Sproul was a walking lawsuit and had become a legal liability to the denomination.

These are just a couple of the many examples of the outrageous behaviors of RC Sproul Jr. Sproul’s reputation by 2006 in and around Bristol and Mendota VA had become so notorious and worrisome that the general consensus of the public was that St. Peter Presbyterian Church was a cult and RC Sproul Jr was a cult leader. Many of the pastors in the community also came to the same conclusion. Genuine pastors don't act so recklessly or put other people's lives in jeopardy. So it's probably best that RC Sproul Jr won't be able to own or carry a gun anymore.

You also brought up an interesting point about the right to travel. We hadn't thought of that. Doing a little online research we discovered that most countries won't allow convicted felons across their borders. Even our Canadian neighbors won't allow Sproul in now. That's very unfortunate because he has in the past had opportunities to enjoy some international travel. That's pretty much over now.

Susan L. said...

What's really crazy to me is how the day after R.C. Sproul Jr. becomes a DUI convicted felon he posts a selfie on his Facebook of him driving down the highway behind the wheel of his car. What? Is he trying to rub it in everyone's faces that he got off with a slap on the wrist for his crimes? That's what it looks like to me and it makes me very angry. When will this man ever learn? Drunk driving is a really really serious issue but it's obvious he just doesn't get it. Even if he does dry out he'll probably never be any better than a "dry drunk" with all the denial issues that go along with it.

William H. Smith said...

Amazing how the unbiblical theology and worldview of AA has infected the thinking of Christians.

RC 2.0 said...

Rev. Smith, you're like a bug bouncing off a light bulb -- just can't stay away from here even though you clearly hate the exposure we're giving RC Jr.

You've had a number of ironic things to say already. Now after posting the lyrics from a song by the Country legend Hank Williams you speak of "unbiblical theology"? Thanks for the laugh.

As to "mind your own business" drunk drivers are everybody's business, including ours. Wolves in sheep's clothing masquerading as pastors, such as RC Sproul Jr, are every Christian's business, including ours.

If you have something new to bring to the table feel free to present it. However, don't waste your time rehashing the same old tired arguments you've already repeatedly raised on this blog before. We've already addressed it and won't go there again with you.

William H. Smith said...

Actually I get a certain level of entertainment from reading you Blog, similar to the entertainment I get from reading the Bayly Blog. I am a little bit fascinated by people who have obsessions. For the Baylys it's patriarchy.For Barbara Roberts it is spousal abuse. For you it is R.C. Sproul, Jr.

My posting of the Hank Williams song was meant to bring a little humor to bear on your obsession, though "mind your own business" is something we find in Paul.

AA really is unbiblical. If you care to look at the subject here are some things I have written: and,

You say: "even though you clearly hate the exposure we're giving RC Jr." What you seem not to understand is that my concern about your Blog is only tangentially related to R.C. Sproul, Jr. What I have done with my comments here is to reflect a concern I have had for a very long time. For me it is not RC Jr, but how we treat sinners - sinners and mercy. That's why I have commented on your Blog.

Here is something from 2014: You may, but probably won't, be interested in the links provide with this Blog where in one way or another I address similar subject matter.

Here is something I wrote in March of this year:

Of course, since you do not identify yourself, I do not know who you are. I do not know to what church you are accountable. I do not know your life experiences. I do not know of your experiences with RC Jr. What I do know is that your Blog is bitter and sarcastic and devoted to the destruction of RC Jr. The big issue is that I do not believe that Christ has given to you as an individual the authority to declare that persons are wolves in sheep's clothing. The authority to make such judgments does not belong to you or to me as individuals. It belongs to the church. We may not always like the way the church operates or the conclusions to which it comes, but the church has the keys of the kingdom - not you, not me.

Now as to commenting. I enjoy interaction with others. I enjoy debate. And I like to present another view to the prevailing one, whether the subject is politics, theology, culture, etc.

I do have a concern for you, as well. I am afraid that in your obsession to destroy RC Jr you may destroy yourself. That would be a tragedy.

RC 2.0 said...

Rev. Smith, thanks for the concern that you’ve expressed for us. We’ll take it to heart. It’s unfortunate that you couldn’t have just expressed yourself in such a gracious manner your first go around in the previous article. It was difficult to hear the underlying message over all your yelling.

As to your concerns for Alcoholics Anonymous, we have no expertise in such matters. It appears that you’ve done your homework, so we’ll defer to you on that subject. It could very well be that AA would be a horrible program for RC Jr.

Have you heard of Celebrate Recovery? Any thoughts on it?

Anonymous said...

I just checked and noted that these three charges were dismissed with prejudice:
Neglect of a Dependent: defendant places dependent in situation that endangers the dependent
Operating A Vehicle While Intoxicated; Endangering A Person
Operating A Vehicle w/ Alcohol Concentration Equivalent to .15 or More

Of course I sought immediate legal advice from Attorney Google and came up with a web site that clarified Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice (Indiana):
"A Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice is filed so that the state or prosecution must dismiss the case and cannot bring the charges up again...
A dismissal with prejudice is warranted when there are major problems with the suit or charges that would prevent the other party from ever being able to prove their case.
Reasons such as an improper handling of the initial complaint, such as a violation of rights during a traffic stop."

The only charge left was a plea deal for Operating Vehicle While Intoxicated...Passenger Under 18

I'd bet some surplus Ligonier $$$ went to pay for those high priced lawyers, who obviously delivered, big time.

A "GREAT" day, indeed. #sad

RC 2.0 said...

Thanks Anonymous for bringing that to our attention. Evidently the court reporter, or perhaps the court clerk, updated the case summary at some time subsequent to our review of it Friday. We erred in assuming that since it wasn't specified (at that time) that it was dismissed without prejudice.

I wouldn't assume, merely based on what you turned up on Google, that there were any legal defects in the prosecution's case, certainly not any serious ones. Had there been serious defects you can be reasonably certain Sproul's attorney would have taken the case to trial. That's his specialty -- challenging any legal defects in the prosecution's case to get his clients off the hook. He appears to have a successful track record at it too.

Plea bargains of this nature are made all the time that include dismissal of charges with prejudice. It's all part of the bargaining process between the parties. Dismissing the other charges with prejudice was no loss to the prosecutor (in her estimation) for the sake of getting the one felony conviction. Stacking additional convictions on top of the one felony wouldn't have changed the outcome -- a suspended sentence and probation.

As to Ligonier Ministries helping to pay for RC Jr's lawyers, that seems unlikely. There could be indirect ways of making it happen so that Ligonier's name is never connected. But we'll leave off any speculation on such matters. Needless to say though Sproul Jr has very deep pockets backing him up, should he ever need it now or in the future.

Jimmy Clark said...

As a man who has been in similar circumstances (facing prison time for sinful choices), I can assure you that being able to leave the courtroom with a felony conviction-as terrible as it is-is salved by being able to come home. Mercy is a great thing. This is ultimately from God. I know what I deserve for my crime. I had no legal pull with a judge. I have no great means of wealth. All I had was an attorney that was good at his job, a judge who was merciful, and a God who saw fit to let me have mercy. Just to put this in perspective.

William H. Smith said...

Mr. Clark, I do not know who you are, but I am thankful you received mercy and understand the blessing of God's mercy and man's mercy in the lives of us sinners.

Anonymous said...

"As to Ligonier Ministries helping to pay for RC Jr's lawyers, that seems unlikely. There could be indirect ways of making it happen so that Ligonier's name is never connected."

I was thinking more along these lines: R.C.'s more than ample remuneration from Ligonier over the years (including being paid during his "year away") should have provided a nice nest egg for him to dip into to hire expensive lawyers. If his parents are still enabling him,they may have kicked in some money as well. No matter how you slice and dice it, Ligonier money is ultimately the basis for his and his parent's financial well being.

RC 2.0 said...

"...Ligonier money is ultimately the basis for his and his parent's financial well being." Agreed, but at least in his father's case he worked for it. RC Sproul Jr is a different case altogether.

The basis of the majority of Ligonier's money are Ligonier donors, most of whom have no idea that their donations have been squandered on things like RC Jr's Ashley Madison scandal resulting in his 10 month suspension with pay. Ligonier was clearly embarrassed to have to admit it because it took many phone calls and emails to determine whether or not RC Jr had been suspended with or without pay.

Given Ligonier's track record of nepotism and enabling family scandals we strongly suspect that when RC Jr resigned from Ligonier Ministries, Reformation Bible College, and from the Ligonier board of directors, that he received a substantial severance package. What the Sprouls want they get, and what they've always wanted is for Precious to have a soft place to land.

Determining if RC Jr received a severance package, however, would necessitate another round of emails and phone calls, something we don't plan on doing again; but it's certainly something that Ligonier Ministries' donors might want to do themselves. The person to contact is Chris Larson.

Carverelle said...

I agree with you about Senior earning his money. He's worked very hard over the years. Junior doesn't have a work ethic. He's lazy and from all accounts he's very dishonest. Here's a comment I saw posted on another blog and the response. Very disturbing stuff:

Bulldogmom: " A few years ago, he was senior pastor at a church in Florida, another job he had no qualifications for, and he stole much money from that church and had to resign in disgrace. Then, DADDY set him up again in these seminary positions, and DADDY and others in the Reformed church gave him the spotlight on many occaisons to pretend to be an evangelical minister/ speaker, and make the public think he was a true man of God, which he has NEVER been. He's a fat, boviated drunk, and a sexual predator. It has now caught up with him, as it will with others in his realm who are living the same way, and being covered by the famous and powerful men who steer the Reformed and Evangeiical tides in this country."

GNL: "I don't know which church Bulldogmom is referring to but I know that R.C. Sproul Jr. has ripped off several churches and a number of ministries. One of his favorite ploys is double and triple billing his travel expenses. When he was pastor at St. Peter Presbyterian he'd use his Highlands Ministries Amex card to pay for travel expenses, not to mention many things that weren't legitimate ministry expenses at all. Highlands Ministries would pay the tab, which he then had St. Peter reimburse, without the knowledge or consent of his church members. He used St. Peter as his personal piggy bank. Then he'd bill the church or ministry that had him speak and pocket the money, even though he'd already been reimbursed. If two or more ministries were involved in sponsoring a conference he'd bill them both. He did this many times and defrauded many of his ministry 'friends.' He even ripped off his own father's Ligonier Ministries in this way many times. He's pocketed tens of thousands of dollars with this scam."

I'd like to think if his parents knew he'd been ripping off Ligonier Ministries they'd make him pay it all back, and Ligonier would then pay back the donors. But the way you describe things they'd just sweep it under the rug. Again.

Anonymous said...

Carverelle said, "No employment prospects for him in ministry anymore, and who in the business world will hire a felon?"

Convicted felons do have a very hard time finding employment in the business world. Not that R.C. would ever work a regular job. That takes too much effort. That's why he most definitely will go back into "ministry" "work" as soon as the dust settles. Give it about a year. He'll be back. Probably not anything highly visible like a conference speaker or author. He'll figure something out on the sly leaching off his dad's ministry donors again. He'll head up some newly formed department at Ligonier. Something in the background and really obscure where he can get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars again but we won't ever hear about it, at least not directly from Ligonier. Just wait. He'll be back.

Craig said...

There's no need to speculate about Ligonier and money. They post their 990s publicly each year (

These 990s show how much money came in, who was paid (and how much).I imagine the 990 for 2016 will go online toward the end of this year.

RC 2.0 said...

Craig, in light of RC Jr's history with Ligonier Ministries speculation is most certainly called for. Even when Ligonier does post their 2016 990s (which won't happen until at least November 2017), it's unlikely to reveal whether or not RC Jr received a generous severance package. There are simply too many ways of concealing it from public scrutiny.

Anyone who's followed this blog is already aware of Ligonier's 990s and how to find them (there are better options than Ligonier's own web site). It's from Ligonier's 990s that we've kept track of and discussed RC Jr's outrageous six-figure salaries from Ligonier Ministries and Reformation Bible College. However, it's also naive to assume that 990s disclose all the details.

Ligonier Ministries could put an end to the speculating right now by just coming clean about it. However, being forthcoming with their donors isn't one of Ligonier's strong suits. Even the manner in which they announced RC Jr's so-called "resignation for personal reasons" is an example of that.

What you also fail to take into account is that any severance package may not have been paid out in 2016 anyway. Given that he "resigned" on Dec 9, 2016 if he received a severance package it may not have happened until Jan 2017. Yes, he could have been paid in Dec 2016, but putting it off until Jan 2017 would buy Ligonier an entire additional year before it became public information.

As such we're likely to have to wait until Nov 2018 for Ligonier to post their 2017 990s before the speculating may come to an end. But given your concern about it we'd encourage you to contact Ligonier Ministries President Chris Larson personally and see if you can get a straight answer from him about whether or not RC Sproul Jr received a severance package, or any other form of compensation, and if so how much. Be forewarned though -- just plan on getting the runaround, and when it happens that should tell you everything you need to know.

William H. Smith said...

Ligonier is a para-church organization, right? As such it operates like a business, right? It is a member the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA), right? So what business is it of yours what kind of arrangements they may have made with RC, Jr. upon is resignation? Are you a donor? And if Ligonier meets the requirements of ECFA, what more do you want? What more do you feel you have a right to know?

RC 2.0 said...

@Anonymous, you're probably right. He'll be back.

RC Sproul Jr has never worked an actual job in his life. All he knows is "ministry," and his idea of ministry is getting gullible Christians to give him lots of money by tugging at their heartstrings with insincere religious twaddle. His lack of work experience puts him at a serious disadvantage compared to, say, his friend Doug Phillips who at least developed some practical works skills at Vision Forum (other than just scamming Christians and molesting nannies). Apparently Phillips is an accomplished photographer and cinematographer, and is making a living at it too. Doug Phillips seems to have come to terms with no longer being welcome in ministry circles, which is a good thing for everyone. Unfortunately, the same won't likely be the case with RC Sproul Jr. He hasn't come to terms with being unwelcome in ministry circles and he probably never will.

So maybe he'll go back to Highlands Ministries. That would be a bad option though. His name is still too closely linked with it. So he'll probably start something else from scratch in a year or so, after the dust settles, with a significant cash infusion from Ligonier, ermmm, dad.

There's also the likelihood that he'll operate under an assumed name, like his disgraced friend Doug Phillips is doing (aka Phil Douglas, Doug Williams, DW Cinematographer). The names "RC Sproul Jr" and "Doug Phillips" are so badly tarnished that the only reasonable thing is to avoid using those names.

Sticking around the old home town is also a liability. Doug Phillips had to skedaddle San Antonio, TX for Durango, CO to evade public scrutiny. RC Sproul Jr has already made his move from Orlando to Fort Wayne, IN, so he's on his way to dropping off the radar. Our guess is he'll drop the "RC" and adopt some heretofore unused variation on his name (like Doug Phillips has), such as "Robert Sproul" or "Craig Sproul."

RC 2.0 said...

@William H. Smith, "And if Ligonier meets the requirements of ECFA, what more do you want?" Do you know anything at all about ECFA? Do you know anything about Ligonier's relationship to ECFA? Do you know if the two are independent and arm's length from one another? We thought not. Ligonier Ministries is a charter member of ECFA, meaning they gave them a bunch of money. Conflict of interest much? You bet. ECFA is a sham organization that does nothing to police its own.

Do your homework, Rev. Smith, and get your information from reliable independent third parties. If you do you'll discover as we have that Ligonier Ministries is one of the most wasteful and inefficient ministries in existence. Ministry Watchman rates their efficiency at 407 out of 423 ministries evaluated, and Ligonier has been toward the bottom of the list for many years. Nepotism plays a part in that, and we're not just talking only about RC Jr. Multiple Sprouls, their spouses, and their kids, work at Ligonier and, like RC Jr, wouldn't stand a chance of getting such exorbitant salaries anywhere else.

"Are you a donor?" Used to be. So, yes, it is our business. RC Sproul Jr also used to be our pastor, which is why we know so much about him. So, yes, this is all very much our business. This has all been explained to you before but any explanation is inadequate for you. No worries. You're not a man who listens to reason, only to yourself.

What business it is of yours to keep telling us it's not our business? No rehashing the same old tired arguments, please, that we've already responded to.

Let's just apply your own standards to your repeated attacks against us: Are we members of your church? Are we under your authority in any way? Who gave you the authority to be arbiter of what we can and cannot say on our own blog? Are you the Holy Spirit? Are you a prophet? Do you fancy yourself to speak in the place God?

Take a dose of your own medicine, Rev. Smith, and heal thyself of thy obsession.

William H. Smith said...

You are a law unto yourself and a self-appointed judge of others. You are consumed with bitterness and filled with malice. I know that you, having lived in this for so long, cannot see it, but this is an ugly and vile thing.

William H. Smith said...

I wonder if you have any knowledge of how irrational are your arguments and how vindictive your spirit. OK, you had some bad experiences when RC Jr was your pastor. (Personally I can't imagine that, if I had ever walked into that church, I would have walked out at the end of the service and never returned.) But to devote years of your life to exposing and criticizing the man? To attack his elderly and ill father? To attach Ligonier Ministries? It takes a especially toxic bitterness combined with an inflated sense of one's own rightness and importance to do those things.

RC 2.0 said...

Rev. Smith, you've said all that before -- multiple times. Apparently you believe that argumentum ad nauseum is a laudable debate skill. However it is nothing but a logical fallacy, and we will not respond in kind with point refuted a thousand times.

Once again you've evaded answering any of our questions, which leads us to believe that you really do believe those things we suspect about you. Certainly by your actions it more than suggests you believe you possess the authority to speak in the place of God. How ironic (and hypocritical) that you would say, "You are a law unto yourself and a self-appointed judge of others" when that is the very way you've conducted yourself here.

Brow beating your 5 or 6 parishioners with judgmental condemnations (i.e. spiritual abuse) may have proven a successful formula for controlling your tiny flock (albeit not a successful strategy for church growth), but such tactics don't work around here. We can sniff out a control freak a mile away.

Earlier you said, "I am a little bit fascinated by people who have obsessions." But if an obsession can be gauged at all by the number of times a person goes back to the same thing in a week -- the thing they even hate no less -- then the title of "obsessed" clearly goes to you. It's proven by our blog stats. You visit this blog more times in a day than RC Jr, than Ligonier, than even we do; and we have to visit because we maintain the place (albeit not as often as you expect us to -- if we don't approve your comments fast enough you stamp your feet and throw a temper tantrum like a petulant child). In the past couple weeks you've hit this blog far more often than anyone has in years. We welcome repeat visitors, and we get plenty of them; but the number of your repeat visits clearly falls in the "obsessed" category.

What could possibly drive your obsession? You've accused us of "Pharisaical, unmerciful, self-righteous, bitterness, malice, hate," etc., even though you don't know us and, therefore, would have no way of knowing our motivations. Nor do you care to know, and that's evidenced by the fact that you've not asked. Far more gratifying to judge and condemn. Clearly you're projecting your own bitterness, and somehow we make a convenient outlet for your hate.

Time to seek the counsel of your Bishop. Or if he isn't qualified to help with obsessive compulsive disorders then please seek professional care.

H.A. said...

You seem to be on top of things but maybe you missed it. The court summary for 6/8/17 says "Court Requests Suspension of Driver for OWI." They sent a notice to the BMV for R.C. Sproul Jr's driver's license to be suspended. But there's a recent photo on his Facebook of him behind the wheel of a car with his wife. So is he suspended yet? If not do you know when he'll lose his license and for how long? Is he required to have a breathalizer installed on his cars?

RC 2.0 said...

Thanks H.A. but we didn't miss it. We just don't have anything positive to report about it. We checked with the court on Thursday, after the Court Summary had been updated, to verify what the terms of the suspension were. We were told it was a "zero day suspension." In other words the SR16 form, in this case, actually informs the BMV to reinstate his suspended driver's license.

It's standard procedure in Indiana that when a driver is arrested for OWI that their license is "administratively suspended" by the BMV pending trial outcome. If the court had wanted his DL to remain suspended they would have stipulated something like "365 day suspension" on the SR16.

Specifics are a little sketchy at this time, but as far we can determine RC Jr has his full driving privileges restored with no restrictions of any kind. He won't be wearing a SCRAM tether. No ignition interlock.

Those who had hoped that the Indiana courts would ensure that the public would in some way have been protected from RC Jr's drunken exploits, even for just a year, will be sadly disappointed. His parole officer will have no way of knowing if RC Jr is still getting liquored up and driving. He's basically on some sort of honor system, so it's not hard to see how that will likely turn out.

We predict that it's just a matter of time before he returns to the comfortable patterns of his old familiar past. After all, up until only recently, RC Jr has gotten away with drunk driving for many years, so the odds are very much in his favor of being able to get away with years more drunk driving. That's the case for most drunk drivers, and if RC Jr can rationalize getting away with it then it's likely to happen. The fact is that alcoholics just think differently and find it easy to rationalize behaviors that the rest of us would never do.

We've had to do a great deal of research through this process. What we've come to discover is that drunk driving is an epidemic in this country. The courts are overwhelmed with DUI/OWI cases. There isn't the prison space available to incarcerate them all. So judges have to figure out what to do about them all. There are alternatives to incarceration. However, few judges seem to take advantage of alternative punishments at all, at least for first and often second time offenders. Why do so few judges take drunk driving seriously? From some conversations we've had it's become obvious that many judges hold a strong personal bias about drunk driving. Many of them regularly get invited to parties where too much booze is served, and many of them can recollect times where they too have then foolishly driven themselves home afterwards. Alcohol does that -- it clouds the judgment of an otherwise prudent mind.

Another unfortunate factor is that our culture has come to view drunkenness in a humorous light. Movies and TV shows quite often portray drunks in a "funny" sort of way. Many stand up comedians have used alcohol as a literal prop for their act (think Dean Martin). But those who've had their lives or the lives of family and friends destroyed by a drunk driver don't see drunkenness as funny.

Usually someone has to die or be maimed before the courts take a specific drunk driving case seriously. However, we can be grateful that at least in the court of public opinion RC Sproul Jr stands guilty as charged. It's a blot on his record that he's unlikely to ever outlive.

We can and should all pray for his genuine and contrite repentance (albeit in light of his Ashley Madison sham repentance few will be willing to believe him now). But we should especially pray for the safety of the public, and even for his own family members that he has endangered, and may very well do so again. That is, after all, what alcoholics do.

William H. Smith said...

I'm content to let what I have written, based on reading your Blog, stand. And, I'm content to let your words about me stand, though they are sarcastic, conjectural, mistaken, and untrue, as you try to play unprepared the roles of logician, rhetorician, psychologist, philosopher, and theologian. With regard to my Bishop, I vowed submission to him when he received me into this church and into his diocese, and I have kept that vow. He was here just last weekend, and he and I are in frequent communication. But then you don't know anything about the nature of the pastoral relationship between bishops and priests. If you publish this, there is no doubt you will have to have the last word. I am content with that, too, including your allowing yourself to think, "I shut him down." Now I must turn back to writing the homily with which I will browbeat my people tomorrow. It's Trinity Sunday and I will be preaching on the text, "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all." It will be hard work, but I am sure I can somehow turn it into a stick with which to beat them.

RC 2.0 said...

Rev. Smith, we're tempted to let you have the last word; but that would risk leaving some of our readers at the disadvantage of being deceived by you. You are, after all, a very slippery one. This blog exists to expose a very slippery "pastor" to help prevent his victimizing any others by spiritual abuse. So we're obligated to set the record straight as it concerns you too.

"It will be hard work, but I am sure I can somehow turn it into a stick with which to beat them." That's not at all how spiritual abusers work, quite the opposite. We're confident that if we attended your service tomorrow that we'd appreciate your sermon. But we've had enough experience with spiritual abusers to know that one generally can't spot them by their sermons. Why? Because it's seldom through sermons that spiritual abusers injure their flocks.

The sermons, blog posts and articles of spiritual abusers are usually chock full of references to grace, mercy, kindness, compassion, forgiveness, etc. It's how they win over their audiences, and the most influential and, therefore, dangerous spiritual abusers are also the most eloquent. RC Sproul Jr is an excellent example of this, as is Doug Wilson, and so many others of their ilk. The majority of people only ever get to "know them" on that superficial basis and, therefore, assume they actually practice the grace, mercy, kindness, forgiveness, etc. that they speak so eloquently about. It's all about tugging at the heartstrings (and the purse strings).

It's only on a one-on-one basis that abusers begin to bear their fangs. When the spiritual abuse starts it comes as such a shock to the person being abused that they often can't even process what's happening. They tend to believe everything their abuser says about them and seek ways to correct whatever it is they're being judged and condemned for; and just like with you judging and condemning us, the allegations are usually false, or at least grossly exaggerated.

It's for good reason that so many of the books and articles on spiritual abuse characterize the personal experiences of spiritual abuse victims as a "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" situation, for that is indeed exactly what so many of us have witnessed come out in the personalities of our spiritually abusive "pastors."

Only when we come to place of seeing our abusers for the wolves in sheep's clothing that they are, and stop blaming ourselves, can we start receiving God's healing.

The fact that you have so energetically defended a tyrant, bully, and drunkard who masquerades as a "pastor," while attacking us who are his victims, says everything we need to know about you.

Susan L. said...

“God gave us 24 hours in a day. There’s 24 bottles of beer in a case. You think that’s just a coincidence?” R.C. Sproul, Jr.

Carverelle said...

"These 990s show how much money came in, who was paid (and how much)." Craig, your comment shows a lack of understanding of RC Jr's devious creativity for scamming the big bucks while not working for a living. He can just form an LLC that bills Ligonier for some nebulous "consulting" or "production" services. As long as he keeps his billing just under Ligonier's fifth highest paid independent contractor ($400,177 in 2015, see page 8 of Lig's 1099) it doesn't even get reported and no one will ever find out. It can just be dad and mom and Precious' little secret. He can work even less than he already did and get paid even more! Glory! Praise the Lord for ministry donors!

Hopefully I'm not giving Junior any ideas that he didn't already have. I seriously doubt it though. I'm sure he's already got it all figured out.

Susan L. said...

William H. Smith said "For the Baylys it's patriarchy."

Priest Smith has made quite a few disclaimers about "not defending R.C. Sproul Jr." when it's too obvious that's exactly what he's been doing. Maybe Priest Smith didn't intend all the irony but it's all over what he's said. His comments are full of irony due at least in part to his incredible ignorance. In his case it's probably willful ignorance which is the worst kind of ignorance. For example he apparently doesn't know that Sproul Jr is the co-author of The Tenets Of Biblical Patriarchy when patriarchy appears to be something he opposes, along with Tim and David Bayly for their support of patriarchy.

RC 2.0 said "But we ultimately gave up on that hope and came to the realization that he would probably make shipwreck of his life before he came to his senses."

Spot on. He most definitely has made shipwreck of his life, and it didn't just start with driving drunk with his kids in the car. The two quotes taken together (yours and Priest Smith's) have a unique kind of irony, especially in light of the Bayly blog posting about R.C. Sproul Jr., Growing Up Famous:

"It's not uncommon in the Evangelical/Reformed world for sons of famous fathers to be shipwrecks, or perhaps worse yet, leeches on the body of Christ. And it's hard, at times, not to see something of the ministry of the father in the tragedy of the son."

"So R. C. Jr.'s faithful service in the Vineyard is testimony both to his own walk with the Lord and to his father's character."

It didn't take long for David and Tim Bayly to be proven wrong about Sproul Jr. He was defrocked only a matter of months afterwards. That didn't stop them from publicly defending Sproul though. They'd committed themselves and weren't about to back down. I wonder how they'd defend him today. I'd post a comment in their article and ask them myself but they've blocked all comments. Hmm.

In case the Bayly brothers hadn't noticed by now R.C. Sproul Jr. most certainly has made shipwreck of his life. How does that reflect on his father's character? I'm not too sure, but the Bayly's never should have brought it up in the first place. I'm pretty sure Sproul Sr. isn't just a "leech on the body of Christ," but the same cannot be said for his son.

William H. Smith said...

Jane, this is "Priest Smith." (Just in case you are interesed, "Priest Smith" is not the way one addresses an Anglican minister. The ways to address an Anglincan minister, are Pr. Bill - or Smith, Fr. Bill - or Smith, Mr. Smith, or just Bill.) Yes, I am opposed to and have repeatedly criticized patriarchy. I also think R.C. Sproul, Jr., is guilty of many and serious sins. Where, I think, we differ are: (1) I regard R.C, Jr. as a brother who has erred, and (2) I believe in treating sinners with mercy. If you would like to know what I think about church discipline you can take a few minuntes to read these blog posts I have written. If you don't want to read them, that's fine, too. I have stopped engagineg R.C. 2.0, but sine you addressed me by name, I thought I should offer you an explanation of where I stand. Thanks. Bill

RC 2.0 said...

Rev. Bill, for being so terribly concerned with how people must properly address you (pride much?), you might want to put forth a little effort yourself. The name of the person you were responding to is "Susan L." not "Jane." She might also be fine with "Susan" or "Ms. Susan."

We enjoyed your Mercy Mercy On Me article. So much truth to it, including your conclusion: "By the way, if you think that writing this reveals that I am a sinner, sometimes unmerciful to others, but always in need of mercy myself, you could not be more right. You saw right through me."

But then this is exactly one of several problems we have with RC Sproul Jr. It's seldom had to do with what he publishes and preaches but, rather, the utter hypocrisy of it. RC Jr has many good things to say but fails to practice them himself. Not just fails, but fails miserably. In fact you could say that by his actions it's apparent he refuses to practice them, while he demands those in his "pastoral care" comply with his preaching. And like you RC Jr concludes many of his sermons and articles with faux humility and a saccharine disclaimer, "Oh, but I haven't arrived either. Pray for me a sinner."

Rev. Smith you haven't just been "sometimes unmerciful" towards us. You've been 100% unmerciful. You've condemned, judged, ridiculed, and been self-righteous in doing so. You do not edify, inspire, encourage, uplift, or even admonish, but rather you beat down the wounded. You set yourself up as an authority over us when you have none. You have not in any way shown yourself to be pastoral. We've pointed these things out to you before but you've refused to acknowledge your hypocrisy and the offense you've caused.

In light of your conduct here your blog articles, just like RC Jr's articles, are hypocritical, at best. A clergyman who cannot practice even just a modicum of what he preaches should cease preaching lest he blaspheme God's name (Rom 2:23-24); but he should especially stop preaching to complete strangers. Making demands of strangers, as you have with us, is the height of arrogance, self-importance, and lording it over others.

If you really can't restrain yourself from preaching at anyone running a blog that you disagree with, then at least have the good sense to not whip out your Clergy Membership Card®. Doing that doesn't buy you any respect (respect is earned) but only reinforces your hypocrisy and confirms a stereotype that many of our readers already hold of clergy.

Anonymous said...

Who will rid us of this troublesome priest?

H.A. said...

I’ve been participating in the discussions over at TWW. Here’s a comment that I posted there that I think is important for everyone to see.

Dew wrote:
Secondarily, what were the terms of his probation? Has that been reported on or discussed? That is an important element here.

H.A. wrote:
As far as anyone can tell it hasn't been reported on. It's also not public information. However, Lisa (Sproul?) did comment above and gave us some important facts (and a lot of fiction too):

Lisa wrote:
Rcjr had his license suspended for six months. Has been dry since Nov. 29, 2016. Had therapy and continues to do so. Much of the information posted is inaccurate both in substance and interpretation. When court go through process you are instructed by your Atty and the judge how to plea to give you time to look at all alternatives. Drug court was denied because he was not bad enough, not because he had felonies. The purpose of Drug court is for those charged w felonies to be submersed in a rehab program for 1-1.5yrs and graduate with the Judge being the one sharing that persons story and how he/she has been redeem and will acclimate as a reformed person in society- it’s a big deal. Then the sentencing happens afterward, moving felonies to misdemeanors. Rcjr is a gentle spirited man who loves his family and grieves over his sin. Everyone who knows him confesses how genuinely repentant of a person he is and how quick he is to admit his failures.

H.A. wrote:
To summarize but also fill in some gaps:
1. RC Sproul Jr's license was suspended for six months. That was the time between his arrest in November 2016 and his plea deal. His license was reinstated early this month with no restrictions. No ignition interlock, no restrictions in terms of when and where he can drive, no restrictions on who can be in the car with him (children, etc.).
2. Lisa claims that RC Jr “Has been dry since Nov. 29, 2016.” Lisa probably has little if any practical experience with alkies. If she were experienced her statement would have started with, “As far as we know…” Those who do have practical experience know that it’s exceedingly difficult to know for certain if their alkie loved one is really dry unless that is they’re “sloppy drunk” with a low tolerance for the stuff, which RC Jr is not. RC Jr is a “high functioning” alkie who is quite adept at sneaking a few tipples through the day and leaving no telltale signs. The only people who are likely to be able to pick up on it are other alkies.
3. RC Sproul Jr “Had therapy and continues to do so.” I take her at her word. It would be good if she could be more specific on what this alleged therapy is though. Is is with a licensed professional who’s trained and qualified in alcoholism? My guess is not because RC Jr has a long history of feigning “submission” for the sake of appearance. More than likely his “therapy” is with someone lacking the qualifications, such as a pastor fan-boy giving him “counseling.” Also, it might be reasonable to assume that since Lisa didn’t specifically state that RC Jr had an AA or CR sponsor he’s probably not in an alky support group.
4. Lisa clearly doesn’t understand the scope of Drug Court, the cases they can legally accept (felony indictments are an immediate and mandatory disqualification), but this isn’t surprising. She’s getting her information, plus a lot of spin, from RC Jr. However, she does offer us some valuable insight about RC’s end game: “Then the sentencing happens afterward, moving felonies to misdemeanors.” This is exactly what I suspected might happen. With as much as he’s paying his attorney, and as competent as his attorney is, he could very well convince the court to drop the felony and convert it to a misdemeanor. Within a year or two he’ll petition the court to expunge the misdemeanor. Viola! No record and right back into “ministry” he goes!

RC 2.0 said...

Thanks H.A. AS you point out Lisa's understanding about Drug Court is way off the mark. She's getting her information from a pathological liar, RC Sproul Jr, who is eager to portray it all as a rather minor legal problem that will eventually just evaporate. By going along with his story she's showing herself to be another one of his enablers.

Lisa is to be thanked though for her disclosures. From them we can see that our predictions about what RC Jr is scheming up for his future are already getting some confirmation.

He's as stubborn as a mule about not having to actually work for a living and will do everything he possibly can to worm his way back into "ministry." For him that can only mean Ligonier Ministries since no other ministry will risk the scandal hiring him would cause. But he'll always have a soft place to land at Ligonier.

Even there though it's doubtful he could get hired back with a felony record. But it's amazing what money and a slick attorney can accomplish. Justice for the privileged is a beautiful thing! After he gets his felony reduced to a misdemeanor he probably won't have to even wait a year or two to then get that expunged from his criminal record. It could perhaps happen in six months or less. And poof! RC Sproul Jr is magically no longer a convicted criminal!

Oh, wait. There's that thing about it being all over the internet. What will he do about that? He could maybe have Ligonier engage in some intensive (expensive) Google ad campaigns in an attempt to push down the search results of his Ashley Madison and drunk driving scandals. If Ligonier spent enough money it's possible that when we google for "RC Sproul Jr" nothing but unicorns and rainbows show up on the first page. It would cost Ligonier (and its donors) an enormous amount of money. But for Precious' sake wouldn't it be worth it?

Deborah said...

Has he ever had a real job?

RC 2.0 said...

No, Deborah, he has not.

H.A. said...

Quotable quote from Daisy at TWW:
"RC Jr. is Mark Driscoll, but only with more beer added."

Unknown said...


I'm a convicted felon. Had no problems getting a high level industry job which had me in Washington twice a year. One year I was away from home for nearly two months on business trips. Of course I'm Canadian...

Unknown said...

I'm sure many of things you say are true and jr would admit to them and has repented. However, you are a coward. You remain to be anonymous.

RC 2.0 said...

Dear Unknown,

Welcome to our blog. You obviously wish to remain anonymous. We won’t call you a “coward” for that, nor have we ever condemned any of the hundreds of folks who've posted comments on this blog under an assumed name. People usually have good and legitimate reasons for anonymity. Cowardice is rarely ever a motive. However, we will call attention to your hypocrisy. If you wish to identify yourself by your given name (which you’re in no way obligated to do) then feel free to mock away. Short of that then kindly refrain from any further insults like that.

Please elaborate on the specifics of how, when, to whom, and by what method RC Sproul Jr “has repented,” and specifically what he's repented for. To our knowledge he hasn’t repented for anything to anyone (confession of sin to those he has wronged is implicit with repentance). Please also define repentance. Do you have a biblical definition of repentance, or are you using RC Jr's definition? This is important because in our years of observing RC Jr's conduct it's more than apparent that he has a very twisted and perverted understanding of what it means to repent.

bulldogmom said...

RC 2.0 should just ignore the Smith person entirely. Let's all look forward to Baby Sproul killing or maiming someone, and then.......

RC 2.0 said...

Anne, thanks for the sarcasm. Yours is a rather dark sense of humor which we find beneficial in grappling with a dark subject -- the wolves in sheep's clothing in our midst.

It would be nice if we could simply ignore Smith. He has, after all, made himself quite a pain in the backside. But ignoring him wouldn't be prudent. Men like him, and the cunningly deceptive opinions they express -- the scripture-twisting methods they employ -- need to be confronted. Such opinions have been foisted onto many undiscerning Christians and then trundled out by their fan-boys every time a preacher finds himself embroiled in a scandal of his own making.

"Gossiping about it is just as sinful as what he did in the first place. No one has the right to judge him. We're all sinners. Any one of us might have done the same. David committed adultery with Bathsheba and then killed her husband. If God can forgive David then He can forgive the mistakes of this preacher too. So who are any of us to judge? He needs our forgiveness. Pray that God would restore him." These are examples of the hundreds of comments posted by Christians in response to RC Sproul Jr's defrocking in 2006. The same comments appeared yet once again over his Ashley Madison sex hookup account scandal in 2015. Then the same thing happened again when he "resigned" from Ligonier in 2016 "for personal reasons" (it's especially prevalent on Ligonier's Facebook). The takeaway message? Judging bad, sweeping it under carpet good, which is exactly what Ligonier Ministries has promoted. Those indoctrinated by Ligonier have promulgated this Sweep preacher scandals under the carpet = biblical forgiveness message far and wide.

Needless to say, any scandal-ridden preacher loves hearing such pusillanimous twaddle. It's the very thing they're looking for -- a smokescreen, a pass rather than accountability.

But this isn't at all what scripture teaches. Jesus said, "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment." (John 7:24) The Apostle Paul instructed, "For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges. Therefore put away from yourselves the evil person." (1 Cor. 5:12-13) The church today often fancies itself as more knowledgeable and sophisticated than was the Corinthian church. But such pride is unjustified.

RC Sproul Jr is exactly the sort of evil person that the Apostle Paul was instructing the Corinthians about. "Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?" (1 Cor 6:3)

Anonymous said...

Are you suggesting that R C Sproul Jr is not saved?

RC 2.0 said...

Anonymous, we'll leave it to you to judge whether or not RC Sproul Jr is saved. Those Christians who have formed an opinion on that have almost always done so based on the man's own profession -- his words, rather than his actions. We view a man's actions as far more relevant -- the evidence of his faith, rather than his words.

We have a personal opinion on the condition of RC Jr's soul, but it's not important or even relevant to this blog. Our concern is for the church of Jesus Christ.

RC Sproul Jr has more than amply demonstrated that he's a wolf in sheep's clothing. We've considered it our Christian duty to sound the alarm about that for some years now, and we provide the evidence for it, so as to stand in the way of other Christians being taken in by his cunning duplicity. That's our focus and that's our priority.

Sad said...

Then I can't help but feel sorry for his parents. This must be heart breaking for them.

Anonymous said...

Sad, his parents bear a lot of responsibility for who their son has become. His mother has spoiled him rotten his entire life. So rotten he's become. Precious can do no wrong. Senior bears a lot of responsibility too, especially for instilling all that arrogance and smug intellectualism in him. Senior is also responsible for all that "Christian liberty" stuff. Senior's poor health means he's had to give up his "liberties," but for many years he habitually imbibed in double whiskey on the rocks and chain smoking Marlboros. That's what Junior grew up with and heard his father justifying, including Junior's seminary days at RTS, where his father taught. It's obviously had a major effect on Junior's life.

Reformation Rat said...

I can’t read the heart and mind of another. But I can lament over sin, in myself and in the world. Any student of church history knows that there have been great saints that have committed great sins. Who among us looks forward to having their secret sins and thoughts exposed on Judgement Day. My only comfort is that it will shine the light in God’s grace and glorify Christ. We should pray for this man, that the redeemingvand sanctifying work if God is evidenced in his life. Mercy trumps judgement.

NewLife said...

I've seen too many comments posted around the internet that assume this was RC Jr's first time he drove drunk. How incredibly naive! Alcoholism is much too widespread a problem, even in the church, for Christians to remain so ignorant. It's simply NEVER been the case that a person who's arrested and convicted for DWI had only been drunk driving the one time. According to the CDC, "On average, a drunk driver will drive 80 times under the influence before their first arrest." (Vital Signs: Alcohol-Impaired Driving Among Adults — United States, 2010. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. October 4, 2011) I know for a fact that RC Sproul Jr drove drunk on a routine basis, at least several times a week, and that he'd been doing so for at least 20 years. He must have been really good about not getting caught because he literally drove thousands of times drunk before he got caught. What got him caught was this was the first time he decided he could handle a combination of booze and opioids.

RC 2.0 said...

@Newlife, "What got him caught was this was the first time he decided he could handle a combination of booze and opioids." Agreed. Booze and pills make for a deadly combination. RC seems even more ashamed of popping opioids than being a drunk, as evidenced by the fact that in the 4+ years since his arrest he's never once mentioned anything about the opioids.

In all likelihood he didn't provide full disclosure to his attorney. He probably figured that if anybody found out he was hammered on not just booze but opioids too he'd be in bigger legal trouble. But he was wrong. Had RC Jr's attorney been apprised that his client was also popping opioids it might have actually served to his legal benefit. The Drug Court judge could have been more willing to hear his case rather than rejecting it. Had that happened RC Jr might have avoided a felony conviction altogether.

Galust said...

Sproul Jr forgot that he is no longer living in a Presbyterian America but a legalistic baptist America where everyone is a potential criminal in the eyes of the state. You get felony and ruined record for something as simple as having an ounce of wine ? This is why America is the most incarcerated nation with millions upon millions of people either imprisoned or under government supervision for victimless crimes. Even Joseph Stalin’s gulags didn’t have as many prisoners.

RC 2.0 said...

@Galust, We're not Baptists. Nor are we teetotalers. Even still we find your comment troubling and less than honest: "You get felony and ruined record for something as simple as having an ounce of wine?" An average glass of wine contains 5 ounces. It takes the average drinker 4 glasses consumed within one hour on an empty stomach to reach the legal limit of .08 BAC. Sproul isn't much of a wine drinker though. He prefers beer and whiskey, which equates to 4x 1.5 ounce whiskey glasses or 4x 12 ounce beer glasses in an hour on an empty stomach. So, as you can see, it actually takes some effort to get legally impaired. Nothing illegal even about that though. It's only illegal to get behind the wheel and drive impaired. You can easily avoid criminal charges by calling for an Uber to take you home. If you want to argue that drunk driving is a "victimless crime" (and your comment implies as much), what do you have to say for the 35,560 drunk driver caused fatalities in 2018? Are you of the position that drunk driving should only be a crime after the drunk has killed or maimed someone?

Angela Bolton said...

@William H. Smith, "With regard to my Bishop, I vowed submission to him when he received me into this church and into his diocese, and I have kept that vow. He was here just last weekend, and he and I are in frequent communication." Are you sure he's just a Bishop and not the Pope? I ask because he's dressed just like the Pope with his Dagon Babylonian fish god hat and all. Is that you Rev. Smith bowing down before your Bishop/Pope (third photo down on left)? How does your denomination get away with calling itself Reformed when it has so many trappings of Roman Catholicism?