Here's What David Barton Calls Vindication of His Historical Claims

Recently, I questioned the way World Net Daily writer John Aman characterized David Barton’s defamation suit against W.S. Smith, a writer for Examiner.com who criticized Barton’s historical claims. Aman wrote:

Barton also won in court against W.S. Smith, a self-described atheist who published an online article in 2010 calling Barton “an admitted liar” whose “books have been picked apart time and again and exposed as fallacious.”

Smith was a no-show throughout the lawsuit, disappearing shortly after Barton sued him in September 2011. Barton’s legal team hired a private detective and published notices in Texas newspapers statewide in an unsuccessful attempt to find the elusive writer.

Smith disappeared after he boasted, in an email to Huffington Post columnist Chris Rodda that he was “happy to meet” Barton in court “because the truth in [sic] on my side.”

“If this is what you want, Mr. Barton, then let’s do it,” Smith said. “Bring it on. Bring it on. Bring it on. The path you’ve chosen will lead only to your embarrassment and ruin.”

Three years later, a Texas court found Smith’s assertions about David Barton both false and defamatory.

It is true that a W.S. Smith was dismissed from the suit via the filing of a notice of non-suit. However, the reason the man was dismissed was because he was the wrong W.S. Smith. The W. S. Smith served with the defamation complaint was not the Examiner.com writer. See this explanation from a letter to the Parker County TX judge.

WSSmithClarification

Thus, the W.S. Smith of Keller, TX was released from the suit. I am sorry for the error in my original reporting and have made a correction in that post. The Parker County TX records I had access to at the time did not provide that information.

So what happened to the writer of the Examiner.com article? Apparently, he disappeared and did not answer any communications from the court. Mr. Aman’s description is accurate until the last sentence in the block quote above: “Three years later, a Texas court found Smith’s assertions about David Barton both false and defamatory.”

W.S. Smith never turned up. In a case where a defendant doesn’t appear, Texas law provides that a judge can appoint an attorney to defend an absent defendant. However, Barton’s lawyers had another idea. They filed a motion for default judgment instead. Essentially, Barton asked the judge to find in Barton’s favor without the benefit of a trial. As you can see from the documents linked below, that is what the judge did.

First, read the argument Barton’s attorney made to Judge Quisenberry in the Motion for Final Default Judgment.  It is too long to reproduce fully but the main requests and rationale are below.

Continue reading “Here's What David Barton Calls Vindication of His Historical Claims”

Hillsong Founder Brian Houston Issues Statement On Mark Driscoll at the Hillsong 2015 Conference

I just received this information from Mark DeMoss via email:

Statement by Brian Houston on Mark Driscoll at Hillsong 2015 Conference 
March 2015 
For years, Hillsong has invited pastors and Christian leaders from around the world to speak at our annual conferences in Sydney, Australia and London, England. Well in advance of his resignation as senior pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, Washington, we invited Mark Driscoll to be one of our speakers this summer. Rather than having Mark preach or teach, I am excited about interviewing Mark and his wife, Grace from our main platform during our Hillsong Conference 2015.
I am looking forward to having this opportunity to speak openly with the Driscolls about life and ministry, as well as recent events and lessons they’ve learned through personal and ministry trials during the past year. My aim is to have an in-depth conversation that gives insight into their hearts.
Mark has been candid about mistakes he has made, and if we can, through our conference, help others through his life experiences, we think that will prove valuable.

This exclusive statement comes from Brian Houston in response to my post last week noting that Mark Driscoll was slated to speak at the conferences. Instead of having a speaking position, he will be interviewed by Houston.
The description of Driscoll on the conference websites (Sydney, Europe) has not changed to reflect this news or the dissolution of Mars Hill Church.  The description lists him as “founding pastor” rather than co-founder of the former Mars Hill Church.
Discuss.

Former Members: Faith Christian Church (Tucson, AZ) Coerced Donations

Earlier today, Arizona Daily Star writers Carol Ann Alaimo and Emily Bregel reported that the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability is now investigating the Faith Christian Church to determine whether or not ECFA guidelines are being met by the church.  From the article:

Dan Busby, president of the Virginia-based Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, expressed support for Faith Christian’s financial practices last week. In an email Tuesday, Busby said, “Since the issues were raised last week, we have had a senior ECFA executive on the ground in Arizona to confirm the Church’s compliance with our standards.”

I wrote Busby and ECFA counsel Michael Martin to find out if the “senior ECFA executive” would meet with former members of FCC. I have received no answer. Thus far, no former members I have interviewed have spoken with the ECFA about their experiences. In addition to the allegations about bizarre teachings on spanking infants, former members have described feeling forced to give money to the church. The level of coercion described by members would certainly violate one tenet of the ECFA’s Donor’s Bill of Rights:

Give cheerfully without being pressured by the organization.

The ECFA lists the following rights:

Donor’s Bill of Rights
You have the right to:
Know how the funds of an organization are being spent.
Know what the programs you support are accomplishing.
Know that the organization complies with federal, state, and municipal laws.
Restrict or designate your gifts to a particular project within the organization’s mission objectives.
A timely and courteous response to your inquiries about finances and programs.
Visit office and program sites of an organization to talk personally with the staff.
Give cheerfully without being pressured by the organization.
Obtain a copy of the organization’s most recent audited financial statements
Know that there is a responsible governing board providing oversight to the organization’s mission.
Know that all appeals for funds are truthful and accurate.

The former members of FCC and sister churches describe coercive tactics by church pastors and elders to gain contributions. Aaron Marley was a bookkeeper at sister church Hope Christian Church in Tempe, AZ. He told me that the giving history of members is reviewed by the ministers. Marley said a minister, who was not part of the church administration, interrogated him about his giving because it didn’t meet expectations. Marley assumed a church would keep giving records for tax purposes but not for the purpose of coercing donations.
Former staff minister Jeff Phillips told me that “tithing is strictly enforced. We were taught that if we did not tithe, we were cursed.” Phillips said he remembered FCC pastor Steve Hall say, “‘I WILL NOT pastor cursed people.'”
Phillips related the following account:

There was one occasion when some of the staff, including me, were caught not tithing soon enough. We were waiting until we had deposited our checks into the bank to tithe to the church. Steve found a verse in the OT about paying late fees for late tithes, so we were forced to pay extra for our lateness. So, essentially the ministers raised their own salaries and gave 13% of that and beyond to the church, which went to pay Steve’s salary along with the other members’ tithes.

A thorough investigation by the ECFA should take into account testimony from former members.

Pastor Jack Hibbs Takes Lessons from David Barton

The third video in Jack Hibb’s mini-series (see a previous post on a prior episode) with David Barton features Hibbs trying his hand at historical interpretation. Watch Hibbs talking about Washington and Jefferson as slave owners (for context, here is the complete segment).

In this clip, Hibbs makes some Bartonesque statements about Washington and Jefferson. Below I give the claim and then after that what I believe to be the truth.  Hibbs said:
1. George Washington was one of the ten wealthiest men in American at the time.
This may be true. Washington was certainly wealthy and may have been in the top ten, although I cannot find a source to that effect.
2. George Washington was a good horseman.
I believe we can all agree to that.
3. Washington’s personal slave William (Billy) Lee was the second best horsemen after Washington.
By all accounts, until he injured his knees, Lee was able to keep up with Washington on horseback.
4. Washington would not allow his attendant (William Lee) to be called a slave.
I searched Washington’s papers for evidence relating to this claim and found nothing to support it. In his will, Washington called Lee, his “mulatto man William.” Elsewhere he called him “my mulatto servant Billy” (see the letter to the Connecticut Journal below). It is true that Washington provided good care for William Lee, but there was no confusion about Lee’s status as a servant.
Georgewashingtonletterbilly
 
5. A quarter or half of Washington’s estate went to William (Billy) Lee.
This is a fabrication. In Washington’s will, Lee was given his freedom, a monthly stipend, and a place to live at Mt. Vernon if he wanted it. The following excerpt is from Washington’s will:

And to my Mulatto man William (calling himself William Lee) I give immediate freedom; or if he should prefer it (on account of the accidents which ha<v>e befallen him, and which have rendered him incapable of walking or of any active employment) to remain in the situation he now is, it shall be optional in him to do so: In either case however, I allow him an annuity of thirty dollars during his natural life, whic<h> shall be independent of the victuals and cloaths he has been accustomed to receive, if he chuses the last alternative; but in full, with his freedom, if he prefers the first; & this I give him as a test<im>ony of my sense of his attachment to me, and for his faithful services during the Revolutionary War.

Commendably, Washington recognized his “mulatto man William’s” faithful service and provided him with monthly living expenses and a place to stay. Lee did not own any part of the estate.
6. When Jefferson went to Europe (France), he took slaves with him.
That is true. Among the slaves, he took James Hemings, the older brother of Sally Hemings. Sally later accompanied Jefferson’s youngest child Polly to France to live with Jefferson.
7. It was illegal to educate slaves (according to the crown of England).
I don’t know why Hibbs mentioned the crown of England, but it was not illegal to educate slaves in Virginia for most of the period of time Jefferson owned slaves. Schools for Black children existed in Virginia and offered classes for slave and free children. For instance, Ann Wager was a teacher at a school in Williamsburg, VA from 1760 until 1774. Samuel Davies, a Presbyterian minister, educated slaves as a means of converting them to Christianity. By 1819, however, Virginia greatly restricted slave gatherings so that classes were viewed as possible meetings to plan rebellion. With most statements about the founders, it is important to specify a time period as a part of a claim. In the case of the founders, they lived and owned slaves when slaves could be educated and freed but also during times when such freedoms were restricted.
8. Jefferson had his slaves educated.
According to the Monticello website, there is no record of it. Jefferson’s family members taught some of the slaves to read but there is no record Jefferson did anything systematically to educate his slaves. In an aside to a friend, he proposed that his system of public education might include slave children but this never was implemented. Jefferson also believed that freed slaves should be educated before being removed to a colony outside of America. He favored somewhere in the West Indies.
9. Jefferson demanded that his slaves be well versed in the Scriptures.
I can’t find anything that supports this. If anything, Jefferson took a hands off attitude toward slave religious observances (again, see the Monticello website). Hibbs indicated that this claim is based on a visit to Monticello. I have also visited Monticello and I don’t recall anything I saw or heard there which indicated Jefferson demanded that his slaves be well versed in the Scriptures. As the Monticello website indicates, slaves were allowed to practice Christianity but they also included some of the religious beliefs learned prior to conversion.
There is something unseemly watching two privileged white males stretch the truth to make the white founding fathers seem like they were benevolent and good slave owners. While Washington and Jefferson appear to be better than some other slave owners, and Washington perhaps better than Jefferson, neither of them compare to Robert Carter who freed all of his slaves beginning in 1791. But no matter how good Washington and Jefferson were, I cannot understand why it is important for Hibbs and Barton to stretch the truth to make the situation seem better than it was. In the process, Hibbs’ audience is less educated and less equipped to speak intelligently than before the program began. How does this help the church achieve anything?

Former Staff Members: Faith Christian Church Members Taught to Spank Infants to Curb Rebellion

Two former staff members of Faith Christian Church in Tucson AZ provided more details about the procedures church leaders told members to use to drive out rebellion from infants. The Arizona Daily Star reported the procedures described by former member and staffer Rachiel Morgan. According to the Star report, church pastor Stephen Hall taught members to spank babies as young as 8 weeks if they raised up their heads while laying on their stomachs.
Wanting to learn more about this claim, I spoke today with Rachiel Morgan. She told me that the techniques were taught in small groups by the elders and that her ex-husband was exhorted to spank his six month old baby in front of church elders to determine if the spankings were hard enough.
Another former staff person, Jeff Phillips told me that the techniques were taught to “drive out the rebellion” in the children. He said, according to church pastors, “The only way to recognize rebellion in a child that small is to place the child on his belly to put him to sleep.” If parents worried about infants suffocating or SIDS, they were told “to live by faith and not worry that our baby would die in the crib if he was on his belly.”
Both Morgan and Phillips described similar tactics. According to Phillips, parents were advised:

When putting the child down, if the child lifted his head, you were to push his head down and say “no” firmly. If he lifted his head again, you were to spank him on the backside with the rubber eraser end of a pencil or a cardboard tube from a clothes hanger. You were supposed to strike the baby hard enough to make him cry. You repeated this process until the baby complied, usually by falling asleep.

I wrote the email provided by Faith Christian Church to allow them to give their side or to rebut these charges but there has been no answer.
Morgan and Phillips described other concerns including financial ones with the ministers of a 400-500 member church getting six figure salaries while most staff were living off donations which had to be shared with the church leadership. Membership in the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability was used by campus non-salary staff to raise money for the church. Morgan and Phillips knew of no investigation on the part of the ECFA; according to the former staffers, the church pastors gloated about the credibility they had due to membership in the ECFA.