Shaun Groves
I’ve received complaints from women about all but two of Compassion’s female bloggers. (I’ve never once received a complaint from a man or about one of our male bloggers. Hmmm.)
Some complaints are over words: “Penis” “sex” “crap” and “sucks” are just a few of the words that some women say are never appropriate regardless of context.
Some complaints are based on assumptions: A blogger travels a lot, for instance, so she’s not a good parent. Her child was sick with a disease and now isn’t as sick so she lied about how sick her kid really was in the first place. A blog grew when a child’s passing was chronicled there so the mom must be using her child’s death to make money.
Some complaints are theological: Quoting Mother Teresa or any Catholic or being a Calvinist or forgiving an abuser garners a lot of criticism.
Some complaints are intuitive or border on clairvoyant: And I quote, “There’s no way her life is as good as she pretends it is. You’ll see and be sorry when the truth comes out.” Or “Everything she does is for money.”
Some complaints are metaphorical: ” Lie down with dogs and you’ll get up with fleas.”
Speaking of dogs…As we say in the South, even a blind dog finds a squirrel from time to time. So, while some complaints are frivolous, others are mean, most are baseless and petty, I take almost all of them seriously and search them for the squirrels, I mean pieces, of truth.
I spend almost half my time as the leader of Compassion Bloggers taking complaints from women about women very seriously.
But there are two complaints I ignore completely and I think we all should:
- PUBLIC COMPLAINTS. I’m purposefully easy to reach. My e-mail address and phone number are published at CompassionBloggers.com (and at ShaunGroves.com) and there’s a form there as well through which people can message me. Anyone who follows me on Twitter is automatically followed back. I do this so EVERYONE following me can direct message me – which is private. I know these modes of communication work because people successfully reach me through them daily.
The apostle Paul says that when we have a complaint against someone we’re to go to that person privately with our concerns. We’re not to attract attention to ourselves or our enemies by complaining publicly.
When someone chooses to complain publicly when private avenues are available, their primary motivation is not constructive but destructive. I’m not rewarding such behavior with a response. And I’ve proven that I’m not always capable of respectfully responding to such disrespectful communication so I’m not attempting it. (Only once have a responded to a public complaint. I was sarcastic, regretted it immediately and apologized frequently.) - DISRESPECTFUL AND INSULTING. I’ve been called a douche, prick, a$$ and snarky a$$ (and worse) in the last month publicly via Twitter, on hate sites (web sites that exist to critique a blogger’s character publicly), and via e-mail. Sadly, the woman who called me a prick – or was it snarky a$$? – had a valid concern that really needed my immediate attention.
But the way she chose to communicate with me undermined the credibility of her complaint, which was heavy on insult and light on detail. It was ignored.
By demeaning me she turned my attention away from her concern and toward her lack of respect. Time was wasted, both of us were frustrated, and a valid concern was almost overlooked completely. Thankfully, a more respectful individual later voiced the same concern in the appropriate way and I took immediate action.
Again, Paul tells us how to deal with one another when we’re upset. We’re to be gentle, kind, humble and above reproach.
I hope none of us is bothered by suggestions, concerns and complaints. They’re opportunities to connect and improve. But they have to be served up privately and respectfully in order to be effective and God-honoring.
Cathy says:
VERY well said, Shaun.
Thanks for posting this!
Bo Lane says:
Great thoughts Shaun.
Jason says:
Well said, Shaun. The only time I’d go public with a complaint is if all other avenues have been exhausted and only if going public might bring about some serious change for more than just myself.
Always check your heart first before you click “publish” or “send.”
Shaun Groves says:
I can’t think of a situation in which going public is ever OK. What’s a hypothetical you have in mind? I’m ready to be schooled ; )
Amy says:
I think a situation where one should go public is when someone’s actions are going to hurt someone else if they are not “exposed”. I’m not speaking of the person most people are addressing here. But in the case of someone blatantly scamming others. The well known April Rose scam is a good example. People went to her in private and asked her to come clean (about her fake pregnancy with a terminally ill child), and she didn’t. Lot’s of people were sending her gifts and money. I think this is a good example where one should go public after private attempts were not successful.
Do you agree?
Amy says:
Hey Shaun,
Are you going to reply to my comment/question?
I was genuinely asking if you agree.
Shaun Groves says:
I’m not familiar with the April Rose “scam” but I agree that there may be very few times when a concern should go public – such as when someone’s life is in danger.
Sorry I didn’t respond sooner. There are quite a few comments here to keep track of ; ) Sorry I missed yours.
Amy says:
Sorry! My “Hey Shaun” looked kind of rude and I didn’t intend it that way.
The April Rose scam I was referring to was a serial scammer who also conned people into thinking she was carrying a baby she was going to let them adopt. A life may not have been in danger, but I still think this person needed to be addressed in a public forum to protect others from falling prey. In a loving, biblical way, which she was.
http://www.tellthechurch.blogspot.com/
Mama Llama says:
Great word! Isn’t it interesting.
Lindsay S. says:
*Sigh* Why must women tear each other down? I found it so interesting, so telling, that the complaints are always about and from women. It hurts to think we are like that. Thanks for your integrity and example in these situations.
Sue says:
It’s really not fair to say women are more at fault. I’ve been using the internet for 15 years and have seen some real ugliness between men; message boards are full of it. Men tend to rip into each other over a particular issue and then move on to something else.
Most of the unpleasantness I’ve seen between women takes place on blogs. Women are more likely to form relationships there and things can happen that cause conflict. It’s not surprising that internet relationships go awry due to the limitations of online communication. A lot of what looks like silly squabbling and petty jealousy is a result of individuals feeling misled or taken advantage of. I’m sure this behavior looks inane to an outsider; it makes more sense if you have watched events unfold from the beginning – sometimes these conflicts are months or years in the making. As in real life, rarely is any one person totally at fault or totally blameless.
I think this has been difficult for Shaun because he isn’t accustomed to criticism. I assume he moves in circles where he receives a lot of praise. Now he’s been thrust into a situation where he’s being criticized and called names. I also assume it’s unusual for Shaun to interact with people (in this country) who have different religious beliefs, or no religious beliefs at all. It’s easy to discount the thoughts and feelings of people who are criticizing you, even when they have a valid point.
Lindsay, next time you’re feeling hurt about the behavior of women, ask yourself who’s responsible for the overwhelming percentage of homicides and domestic violence incidents. Who has started wars and created mayhem throughout history? Are we really that bad 😉 ?
Dc says:
Quite a lot of assuming going on in the second last paragraph dont you think?
Rebecca says:
Sigh. It is a sad thing that you had to post this. Very true though.
adam herod says:
I normally don’t like to just leave a comment saying “love it”, but I’m going to say it:
Love it!
On a side note, I love your transparency and willingness to share yourself with others. It can honestly be intimidating when you see someone living freely, but it is so freeing when you step out and try it yourself. Thanks for being one of those voices in my world that’s helping push me towards better relationships and greater depths of honesty.
Shaun Groves says:
Dude, because I read so many complaints about bloggers coming across as “self-righteous”, well, I have to preemptively admit now that I am far from perfect. I ignore the disrespectful comments largely because I lack the maturity to respond to them with respect in return. Hopefully, some day, maybe I’ll be able to respond with grace. Just not there right now.
Thanks for the encouragement, Adam. Honored to be part of your life in the smallest way and glad you’re part of mine here as well.
Nancy says:
AMEN! Unfortunately Facebook and Twitter have given people the “security” to say things to a whole crowd of people that they would never say to someone’s face. Having been on the receiving end of that, I appreciate your post and your honesty. What is sad is that the vast majority of those out there behaving this way claim to be Christians.
Alex Green says:
It’s a product of our electronic culture – anonymous intimacy – We can say what we like, stuff that would never be spoken in a face-to-face setting and we think nothing gets back to us!
Electronic media has a power that, if we don’t understand it, will overcome us and master us and shape us in ways we do not want to be shaped instead of us being able to use it and control it to our own, God-glorifying ends.
It’s a bit scary sometimes and unfortunately, any kind community or forum on the web eventually contains a certain amount of name calling, complaining etc. I’ve seen it so many times.
My prayer for you Shaun and for the rest of your team is that you can continue to act in honourable and truthful honesty as it seems you are in the habit of doing.
God bless His work in you.
Shaun Groves says:
Ah, but the power of the IP address is forgotten. Nothing is anonymous…to the geekiest among us ; )
[email protected] Beauty and Bedlam says:
Amen, amen and amen…there is a reason that scripture SO CLEARLY states the biblical model of confrontation – it works!! With directing women, I now start out all of my first “introduce” yourself type meetings with the whole model of biblical confrontation. I shoot straight and tell them….”I don’t want to hear your complaints. No one else should hear your complaints unless you’ve first gone to your sister – in love…it’s called “carefrontation.”
I can only imagine what you went through with the nastiness this last month. Having met both of these women, I know their hearts were all about sharing God’s goodness and reflecting His glory – warts and all. Ok, I will get off my soap box because I could have a LOT to say on this subject. It’s one of my hot buttons…LOL 🙂
Shaun Groves says:
I heard an interesting argument against private confrontation this past week.. A woman on a hate site said she didn’t have to confront a blogger privately because said blogger was not an individual but a brand or corporation.
What do you think? Is that a reasonable loophole?
annalea @ our hartbeat says:
i think that could be an easy excuse. and maybe it is true in the secular blogging world, but if we are choosing to follow Jesus, then we are His ambassadors in each others lives. we are part of a community – whether in real life or on-line – and bloggers are still our brothers and sisters.
Jennie says:
When your new car just quits, do you get online and shout out complaints, telling everyone who will listen how awful The Brand is, or do you call the dealership and get the car fixed? Not a loophole. It feels more like cowardice on the part of the complainer. It’s easy to be snarky when you don’t have to face the person you’re bashing.
I’m pretty sure as Christians we are called to LOVE. Not judge. Just love, and let God sort out the rest. It makes me sad that ‘hate sites’ even exist.
dubdynomite says:
I think they are rationalizing. The only reasons that anyone would want to start or frequent a ‘hate site’ would be to draw attention to themselves, and/or seek to damage/destroy the object of their hate.
They have no interest in resolving their issues or working out their differences. Somehow they have convinced themselves that being an internet vigilante is justified.
Amy @ My Friend Amy says:
I coordinate a big blogging event for the book blogging community every year. Last year, several people didn’t like the way things were handled and before coming to me, they tweeted about it and they posted about it on their blogs. I know it’s a little bit different because in this case it was a public event involving the organization of things, but I genuinely felt that many attacks were made against my character. (all for something I do voluntarily by the way, no money in blogging for me)
When I expressed that I felt publicly attacking me was disrespectful and not productive, one person said they disagreed because by dealing with it publicly, it helped others to see they weren’t alone.
I felt this was a valid point.
Recently I blogged about a Christian publisher’s covers and how I didn’t like them and the messages they communicated to me. When I spoke to the publisher as a result of that post, I felt he was also asking me the same thing…take it private and not public, but what that post revealed to me was that many other people DO feel the same way as I do. (even if that was a concern he was unwilling to hear)
I think in this case, when you are associating the bloggers with Compassion the line isn’t as clear as you might think. I’m sure some of the problems spring from jealousy and insecurity. I don’t know if you’ve blogged much lately about how you choose to invite and why, but it might be helpful to always be clear and transparent about that, and that you are looking for diversity and that you’re okay with imperfect bloggers. And it might also be helpful to sometimes see if the blogger is willing to address the issues raised in a transparent way on their blog. The audience is so much bigger than just those who interact with you and many people may be thinking the same things they will never say. There’s probably a few other people thinking the same things for each person who speaks.
It really is very complicated and I still don’t know exactly how to handle all of these things. What I do know is that transparency is always valued.
Vicki Small says:
You answered this by bringing in the appropriate scripture, but my first question was going to be, “Why are these women complaining to *you* about female Compassion bloggers?” I know you’re the leader, but have they complained to the women, themselves??
I’m glad you posted this. I’ve had my own comeuppance (?) because I sent an electronic complaint to a person who then replied to my biting tone with gratitude. Ouch. I remember thinking, “Oh my gosh! He’s not just words on the screen; he’s a real person!” I apologized profusely and more than once, and we enjoyed a pleasant and respectful friendship, for some time. Then he lost his job and we’ve lost touch. But the lesson I learned continues….
Georges says:
Vicki, I think they are complaining to Shaun because he is in largely the guy in charge for choosing who he brings on the Compassion Blogger trips.
Shaun Groves says:
Agreed, Georges. I am, in fact, the only person making that decision. I have decided, however, to make that more of a group process. Defining what that might look like even today.
Shaun Groves says:
Some say they have complained via public comments on a woman’s blog. Some say they were ignored, deleted, banned or all three for doing so. I don’t know what their comments looked like – whether they were respectful, etc – so I can’t respond to those claims. I do know that I make sure every one of our bloggers are reachable via published e-mail address or communication form on their site. It is required that readers be able to reach our bloggers.
I get complained to because I am the matchmaker between Compassion and these bloggers. I vet them. I decide they are people Compassion should be associated with publicly. I do think I should be critiqued and made aware of any concerns, complaints, etc.
Kathryn says:
I have been blocked from ______ blog for questioning a post.. I was not rude, nor did I use profound language.. Every one has there own oppinion and if your going to have a public blog you have to expect people to disagree with you, she can’t handle any one disagreeing with any thing she says, she thrives only on comments that agree.. She blocked me and thousands of others.. That’s ok though.. I don’t follow.. And she is loosing readers.. I just cant believe _____ was allowed on the trip.. Weather is was oops on his paper work… still a bad call.. Even thinking that they have kids at home you should have only allowed one parent to go so that one could stay home with there kids. It’s was a waist of money for him to go… JUst my thoughts.
(names delated by Shaun Groves)
Shaun Groves says:
Kathryn, as I’ve said repeatedly here (I think this is the fourth time), she has changed her moderation strategy. E-mail the blogger in question and if she does not reply kindly, bring me in to the conversation because she has assured me she will allow dissenting opinions.
As far as a waste of money goes… If it was waste it was his money. I invite every spouse to go on these trips with us because I think it is healthiest for marriages to undergo such shifts in theology, values, etc TOGETHER. BUT, the spouse is asked to pay their own way.
Kathryn says:
This was the first time to your blog so I din’t know what you have posted previously.. I don’t see why we have to come to you to get questions answered?? She is a grown woman and should answer herself.. I have known her for a long time and we bacame good friends.. But I say one thing ( not bad) and she just dumps me in the dirt..
I think compassion should reevaluate the relation ship with them. I have been with compassion for awhile and thought they were a legimet company untill I saw what I saw.. Now me and others don’t do buisness with compassion because of the bad decisions .. So what… she may have a big fan base and your using her to get kids sponsored.. it wont last for long if she keeps blocking people.. And the money grubber that she is, she really does not give a crap about compassion. she is doing it soley for the money and fame..
Any buisness associated with them from now on I will not trust.. Because any buisness that will contribute to sinners are sinners.
Kathryn says:
Oh, and i’m not against you I’m justtrying to make a point.. You look like your a well respected guy. .I would hate for you to be taken advantage of..
ANd just to clear things up __________ is not a hate site.. believe it or not is a site to talk about the things you disagree with her.. Because you certainly can’t email or do it on her comments becasue she will again block you.. If you haven’t noticed on all her comments they are nothing but praises which she thrives for.
You shoulkd probably get out before you hget sucked in..LOL
Nick says:
I honestly never really read these posts when I see them on Facebook, but I clicked on this one, now I’m curious about other ones.
Just thought I would pass that along.
We are THAT family says:
Shaun,
You have really impressed my hubby and I. Not just with this post (or the statement on the hate blog), but with your character and integrity in real life, on the Internet and across the globe. The world needs more people like you. The Christian world, especially.
P.S. I hope I’m not one of the two who hasn’t been complained about. . .really trying to lose the Pollyanna image ;D
Shaun Groves says:
You are, Kristen. Not one complain about you…yet. But give it time. We’re all just one post away from criticism ; )
I appreciate the kind words. Your husband, especially, has been incredibly surprisingly supportive. I’ve never had a cheerleader who likes NASCAR before ; )
Thankful for you both.
lisa fredricks says:
Just wanted to put my $.02 in here, I think its udderly ridiculous to invite a blogger who dresses like a cow. Although I do like reading her teets…. I mean tweets. (theres a complaint for you!)
kidding 🙂
Shelley says:
I’d like to complain publicly about Kristen. Her blog stepped on my toes! 🙂 Sorry, couldn’t resist.
While I’m at it, I’ll make the same complaint about Shaun, or Sh-aun, as Sophie calls him. Stinking toe steppers!
The whole snarky lot of you has me praying about sponsoring another child. You should be ashamed of yourselves. Wink. Wink.
Seriously I find it very sad that women are so hard on each other. Just what satan wants no doubt.
Zack says:
Good post, Pricky Snark
Wait…
Shaun Groves says:
Thanks, douche.
whitney says:
lmbo. love the post, shaun.
Heather Jackson says:
I confess that I’m not always good about seeking out private correction; I’ve been known (&called on) making public comments about public attitudes encountered in the “christian” community. I will say that if I, personally, feel offended, I try to keep the matter private, and in many of the situations listed above, I’d keep things private. What tends to bring out public ire in me are very public attitudes that lead to people outside of the church wanting nothing to do with the Christ of the church… things like Pat Robertson’s statement about Satanic worship in Haiti, or the divisive hate-speech that comes from certain specific “churches”. When it is obvious that there is a pattern of behavior and language that serves to speak judgment first and ignore the compassion and love that God, through Christ, is all about, then I feel compelled to make a public stand. And even then, it is my desire (though I’m sure I don’t always succeed) to point people to the love and compassion in Christ, rather than to simply sit and bash an individual or group. I’m hoping to say to the Lost among us who might read my blog because they care about me that “Christians aren’t all just the people you’ve seen saying hateful things on TV. Here’s what it SHOULD look like.” I’m hoping to say to believers who are trying to lead an authentic, Christ-centered life, “This is who the Bible tells us Christ is, and if you find yourself behaving like these other people, ask yourself if Christ is in that behavior? Because I don’t find Him there. I find Him over here, in the Compassion.” I feel like those posts are temple-cleansing moments, throwing out the money-changers who would cheat the men and women who came to worship God and were distracted and cheated instead. And I try to temper them with a response… if that’s not who we’re supposed to be, then what’s the proper Biblical response? What does the Bible say about who we ARE supposed to be? And I do my best to keep them to a minimum.
Am I trying to justify myself? Yeah. Am I always right to write these? Probably not. But I’ve always got Biblical backing for my specific points being made, and I’m pretty certain that in every case, there was no way to seek out private remediation (Pat has a history of these outlandish claims, and I doubt he’s going to retract them just because I call him on it, and these hateful churches thrive on being told they’re wrong so they can call their opponents demons and the like). In some, I seek private remediation, and the comment isn’t over a specific person or one incident, but a general attitude that is common in many churches… and it’s not necessarily bad, but it still needs examination. So how does private remediation work there? When 100s, 1000s of churches do the same things, how do you address a hurt being inflicted without intent on countless members? You’ve got to say something publicly to address the Body as a whole.
I long for unity and salvation for us all & write to that end.
Shaun Groves says:
I get nervous when there are so many positive comments in a row. It usually means the hammer’s gonna fall.
Crap.
Stretch Mark Mama says:
This post takes me back to my corporate days, where I’d consistently ask myself which group was easier to work with–men or women.
(answer: aliens)
Bless yer heart, Shaun. And I mean that from the bottom of my midwestern-transplanted-to-the-northwest heart.
Heather Jackson says:
I’d like to point out, I don’t think I’ve ever written Shaun a complain about the bloggers, complained on someone’s blogs, and all the things that he listed as reasons people complain made me roll my eyes. And I’m with all of you: I despise that women tear women down. We’re supposed to be building each other up.
My concern when I write posts that are confrontational is that the Lost, who are seeing hatefulness as the face of christianity, be given a chance to know that the Christ of the Bible isn’t anything like that. It’s to contrast the Biblical portrait of a loving Christ who sacrificed eternity, glory, and power for mortality and death on the cross to woo and redeem us back to Him, and then rose, triumphant, to provide us a means to have an eternal relationship with Him. It’s about a God who picked up what He laid down and is coming again, and all for LOVE. And it’s to demonstrate that even the Old Testament God is one that is about Love. So no matter what hatefulness is spewed in the mainstream media, I want to paint a clear distinction… the Bible says that God is LOVE. If that’s what you’re missing, this is where it’s at.
Shaun Groves says:
That’ll preach, Heather. Amen.
Kim says:
Well my mom said “if you can’t say something nice do not say anything at all”
I think the whole internet world has opened us bloggers up in ways we never imagined
I have learned that some people will complain about ANYTHING
I always pray before I make a new post on my blog and ask God to give me words to tell the story without offending always seeking to give God the glory
And you know the great thing about the computer/twitter/facebook – if someone offends you then turn them off go follow someone else
God bless
lisa fredricks says:
I have read the blog I believe that you are referring to. After some prayer I sent an individual a email that I hoped would be encouraging. (She emailed back that it was, wow!)
Here is my concern. I am not sure whether the blog that is written against her is written by a follower of Christ. I am sure that a lot of the people reading it are not. We are representing in a big way.
She (the critiqued blogger) has done a fantastic job thus far not engaging in all out warfare and trying to “live it”
We should all do the same. Pray for them. Spiritual warfare is not something to be taken lightly or something to be reactionary with.
So to the “anti blogger” thank you for your concern. You are in my prayers.
Also to the origional blogger, You are in my prayers as well.
Shaun Groves says:
I think I know the identity of the author of the primary hate blog and I believe her to be a Christian. But you are correct, some of the loudest voices on that blog are open about not sharing our faith. I struggle with how to reason with these admittedly intelligent and quick witted women, not because I don’t love them but because we don’t have a common standard to hold one another to. If morality is then decided by who’s smartest or loudest, well, I lose. DO we want a world where right and wrong are decided in this way?
Hmm, another post perhaps for another day.
Jessalyn says:
___________ is not a hate blog. Please get that out there.
Sarah Valente (Kingdom Mama) says:
I think when the criticism is coming from a non-believer, we simply embrace it, don’t we? The Lord has really been teaching me lately about the kindness that lead to repentance. Of course, that doesn’t just apply to unbelievers.
This is officially my last comment of the day. Sorry, I just REALLY appreciate this topic.
glowingredtulip says:
Jessalyn – ___________ IS a hate blog….
Georges says:
Lisa, I have read that blog, too, and so I think most of the comments there made to Shaun were not actually about the blogger in question but about her husband, who, admittedly, should not have gone on the trip and will not be allowed on further trips.
Shaun Groves says:
Most of the blog’s content is about the blogger. It is not true that most comments or comment to me have been about her husband.
Bri says:
Wisdom and a snarky sense of humor. Sounds like a healthy dose to me and the right temperament for a leader. Seems like life has brought you to this point in the Shaun Groves. I’m happy to have discovered you.
My formative years were in a very privileged community in a 3rd world country where the poor were behind walls and ministering to them was part of my parochial school curriculum. I have never seen anything as dire as Kenya. Ever, up close. I was shocked and eyes wide open. All I had to do was look at my pampered dog to realize a human being couldn’t have a life less worthy than my pet.
It took reading everyone’s blogs to move me to action. Not one blogger, but all. It was truly a team effort and I appreciate and commend you for being the leader that you are. Blessings and more to you.
Vanessa Myers says:
WIsh I could preach this to all our former church members…used to be a PK and we saw this ALL the time. People had “complaints” ALL the time- about me, my dad, my mom, my family, etc. However, we usually heard about them AFTER they’d left the church and aired all their dirty laundry to the world.
What you’ve said applies to all of life! in families, churches, and just the body of Christ in general. Thanks for tackling the issue.
Erin Ramsey says:
True That!!
It’s a trap that women get caught in … we feel like we need to defend our opinion even when no one asked for it.
Maybe for the mean spirited commenters… they feel like they have the right to complain publicly because it’s a blog – which IS public.
I have had a couple instances where I commented on a friends facebook status…only to regret it later. I especially feel like I need to keep my comments to a minimum b/c I’m involved with women’s ministry at my church and I would never want anything I said (like my opinions) to take away from my witness to Christ.
One of my daily prayers now is that I’ll make my words few and true.
Also Shaun…the more we speak Truth to people…the more we are putting ourselves out there for persecution … it’s our job to be busy building up God’s kingdom .. not debating with hateful people.
Great Post!
(I love all those compassion bloggers Especially WeAreThatFamily!!!… My husband and I are praying about sponsoring a little boy who shares my daughters bday….exciting stuff.)
Johanna says:
Thank you for posting this on your blog. I hope it is encouraging to both your past female Compassion bloggers, and to future Compassion bloggers as well.
As Christians, we should be the MOST humble and the MOST loving when non-believers attack.
I was once the subject of a hate site (thankfully it was years ago when the Internet was much smaller), and it was incredibly humbling. (And painful and embarrassing and frustrating and all of that.) But God made good out it, just as he always promises to do for those who love him and are callled according to his purpose. (In many ways, but the biggest way was that he finally broke down my wall of pride.)
As a Compassion sponsor, I support the CB program 100% and I’m grateful the bloggers have a leader like you.
Jennifer says:
I don’t have a clue what issues you’re talking about (blissfully so) although I completely agree with what you are saying.
I just want to say that I read all of the blogs on Kenya and loved the group that went. I felt like I was with you on the trip and really appreciated everyone’s posts. So, in my opinion, your bloggers were incredibly effective and hundreds of kids were sponsored! I really appreciate everything that you do, Shaun.
Gwen says:
“Don’t be surprised at the painful trial you’re suffering, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed.”
To me, your posts show the love, compassion and character of Christ. Nobody’s perfect, sure, but if we’re supposed to know Christians by their love and by their fruit, then you’re the real deal. I’m really encouraged by reading your blog every day, and I think you’re bringing honour to the name of Christ. God’s using you to bring blessing to those in need, all over the world. Thanks!!! 🙂
Kelly says:
I just have a few complaints about some former compassion bloggers: boomama makes me laugh a little too loud and she supports the wrong SEC team, bigmama is a little TOO hilarious and her fashion Fridays make me want to shop, Angie smith’s hair is a little too perfect and the fact that her writing is so beautiful that it makes me cry is slightly annoying when i’ve just fixed my make-up, Molly piper loved the kids a little too much, frankly Heather Whittaker looked way too cute in camo pants, hats,and sparkly TOMS to be playing soccer with kids in el Salvador and just so I can throw in a guy – the fact that you have sacrificed so much and dedicated your life to getting kids out of poverty – I’m mostly jealous that your mansion in heaven is going to be a LOT bigger than mine! 🙂
Sarah Valente (Kingdom Mama) says:
Ditto!! 🙂
Kelly says:
Oh and Keely’s pictures were a little too wonderful. It’s annoying how talented that girl is!
That is all. 🙂
Sarah Valente (Kingdom Mama) says:
Oh, wow, Shaun. I had no idea. And I don’t follow any of the criticism so I never know what’s going on unless I hear from J or A about their struggles. It’s so sad…and at this very moment I’m finding little pride in being a woman (that’s not your fault, obviously, you were just pointing out 100% statistics). I think that we, women, are powerful tools for the Kingdom, and our hearts are bigger than men’s in most ways.
http://www.kingdomtwindom.com/2009/09/all-single-ladies.html?dsq=17419839#comment-17419839
Satan has worked hard to destroy the ministry of “sisterhood,” and, unfortunately, we’ve let him.
(BTW, I am someone who has forgiven an “abuser” i.e. adulterer. You wouldn’t believe, though I guess you would, the hatred that I have received from so called “sisters.)
I am writing my Church secretary to see if we can persuade you to come out here this spring/summer! I live in the mountains, btw, in case your list is getting full and you need decision making factors:)
Awesome, awesome post. I will be thinking about this one for days!
Sarah's Dandelions says:
I’ve been thinking about this topic a lot recently too. I agree with you that we need to go to the person we have a “complaint” against privately. The Bible tells us that if they refuse to listen to go back with another “witness”… and if that doesn’t work to bring this person before the church. (Matthew 18: 15-17 and 1 Timothy 5:20) … So, how does this translate to the internet?? What do we consider to be the “church”?
I have gone to the blogger you are referring to privately, with concerns I had. I was ignored. I then left her ONE comment with a respectful concern and it was deleted. At that point I just “walked” away from the situation.
But should I have?
Now this blogger is representing good organizations like Focus on the Family and Compassion and that makes me very sad. Maybe I should have spoke up about the very serious “red flags” … I don’t know.
Shaun Groves says:
I’ve talked with the blogger in question about allowing negative comments as long as they are respectful. I’m confident that if you voice your concern respectfully she will respond. If she does not, e-mail her and copy me.
I’m not her pastor but I am someone she promised she would communicate with critics kindly. So, if she does not, bring me into the discussion and I’ll do my best to fairly mediate.
Judy says:
I too left what I thought to be a message of support saying something to the effect of you must be sad to be leaving your children so much lately and was banned and my commented deleted. In no way was I being confrontational! I too just walked away and won’t return. Something just isn’t quite right but other than this comment I have kept to myself about my worries and concerns, well to myself and to God! When children are involved I will always turn to God.
Princess Leia says:
I don’t know the particulars of any of this. I was introduced to all of the bloggers on this trip when you introduced them (although I’ve followed the blogs of a couple of others on past trips prior to the trips).
But it seems to me that the critics here are expecting that you’re taking perfect people with you on these trips. All of us have sinned and no sin is any “bigger” than any other. They’re not there to represent Compassion, they’re there are people and sponsors to meet children and see and talk about Compassion’s work. As I think I said in a comment yesterday, trips like this (imo) aren’t about the change that happens when someone reads the blogs (although that’s great too), it’s about the change in the bloggers (and any spouses or children who come along). If you take perfect people along, then those who need to be broken so that they can be repaired and redeemed will miss their chance. I encourage you, Shaun, to trust that God is leading you to the right people. By all means, get some help with the vetting process if you’re feeling led to, but don’t second-guess God’s plan after the fact, no matter what the “haters” might have to say.
And to those who complain about _both_ parents going, I personally would not _want_ to go on a trip of this kind without my husband along, not because I’m afraid, but because I want us _both_ to experience it. I’ve seen plenty. My husband hasn’t. And if I’m going to be broken again, I need him to understand where I am and to be on-board with the changes I would need to make in my life upon my return. This kind of brokenness is something best shared with a spouse if possible, imo. Especially if the two are already in (or coming back from) a rocky place.
Isn’t that why God made grandparents?
Mrs K says:
Amen.
Angela H. says:
Shaun, you made a disturbing and misleading statement:
“I’ve received complaints from women about all but two of Compassion’s female bloggers. (I’ve never once received a complaint from a man or about one of our male bloggers. Hmmm.)”
First, the misleading part. You have received a number of complaints about a male who went on the Compassion trip to Kenya. You will say that you are technically correct, as he wasn’t one of your “official” bloggers, but he is most definitely a blogger. And one with a criminal record of domestic violence.
Second, the disturbing part. Why do you feel the need to make a point that all of the complaints came from women about women? (Which wasn’t even true in the first place?) Are you trying to imply that men are superior because they complain less? What is your point?
Shaun Groves says:
Angela, what I’ve written is true. The BLOGGERS people have complained about have been 100% female. I have never received a negative complaint about a male BLOGGER. You are correct that a man has been criticized in the past. He traveled with us as a spouse. Sorry for not being clearer. No misleading intended.
Second, I made the point that only women complain and the complaints about bloggers are only about the female bloggers because it surprises me, it’s interesting, and it may bring about productive conversation about why that is.
Being a guy, I’m not sure why that is, but you’re correct: It is disturbing.
Thank you for commenting, Angela. Does my explanation help clarify at all?
Darla says:
Shaun, it’s a privilege that you are in a position where you can pick and choose people you deal with based on how they treat you.
My husband is the chief of police in our area and he doesn’t have the privilege of picking what allegations he chooses to looked into based on the names people may or may not call him. He lives by the code of “my peace cannot be disturbed”.
I’m actually very proud of my husband at this moment for not taking things personally and following through, even when it’s hard. Cuz it gets HARD and it’s WEARING.
P.S. I sent you an email on with a question.. I’m the same “Darla”. Thanks! 🙂
Melissa W says:
Shaun, I am very offended by your post for two reasons, what a coincidence!
1) You left off the complaint women had by allowing ———–, a man twice convicted of recent Domestic Violence against ———, on the trip around children. Which after return of the trip you found the ‘allegations of our concerns’ to be completely true and the error was made by CI’s background check that missed it and allowed a man convicted of violent crimes on a trip with children.
2) I was one of the people who did in fact email you privately about those charges along with the information on how to verify those charges. You responded to me privately on two thing, how CI was looking into it and how to get in touch with the moderator of a blog. You DID NOT respond to me privately with the actions that CI was going to take in their (and yes it is CI’s error as they hired the background company) error of allowing a man with two recent DV convictions on a trip around children.
If you’re going to post about this, please don’t leave off all the facts, leaving those who did respect your ‘contact me privately’ clause to have to out your half truths publicly.
Oh wait, theres one more thing. As my personal opinion, if you represent a company that publicly requests donations to support children, then you should expect public complaints and questions. Otherwise, what is your company trying to hide?
From this post it seems the background company’s failure to keep a man convicted of DV off a trip around children.
(Names removed from this comment by Shaun Groves)
Shaun Groves says:
Melissa, thanks for commenting. There have been many allegations made. I did not list them all, nor did I claim to. I apologize if I gave the impression that this post contained a complete list of complaints, concerns and allegations.
I’ll do my best to address the points you made.
1) As I’ve said publicly on the hate site you might frequent and privately via numerous e-mails: Yes, a criminal background check was run of every blogger and spouse traveling with Compassion to Kenya. I was told by Compassion’s trips department that all applicants passed the check – meaning they had no crimes on their record. While on the trip I received disrespectful public allegations of many kinds, one being that a spouse on our trip had two domestic abuse convictions. As stated in this post, that is an allegation that demands immediate action, however I chose to ignore it because 1)the disrespectful public way the accusation was made, 2)I had already been given the assurance of my friends and superiors at Compassion that every traveler had no criminal record. I chose to believe the credible over the uncredible. This was reasonable.
When I returned from Kenya the accusations continued. So, I asked for proof and promised to act on it. I was given proof and immediately acted on it. In less than four hours I posted an admission on a hate blog that a spouse did have a criminal record that should have kept him from traveling with Compassion. I apologized, explained how an unfortunate admin mistake kept me from being alerted as the system is designed, and explained what steps were being taken to prevent a breakdown of that kind in the future.
2)Melissa, in an e-mail received on March 15th you made the following request: “If you could either respond or post on the [hate site] as to the result and action taken by CI once you have confirmed the convictions that would be appreciated.” I did so. I did so in addition to replying directly to you immediately with my thanks and with a promise that I would look into the allegations you made. I just reread the e-mails from you and I believe I answered every question asked in a timely manner and did everything you requested of me. Did I miss something? Is there anything further I can do for you at this late date?
Erica says:
While I appreciate you coming to the “hate site” (which I don’t think is an accurate description) to address the blogger in question, I can tell you that I have personally asked respectful questions of this blogger (via email and on her site) and was quickly banned from commenting, and recieved a very passive agressive email in return. This is the reason the other site exists. When your comment is deleted, and you’re banned, it is only natural to want to voice an opinion/ask questions somewhere. Especially when you’ve been reading this person’s blog for a long time. I was just shocked to find out how many people had concerns. It is hardly a “angry few”.
As far as the husband of this blogger, you have addressed it pretty extensively. I just wish CI had caught this before he went to Kenya and blogged about it.
Shaun Groves says:
As I’ve already said here, that blogger’s policy on negative comments has changed over time. If the hate site was created because of dissenting viewpoints being deleted and banned then it no longer needs to exist. As long as commenter do not post anonymously, use foul language or make threats, their comments will stand. As I’ve already stated here, if they do not, then e-mail the blogger in question. If she does not respond kindly then copy me on your correspondence because she has assured me she will.
We will have to agree to disagree on whether the site in question is fairly classified as a hate site or not.
Kathryn says:
Thats not true.. I have tried to leave “positve comments” recently.. you know becaquse I still have nice things to say…=) and I am blocked from making comments.. I know how it works.. I also have disqus.. She blocks us by our IP address.. So what ever you say is fixed… NOPE… she is still blocking away and keeping them blocked.. Like I said earlier.. sooner or later your wont have any followers left… And what real christian talks about sex online??? The whole Solomon thing, she twisted that around to.. She should actually understand the story before spouting a twisted story on line..
Shaun Groves says:
Kathryn, have you e-mailed and asked to be unblocked?
If tat request goes unanswered, please copy me on the next e-mail request, and, again, I’ll remind the blogger of her commitment to me to allow dissenting points of view that are respectful, contain no threats or foul language. Cool?
Kathryn says:
shaun,
I am so sorry… It’s not fair for you to be brought into this drama.. I have send emails to her and they get ignored and nothing gets resolved..
I don’t care to be unblocked.. I’m trying to make a point and have a voice for those who get shut down by her. Im sad to see these innocent people get sucked in. I am a forgiving person but she just keeps making things worse..
Allot of good came out of the Kenya trip and allot of kids are getting sponsored!!! It’s wonderful.. But to her is a game/competition.. It’s sad.
Melissa W says:
No Shaun, there is nothing you can do for me at this late date.
You are correct that I emailed ‘respond or post’ when I should have specifically stated “respond to me or post”.
I only found the ‘hate site’ ,which i don’t believe it is, because I was looking for more information about CI. You can confirm with the moderator of that blog that I have never posted a comment to that blog on any post that was not related to the DV charges and the CI trip and will not be returning there since this trip is over.
I would just think that if you are going to chose to post about the petty things women want to complain to you about, maybe you should include the legitimate proven truthful concerns that were brought to your attention. Public or not.
It’s your blog and that’s just my opinion. You were nothing but respectful towards me, as I feel I have been to you, and once someone finally took the “allegations” seriously, the matter was handled appropriately with appropriate consequences.
Shaun Groves says:
So glad we’ve reached some agreement, Melissa. Thank you for the chance to clarify.
Melissa W says:
You’re welcome. And I am very disappointed, not with you, to hear that it was my email and only one other that finally got you to act on his convictions.
There are sooo many women at that site who were aware of the fact, complaining of it, and only two did more than complain to each other?!? What is the point of that site then if it’s not to change something they feel is wrong?
Sorry, this isn’t really a comment towards you. Just a great disappointment in finding out that information. That site is where I learned of the convictions and how to locate them for verification.
I’m not a practicing Christian, but I still deeply believe in helping less fortunate children, as well as keeping them safe from possible dangers they are unncessarily exposed to. So sad and pointless.
Cecily L says:
I think that it would be fair to also say in this post that because of this “hate site” you realized a grave mistake in allowing a certain blogger’s husband to travel with Compassion, and he will never be allowed to travel with Compassion again.
Shaun Groves says:
Sort of.. It was Melissa’s e-mail and one other containing links to criminal records that I credit. I do credit the hate site author for allowing me to post our findings after the swift investigation. Very much appreciated.
Kelli says:
You know, there are so many privilages that come with being a woman. We can change our hair color whenever we want, we can wear high heels and make up, we get to bring children into the world, we can make everything better with a kiss and a bowl of chicken noodle soup…oh the list could go on and on.
But there are drawbacks as well. Namely being that women can be vicious and cruel and desperately hurtful. It is those times that makes me wish I was a dude and didn’t have to deal with the drama all the time. Good grief.
Thanks for your honesty and maturity in dealing with a difficult situation. And thanks for being patient with us women! We’re not all that petty.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go make put on some make up and fix my hair and bake cookies with my kids, because for the most part, I enjoy being a girl. 🙂
Cara says:
You couldn’t pay me enough to be in leadership (which, IMHO, are usually underpaid) and to deal with this type of petty, snarky crud day in and day out.
Kudos to you Shaun for being mature enough to keep your cool and try to approach this with humility and love.
Keep going Shaun, because at the end of it all this is about the KIDS that NEED us to reach out in Christ’s name. The reality is that these kids, day in and day out, are living in conditions that I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. Compassion is an organization that is VERY accountable and transparent with their money and they do incredible work with what they are given.
Watching this awful soap-operatic drama unfold was painful, but you know what? Your response through this all made me GLAD to be a sponsor through Compassion (over 5 years now! and many more to come!) because I know that Compassions’ heart for the poor is very real and the people they hire to represent them are godly, honest and AUTHENTIC people. Not perfect, but authentic. I appreciate that.
Don’t be discouraged. God is bigger than all of this stuff and is MIGHTY to save us (from ourselves) and redeem our situations.
I appreciate you, and I appreciate the trips these bloggers have gone on. They have impacted me to communicate more frequently with the kids. The methods that Compassion uses to recruit sponsors are quite effective I think. The first boy we sponsored was at a concert at a church with Rebecca St.James and the second, a girl from the DR was because of the blogging trip a couple of years ago.
Be encouraged – perhaps you’ve ruffled a few feathers in the spiritual realms… 😉
Shaun Groves says:
THANK YOU for the kind words.
Cecily L says:
I would also like to add – Shaun, I think you’ve handled this whole mess with the particular blogger very well and with dignity. I really just feel badly that you got dragged into it [inadvertently] by —– . If you knew what you know now, and could have predicted all the negative things you’ve had to deal with since, would you still have brought —- along? Were the number of sponsorships she brought in worth it?
Oh, and you said you read her blog for 4 months before and that someone [you?] at Compassion had audited the archives – how did you miss —— acknowledging the arrests [etc] after a reader uncovered the police records? Her husband also acknowledges them on his recent posts. If you “had already been given the assurance of my friends and superiors at Compassion that every traveler had no criminal record,” does that mean that not one of those people had read—‘s and —‘s blogs before, where it says plain as day, many times, that the police were involved? I don’t understand how you, and everyone you asked, could have missed it since she’s posted about it several times.
Shaun Groves says:
Thank you for the encouragement.
Actually, I read her blog for five months. All I ever saw regarding this situation was an admission by the blogger that she had called the police on her husband. Police involvement does not mean a crime has been committed. Innocent until proven guilty and all that stuff right?
I alerted our background check folks o the greater potential of a criminal record and asked that they pay special close attention to this person’s check. They did. They found convictions but, like I’ve said, an admin in that department dropped the ball and their mistake resulted in this whole mess. They’ve been dealt with.
There was no admission of a conviction on the blog that I found before the trip or since. I wasn’t looking for one, admittedly. I was trusting the background check – a mistake I will not make twice.
Georges says:
Maybe this is a stupid question, but why isn’t “have you ever been convicted of a violent crime” one of the initial questions you ask people going on a CI trip?
Shaun Groves says:
Not stupid. It’s on the paperwork. The spouse in question answered truthfully. That answer was confirmed by a background check. The problem, again, was that I don’t see those checks or the bloggers’ answers to that question. For privacy sake, all criminal record related stuff goes through one guy and his admin. The mistake was theirs. Again, very sorry for that. It has been dealt with swiftly.
Kim says:
Hi Shaun,
Just 2 comments. The fact of the matter is that you chose _____ and _____ to go on the trip. Enough said. Yes you are getting more than your fill of backlash about it but by addressing it on your blog and on [hate site] you are opening yourself up to many comments. But as you said, it was solely your choice. You went with it, done, over. I wonder why you ever addressed it at all. A simple “I’m checking into this” or “Thanks for the heads up” comment would suffice, (and granted people probably would have complained about that response, but it would give you time to look into it or just let the dust settle. Unfortunately you just can’t please everyone). However, you seem to want to keep it going by posting this. I would argue that people like ______ and ________ should not need you to defend them. They are big girls/boys and really if they are in the public eye, they should be able to handle the comments. You have to be getting sick of defending your decision.
Secondly the other site is not a hate site. Most people who go there (including myself) don’t hate _______ but rather feel duped and lied to. When they try to comment, either privately or via the blog, with any sort of opinion that is different than that of the blog owner, it is has been deleted and they have been banned from ever commenting again. I can see doing that if someone is being disrespectful, but if someone is making a respectful comment, but one that maybe pointing out an inconsistency, the comment was deleted and the person banned. Some people argue that is deceitful to do that.
Unfortunately there are a couple commenters on [hate site] there that can be disrespectful, but no more disrespectful than some of the commenters on ______’s site. I have seen downright nastiness from Christian women over there. It really goes both ways!
(Names removed by Shaun Groves)
Shaun Groves says:
I love being opened up to many comments. Thanks for yours.
I did respectfully say “I’m checking into this” and “thanks for the info” many times. And, you’re right, people hated that answer and concocted a few conspiracy cover-up theories. (At times I’ve felt like I’m in the world’s largest game of “Does this dress make me look fat?” You know? I’m a man trying to be kind to a LOT of smarter faster women. I’m at a biological disadvantage here! Thanks for affirming that.)
I’m not defending an individual. I’ve not mentioned an individual. I’m teaching critics who deserve to be taken seriously, who should have been taken seriously, how to be taken seriously.
Again, as stated here three times now, the blogger in question reports to have changed her moderation tactics. If you post a respectful dissenting opinion or critique that contains no foul language or threats, she promises to let it stand. If she does not, e-mail her about it. If she does not respond kindly after that, copy me because she has assured me she will allow dissenting viewpoints that contain no foul language and threats. Does that work for you?
You don’t want me defending _______ but you end with an attack on her? Like I’ve said, I’m not defending her or her readers. I’ve been kind to you and so have my readers right? Hope your experience here is better than you report to have over on _______’s blog. If it’s not, let me know.
Thanks for the comment.
Kim says:
Shaun, I didn’t end my post with an attack on ______. I stated that some of the people on her blog can be downright nasty to people that have another opinion, just as some people on the other blog can. I have never insulted her. In fact I have never commented to her at all, but I do feel for the ones that have respectfully and were banned. But as you said you addressed it.
Personally I have to say I find it kind of humerous that you are asking people to email her and copy you in, kinda like tattletaling…..”See Shaun, I was banned!!” Just my opinion, but I would hope no grown adult would need a 3rd party to moderate.
Kim says:
Ooops, and I forgot to say, Yes you have been very kind!
Jules says:
To the people who don’t like her and her husband DON’T READ HER BLOG. PERIOD. THAT’S IT. MOVE ON!
Thanks,
Angie Smith says:
I’m with Kelly on this one. Way too many gifted, God-loving women have loved and invested in compassion. Could you please clarify to Mrs. Stamps that my hair does not hold up as well as Melissa’s in 109 degree weather?
And I would like a bunk in the heavenly mansion. Shaun, those who know you love and appreciate you for what you do with your life…honored to have been a small part of it 🙂
ang
Elizabeth says:
Shaun, as a sponsor of two Compassion children, I would like to express a few thoughts.
I am truly impressed by the ministry of this organization. It is almost impossible to believe that so much can be done for these precious children with such a small monthly contribution. I’ve followed many blogger trips and have been so grateful to “see” God’s love and work behind the scenes. I love to see the increase in sponsorships that result from the trips. Thank you for your work with Compassion.
As far as the blogger and her husband who were on the recent trip to Kenya, I must say I’ve had “something’s not quite right” feelings when I’ve read her blog. Too much manipulation for clicks, which of course are money driven. The fact that her husband with a domestic violence charge was included in the trip was disturbing to me. Obviously, this was a mistake and one I expect will never again happen with a Compassion trip.
I also thought your comment about complaints being only from women was a little odd and totally unnecessary. The implications were obvious…kinda snarky! Just sayin’…
May God continue to bless Compassion’s ministry and your work.
Shaun Groves says:
Thanks for sticking with Compassion through mistake.
Snarky? I don’t know how to define that word but I get called it enough that you’re probably right. Is that always a bad thing? ; )
I do think the fact that complaints ONLY come from women and ONLY about women is odd, to say the least. Why do you think that might be? Truly curious.
As a man, I admit, it makes it harder for me to take criticisms by women of women as seriously as I would have a year ago. That’s not right of me, but I admit this job has created that bias in me.
Yael says:
I Have been a follower of *both* blogs in question.
________ has the *exact* problem that [hate site] has:
A handful of individuals who resort to horrible name calling as a result of a comment that does not agree with the main posting.
On [ ——-‘s blog] I raised a question about a particular post.(I could e-mail it if you want) the response was swift and disturbing. One commenter stated that he/she was praying to god to be vengeful in any way possible.
On [hate site] the *commenters* can respond in the same way to an individual who does not agree with the majority.
However Shaun, I must “agree to disagree” with you that [hate site] is a “hate site”
The postings, made by the creator, are respectful in tone…if a tad sarcastic.
It is the commenters that can become disturbing in their responses. But, it is the same with ___________. The commenters can become completely bodmin!
______ and [hate site] are their own individual sites. They each have their followers, their lovers and their dissenters.
But to call a site a “hate site” simply because the creator wanted a place to voice concerns and disagreements lessens the power of the word hate–and brings unwanted attention and discomfort.
Look at it this way: Their are sites for Democrats and sites for Republicans. Each site posts information on the other. The postings–by the creator–are sometimes sarcastic yet always respectful in tone. But the commenters—they can get out of hand! Would you call that site a “hate site” based on the comments?
I for one wouldn’t. I would follow the site for its main content…and ignore the more “passionate” responses.
Each site ——– and [hate site] has some outrageous and slightly nutty followers. These followers can bash someone who disagrees to a pulp.
But it doesn’t *ever* mean the site is a hateful one–it just means some of those who frequent it are.
🙂
(Names deleted by Shaun Groves)
Shaun Groves says:
You know what? You make a great rational argument, Yael. Hmmm.
What would you classify it as. I’m not going to ever post the name of it so what do you suggest I classify it as as, obviously, we’re not in agreement that it is a hate site. I’m willing to ditch that moniker if you can help me come up with a better one. I’ll replace every mention of “hate site” from this post even. Fair enough?
k says:
I would classify the second site as the response site. Or I would call it a counterpoint site as I think that is the blog owner’s intent. The —– site is not just a blank but is a mommy blogger with a point of view. The other site counters it.
I may not agree with you on many things. but I do respect your right to have your thoughts. I also appreciate it when people are respectful not matter the difference in point of view.
Yael says:
Goodness!
Opposing?
Dissenting?
Odium(sorry couldn’t resist)?
Trouble(not as strong as hate–but keeps the meaning since site does, as witnessed here–raise it)?
Disfavor?
Objecting?
The welsh in me could come up with some more but that would be a *whole* other list.
And thank you. Your response, and this site has found a follower–A Welsh/Jewish/Christian follower–but a follower just the same.
Great site, great debate. And interactions from those who don’t always agree that are friendly and warm. It is a wonderful thing to see.
MW-to-tha-Oh, you know says:
Thank you, Yael. I agree. “Hate” is a strong word, but the wrong strong word. I don’t feel “hate” on that blog. Frustration, anger, confusion, bewilderment, satire, camaraderie, with a dash of jealousy and hormones, yes.
It is not a positive blog, or necessarily a positive place, but it’s not hate-filled or hateful, or a “hate” blog.
My suggestion is “op-ed”. They are opinions and editorials based around facts and quotes about a public figure and business owner.
That’s just my take.
annalise says:
None of the men I know blog, or have anything to do with blogs. So that could be why you don’t hear from men often? Vast majority of those that create & read blogs are women. Would make sense that more women would address it?
I tried asking a question, on _________blog, and it was deleted and I was banned. So many people are banned from *certain* blog sites…not quite as many questions or observations {questioning her/them} as their may have been.
Shaun Groves says:
That’s a logical argument there, Annalise except that we’re not talking “more women” complaining. We’re talking ONLY women complaining.
We’ve taken male bloggers like Tim Challies and Carlos Whittaker on trips. Those guys have a zillion readers both male and female. And Carlos often takes his clothes off on his blog. Seriously. Not ONE complaint. Weird huh?
For the sixth time here in the comments, e-mail her. If she doesn’t respond kindly, copy me and I’ll moderate because she assured me she would allow dissenting points of view if they were respectful, contained no foul language, and made no threats. Cool?
Judy says:
Just a question – if you are banned, can you email? Not sure and wanted to be sure the advice you are giving is accurate. I
Shaun Groves says:
Yep. E-mail works. A person is only banned from commenting on a site.
Kelly @ Love Well says:
Most days, I love being a woman.
Right now, I’m ashamed of my gender.
I will not touch the mess you’ve gotten dragged into, Shaun. God will judge every one of the participants, and I rest in His justice.
But the female-on-female thing disturbs me greatly. I think men tend to walk away from a blog that offends them — especially a personal blog. I realize it’s different if someone says something about the Red Sox. But women have a tremendous capacity to hold a grudge, get bitter and angry and take revenge into their own hands. Maybe that’s why Paul specifically warns women against being busybodies (1 Timothy 5).
Why are we wasting our time, our energy and our passion trying to undermine someone else — even if they are guilty? How does that benefit anyone? Wouldn’t our time be better spent doing good? Do we not trust God to judge and to bring the truth into the light?
I truly don’t understand.
Shaun Groves says:
Great point. Great great point from scripture. My wife agrees, by the way. She brought that up sometime last year when I was getting quite a few complaints about another female blogger.
You’re right about me, at least. If I don’t like you I just don’t hang out with you – on-line or off.
Christine says:
Shaun, just a note to say that I’m praying that God will keep you and encourage you in this whole episode. Doubtless mistakes were made and hindsight is always 20/20 but surely everyone involved is in need of grace and mercy for in many things we all offend. Thank God for the Cross.
Shaun Groves says:
Like a cool drink of water…
Lisa Collinsworth says:
Shaun, I recently stumbled upon the hate blog and it has saddened me to see how much satan is trying to steal and destroy. And I am one of those people who just can’t sit by while people take hits on a person’s character. I lovingly commented on the hate blog that the site should be taken down because I believe the author of this blog to be a Christian and I believe that if they are, then the Holy Spirit is already prompting them to do the right thing, but they are ignoring Him. I am so very sorry that commenters from that blog have been so cruel towards you through their words. I’ve realized people say things online that they would NEVER say in person…but it also shows just how much hate is in their hearts. There are some that have legitimate concerns and when they express them out of serious concern and not out of pride/jealousy/hate, it’s only then that they can be taken seriously. But they are few and far between. If those people would only view there own words as if someone else was saying them about THEM…I wonder if they would ever write them.
While I agree that the husband of the blogger who is being criticized (quite unfairly I must say) should not have been allowed by CI to go on the trip, I must say I’m glad that God orchestrated it where he was able to go (and I do believe God orchestrated that!!!). I think that the trip has impacted them in a positive way and I also think the children of Kenya would have missed out on a blessing without him being there (as well as the other bloggers). I believe this man is being open and honest about his faults and hangups and I feel like he is sincere in his desire to become more like Christ. Because of this, satan will try to bring him down through hate and through the words of those who choose to tear down instead of build up.
You have done a great job of dealing with the things that you’ve needed to and I hope you will not be discouraged by those who choose hate instead of love. For Christ loves us all…and we too should love all.
Melissa W says:
Reasoning like this, not you personally, but the reasoning that it was God’s doing that a man recently convicted TWICE of domestic violence against his wife, is partly why I am not a practicing Christian.
And please do not read this as I am bashing Christianity or you personally, I am not.
I am bashing dangerous thinking that God wanted to test him around children and Satan is the one making this a big deal and bringing him down.
Couldn’t the roles easily be reversed that it was Satan who allowed the mistake to happen for him to attend the trip and it was God who kept everyone safe till the truth was revealed?
Lisa Collinsworth says:
Like I commented on the hate blog… I believe it is absolute rubbish to say this man was a danger to these children (that’s my opinion and I respect that yours is different). He’s not a child molester and it has not been said that he was ever physically violent. He was yelling and screaming with possible threats and the police were called. I am not saying that he should be excused…there is no excuse for that kind of behavior. But I believe (again my opinion) that he is allowing God to free him from his anger and that he is truly repentant. He still should not have been allowed on the trip, but I think it is very unfair to say that the children of Kenya were unsafe with him around. To be honest, I would put my child in a locked room with this man before I would ever dream of putting him in a room with some of the people who post and comment on the hate blog.
Lisa says:
Lisa,
Please be honest.
You did not “stumble” on the other site.
You’re in fact a regular visitor and commenter on that site.
You don’t just “stumble” onto a website. You go looking, searching for a site and then CHOOSE to stay.
You’ve chosen to stay. Don’t lie. Not here.
Lisa Collinsworth says:
And just so I’m clear …we are ALL sinners and fall short of God’s glory. I am certainly not perfect and have shown hate many times in my words and actions. Like Christine said….thank God for the cross!
Thomas says:
Wait a minute. Wait a minute. I want to say something snarky. Darn it. I have nothing snarky to say.
There sure has been some great lessons this week on Shlog.
Humility and gentleness, forgiveness and polite ways to complain.
Thomas
brandy says:
Shaun,
Just wanted to say that I was so impressed when I saw you in West Palm a year ago. I have already been sponsoring compassion kids and am so so so so thankful you are doing what you are doing!! So thanks for letting God use you and for loving people who are forgotten by most of the world.
Claudia says:
Dude – I would soooo not want your job right now 😉
Truly, you are a better person than I & I wish you all the best …..
JD says:
Shaun,
There are plenty of times you should take your complaint public, rather than keep it private. Generally it’s a good idea to start with it private, however, if the person either doesn’t respond to emails, or is known to not take it seriously, you may not have a choice. I’ve even watched a documentry claiming that if some of the people at NASA would have gone public with their concerns, the Challenger accident wouldn’t have happened.
The blogger you are discussing had posted that she no longer replies to emails. What would be the point of emailing her then, only to be not responded to. As for complaints directly to you, I saw a post in which you were flat out rude to someone who had emailed you. After reading that, I had no desire to take anything to you in private. Sure, you did publicly apologize to her, however that doesn’t immediately change the impression you left on people.
The “hate site” you discuss isn’t really a hate site. Sure, there are a few people who probably do hate her, but the blogger in question also has a few people who hate the “hate site”. So does that make the blogger’s site a “hate site” too? Its more of a dissenting opinion site. One thing you should be reminded of was that most of the people on what you call the “hate site” were people who prayed for this blogger’s sick child. It wasn’t until people started seeing red flags that sites like these were created.
Shaun Groves says:
Nope, JD. I was flat out rude to someone who publicly criticized me via Twitter. Which is no less wrong. But a bit different. As I said in this post today, it was the one time I’ve ever done something like that, I regretted it immediately and have apologized frequently. I made a mistake, was humbled by it, and do, yet again, ask forgiveness.
Roberta says:
WOW…I’m in shock and feel numb right now.
People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones! Maybe I just don’t get it…but if I created and paid for my own blog then I have the right to delete and not talk to rude people…it’s like my home…if I don’t want you in my house I don’t answer the door or the phone.
Maybe from an administrative stand-point, in the future, all Compassion Bloggers should have a blog that is paid for and or moderated by Compassion administrative staff. THEN I could see the organization making setting standards and/or REQUIREMENTS, that complaints. have to be dealt with. BUT if it’s my personal blog and I have other vendors/sponsors, etc. that I generated before my association with CI, then I do not see how CI can set any requirements in regards to allowing or answering any unwanted comments.
Another point…in most states when a husband is charged and found guilty of Domestic Violence…he is not considered a Threat to Children…either in their own home or anywhere else. So perhaps the interpretation of the law was where the CI Staff “failed”…but all’s I feel at this point is…GIVE ME A BREAK!
You know there are a lot of people who just HAVE TO BE RIGHT no matter what the cost to themselves or others. Then they wonder why they “repell” people in lieu of “attracking” them.
AS always I wish all of the engergy was spent on sponsoring children in lieu of policing the CI bloggers. Bless you Shaun and all the CI Bloggers…my heart really goes out to all of you and remember “THIS TOO SHALL PASS”.
Beth says:
If we’re honest, none of us has any reason to be self-righteous. One fundamental truth of Christianity is that we are all a mess and desperately in need of help from outside of ourselves. Look at all the heroes of our faith. Moses killed someone, Abraham lied about his wife being his sister, David had a man killed and committed adultery, Peter denied Christ, Paul persecuted Christians…We are all hopeless, helpless, and needy, all of the time. All we can do is depend on the righteousness of Christ. I have enjoyed every single blogger I’ve read who has been on the Compassion trips. I have a lot of respect for someone who admits he has been very wrong, that he is a mess, and who is completely dependent on God to help him change. I think if we were all more realistic about ourselves we would have a lot more grace for other people. Thank you, Shaun, for your patience and grace!
Rick Orrell says:
Just spent the last 30 minutes reading through the soap-opera (oops, I meant blog comments) and just want to say you’ve shown more restraint with your responses and replies than I probably would have shown. Thanks for your calm, calculated and articulate words. I used to sponsor a child about 20 years ago and you’re in the process of convincing me to do so once again……
Have a groovy day, dude!! (Praying for ya’!)
lisa fredricks says:
Shaun, I seriously would be banging my head on the wall at this point. Your restraint and humility is humbling.
Turn your eyes upon Jesus,
Look full in his wonderful face,
and the things of earth will grow strangely dim,
in the light of HIS glory and grace.
Lets just remember when we are looking at this blog who we should be looking for.
I found Him tonight in you.
Please don’t take that as worshipful of you but a great example of how to act christlike.
Thank you.
Gloria says:
You are preaching on Sunday, correct? So do you think that you are being spiritually attacked with all this drama that you are getting drawn into? You have done a great job clarifying and refereeing…now I think it is time to set all the drama aside. Everyone here is an adult and it is all in the past and CI has taken care of the part of the equation that missed the conviction and it’s time for you to recharge and get ready for God to speak through you when you preach. How about a media fast for a day or too?
Gloria says:
Oh and by the way, thank you for inviting real people on your CI trips–people that are imperfect and honestly working on changes of the heart. People that are “in process”. I think that you chose well for this trip and I’m sorry that CI missed the legal problem, only because it would have spared you all this hassle. I do think that this is the sort of thing that whenever possible a couple should experience and process a CI trip together. Did you start that media fast yet??? = )
Kelly says:
Shaun, I take issue with two of your assertions:
1. Calling the blog a “hate site” is just inflammatory and does nothing to bolster your argument against making public complaints.
and
2. The women to whom you are referring have *repeatedly* tried to address issues with the blogger in question in private. Repeatedly. There are countless stories of people sending emails to this blogger and receiving curt replies, if they received any reply at all.
Because this blogger makes money by preying on the emotions of her readers and because she repeatedly deletes comments that raise questions about her business practices, it is reasonable, in my opinion, for her readers to resort to other ways of eliciting honesty and integrity from her.
As we have seen recently with the Toyota recall, it is sometimes necessary to hold businesses accountable *in public* in order for changes to transpire. Just because this blogger’s business is on the internet does not make her immune to such accountability.
I do agree with you that name-calling, threats, and hateful statements have no place in these discussions. I am sorry that some people chose to bring these issues to your attention in such a way.
Shaun Groves says:
Kelly, on point #1, I wasn’t trying to be inflammatory. I agree calling it a hate site doesn’t help the discussion stay civilized but it seems to fit best my understanding of it’s content and my experience there. It truly seems like a hateful place – the intent is to destroy a woman’s reputation by dissecting her every word looking for inaccuracies, character flaws, family problems, lies, half truths, etc. I truly don’t know what else to call that. Have any ideas? Some have suggested “op-ed site” but that doesn’t quite nail the climate or content does it? What’s your suggestion? I’m open to alternative ideas.
On point #2, this post today wasn’t about whether someone should or shouldn’t complain privately to _______, though I’ve happily, six times now in the comments, explained that her moderation policy has changed making that more possible today than it once was. She has assured me she will allow dissenting opinions that are not threatening, disrespectful or use foul language. If she doesn’t allow yours then e-mail her. If that doesn’t work copy me and I’ll do what I can to help out by reminding her of the promise she made me.
No, the purpose of the post wasn’t to address how one should complain to HER but how one should complain to ME if one wants one’s complaints to be taken seriously…as they should be. (Wow, that was a lot of “ones” wasn’t it?)
Lastly, I believe your life is too precious to be spent trying to get people to listen to you who don’t want to listen to you…if that’s the case. There is a mindset among SOME of the commenters here that SEEMS to say “If ______ won’t listen to me I have to keep trying to make her listen to me even it means being mean and public because she’s wrong and I have to fix that about her.” Your life is too precious, Kelly, to waste it trying to make people listen who don’t want to. If you’ve given it a shot and she’s not listening, why not walk away, stop reading there, pray for her, and spend your time reading somewhere else…like here? ; ) Would love to have your eyeballs here. And I promise I won’t delete your comments or ignore your e-mails. Why not walk away?
But, again, this post was about me, not her. ; ) If anyone wants ME to listen to their complaints, they need to be respectful and private. I do my best to be kind and accessible. That’s the point I was trying to make. Sorry if that got lost somewhere along the way.
Melissa says:
Shaun, I think your point #1 accuratley describes the “hate” site. How can that blogger ever “win” or “change” if her words are always picked apart? It is truly a sad thing no matter how you look at it.
On a more positive note I think that Compassion engaging bloggers on their trips is amazing. I had never heard of Compassion until a blogging trip a few years back and read the India trip with batted breath. Ryans’ writing was wonderful on the Kenya trip. When our personal fianancial situation improves I am going to sponsor a child. Keep up the great work that you do.
Let us all live and learn from our mistakes!
~Melissa
(I will apologize now for any spelling or grammar mistakes)
Melissa says:
I should add that I do think said blogger CAN change and probably has, but….
Lisa Collinsworth says:
That was a very loving response, Shaun. I respect you so much for how you are handling these questions and comments!!!
Emily says:
Sheesh.
Thanks for your wisdom, Shaun, and not just in this situation. I’m sorry you’ve found yourself in the middle of so much drama!
I left the blogfrog at the blog in question because it hurt my heart so much to see believers tearing each other apart. While I miss the connection to lots of awesome women, I saw myself getting too invested in (too-often futile) attempts at reconciliation and had to pull the plug for my own emotional & spiritual health.
I still read her blog, maybe with a grain of salt, but isn’t that how we are supposed to read anything that’s not scripture? We’re all frail. We all need to be held accountable, sure. But we all need to be treated as people crafted in His image.
Having concerns about someone’s sincerity or motivations is fine. It can even be noble. But investing so much time & energy in tearing down another person is not healthy for anyone.
I was brought to tears by her compassion posts. As a CI sponsor and advocate, I was glad she went. Now I’m just deeply saddened that this catty drama has seeped into a part of my life that I love and from which I will not walk away.
I’d love to see the bright light and powerful peace of Christ shine through Compassion’s ministry into what I consider to be a very sad situation all around.
Jody says:
you know what was also interesting? (and I am not trying to be snarky, just observing)–many of the complaints about YOUR blog post today were also by females–seriously, that is ODD. why are we ladies not acting like ladies???
Thank you for being bold, for being willing to be criticized and attacked and complained to for the sake of showing Jesus to the children and people of the world. Just like Moses, Peter, Paul….and so many (ooh, you can add your name to that list in Hebrews 11!! 🙂 ). THANK YOU!!!!!
Kelly says:
Shaun, I apologize for being redundant. I did not take the time to read through all of the comments and your replies to them before I wrote my commnet.
If the blogger you mention does, in fact, truly change the way she moderates her blog comments and responds to criticism, then the mission of the “opposing” site will be accomplished and there will be no need for it to continue. Until there is evidence of this transformation, the site remains a necessary counterbalance.
Shaun Groves says:
No apology needed. It’s a LOT to read!!
That’s great news! I hope she does welcome dissenting viewpoints and those are expressed with respect, no name calling, foul language or threats. Believing the best of all involved moving forward.
You used the word “necessary.” The not-hate-site/opposing-site is “necessary” you said. For the sake of learning on my part, what bad thing(s) do you believe would happen if it stopped existing immediately? What, to you, is it accomplishing?
Thanks for being here, Kelly.
Megan says:
Oh my word. But can you answer this: What in the world is the difference between someone who is an a$$ and someone who is a snarky a$$?
I’ve always wondered…
PS: Sorry you had to field so many of those. What is it with women having no grace for other women? We remain our harshest critics…
Shaun Groves says:
I think an a$$ is not liked and a a$$ is funny at the same time.
Kelly says:
I believe, as a commenter mentioned above, that the opposition site (does that moniker work for you?) provides a forum for readers to ask questions and figure out why they feel there’s something not quite right when they read this blogger’s writing. Because of the emotional (and sometimes finanacial) investment in this blogger’s life, the stakes are pretty high.
This blogger has quite a following – and quite a bit of influence on (some of) her readers. Many of the commenters on the opposition site (I’m likin’ it!) have stated that they read the blog, prayed for the child, and were heartbroken in moments when they thought he wasn’t going to make it, only to feel later like they had been misled. Many commenters point to incidences where they questioned *themselves* and their faith because of things this blogger wrote (or said at a major blogging conference.) The site provides a way for these people to connect and share a few “wow – I’m not crazy for thinking/feeling this” moments.
Hopefully the site can, respectfully, prevent others from experiencing the same things.
I don’t think bad things would happen if this blog ceased to exist, but I do think there will be many more frustrated, disillusioned readers in the months and years to come.
By the way, have you read some of the comments on the opposition site by women who have been threatened by this blogger’s supporters? (See I Am Barking Mad). Some of these women are young, Christian mothers who want to connect with others like them. In some cases, the blogger’s supporters have ripped into them so viciously that they were left feeling like God must be punishing them for something they did – they have not felt redeemed by God’s grace or loved by God’s followers. It is so sad to me that some people who are not Christian or who might be struggling with their faith see people acting like this “in God’s name” and think that all Christians are so judgemental and mean.
Hardly a situation I think an organization like Compassion International would want to be linked to, in my opinion.
And it can’t all be waved away with a “let’s all be Godly” talk or “don’t let Satan get you down” or “we are all imperfect sinners”. Especially, I think, since large sums of money are involved (according to a televeision interview given by this blogger.) Many people just want a person who claims to be a Christian blogger to do things in a way that is consistent with what she says she believes.
It is refreshing to engage in a civilized discussion on the internet. I find that is not always the case. And your point that you were writing about how people should address *you* was lost on me in your original post. Thanks for clearing that up!
Shaun Groves says:
Our blogger vetting process gets more and more robust but I haven’t found a way to vet every reader of every blogger who wants to travel with Compassion. ; )
The woman has a LOT of readers. I’m not surprised that some of them aren’t very nice. Statistically, speaking, that’s to be expected. I wish they’d be respectful and loving but if they aren’t it doesn’t hurt Compassion in the least. THEY aren’t traveling with us.
The opposition site has readers who are VERY hateful publicly toward me. Is their behavior something YOU should want to be “linked to?” Seems like a double standard at work from my vantage point. If we’re all to be concerned about tenuous associations with small groups of hateful people, well, shouldn’t you stop reading and participating in the opposition site formerly known as the hate site? ; )
Kelly says:
My point was that when I read the comments here it seems like those at the opposition site are characterized as hateful when they use unkind (mean, snarky, profane – whatever) words in their “critiques” but commenters on this blogger’s *own* site aren’t called out. It goes both ways.
(And I am *not* saying it is okay to be ugly disagreeing with someone on the internet. I completely agree with you that it does nothing to further the cause. And that’s not just for Christians – it’s for human beings and how they relate to each other.)
I do disagree with you that the “hate” comments on the blogger’s site (and the opposition site) don’t hurt CI. In fact, many commenters are/were CI supporters, including at least one CI Advocate, and they have been quite taken aback by the viciousness of the blogger’s supporters. Some people said they were thinking about sponsoring a child with Compasison but have chosen not to do so because of the issues that have been raised about this blogger’s qualifications for going on the trip.
And one (although probably not my final!) thought: according to CI’s vetting requirements, bloggers are supposed to write about Compassion *before* they go on a trip (this would presumably be during the time before they *know* they are going to be a Compasison blogger). What incidences did you find of this blogger supporting Compassion on her blog before she announced she was going on the trip?
Drew says:
Thanks for the post, and for the blogging. I’m kinda sad that your writing time is being taken up by this kinda thing instead of Compassion children or cake decorating (love those).
It took me awhile to find the “critique” site. I think your chosen adjective of it is appropriate and generous. Hate comes to mind while reading posts/comments there, not love. You are handling the matter with poise, sir. I think it’s unfortunate that groups like that contribute to society’s perception of community.
I love irony. I find it ironic that the people who have posted problems here are women. Sorry gals, but you are not doing the gossip/cut-throat stereotype any favors. I think drama excites the ladies.
On a personal note, thanks for being gracious on a continual basis. I got my first concert t-shirt from you (the cool, understated ear design for the “Invitation to Eavesdrop” tour) and got it signed right after the concert. I totally got to tell all my friends how awesome “Welcome Home” was before it blew up. Good times. I wore that shirt I bought (years ago) on a summer-long mission trip to the Philippines just last year. The signature faded into obscurity, but the message has stayed with me. “For His Renown.” Thank you.
p.s. Do you still break out the Michael W. Smith impersonation? That stuff is hilarious.
Hope says:
Oy! Ok, I didn’t read all of the responses, but here’s my take. It does not surprise me that it’s women bashing women. Saddens me beyond words, but surprise? Not so much. I will never understand the pecking order of women and I guess that’s why I am a misfit.
I will say this. I have read her blog and I’ve read the opposition blog some tonight and I read an opposition site in the past when things were a wee troublesome for me. I have enough struggles with my own relationship with the Lord and parenting my own children though, so I certainly don’t need to spend time picking her apart.
The bottom line for me is this, she does generate a lot of traffic to her site and someone asked if the amount of children getting sponsored was worth all of this drama and I would have to say, (although I am not in your shoes, Shaun) YES YES YES it is worth it. One child would be worth it, don’t you think? If the Shepherd would leave the 99 sheep to go after the one that was lost, how can any one of those children not be worth it? Scroll through all of the pictures of children that were sponsored that week and choose which ones it would be ok to leave out. It’s just not possible.
I read the blogs when Angie and Pete went on their compassion trips. I have tried to keep up with these trips, but Kenya wrecked me. I have no clue what has happened to me, but the Lord and I are in a state of tension and I have cried for two weeks. I thank God for Compassion and I thank you Shaun for your heart for the Lord and those in need. I am sorry you are going through this, but know this… I am forever changed because of this trip and I am forever thankful.
Donna Albert says:
I said I would continue to pray for you, but I didn’t realize just how much you were going to need it!
No one will agree with you all the time, but it seems you are being allowed to hone your respond-with-grace skills.
I was looking for a new blog to read… I think I’m officially ‘done’ reading at the two mentioned here.
Susan says:
What a great time to read this. I have a friend in a very public government position who is being drug through the mud right now. It is hard to read comments, etc… that are only half truthful in the paper and then negative, hurtful comments from readers via comments. It’s sad our society now uses this very public forum (Blogs, tweets, Twitter, etc…) to air very rude opinions – I often advise my 11 year old “yes, you have a right to your opinion but it’s not always right to air/voice it.” And it’s not the dissenting opinions I have a problem with but the character attacking ones.
“Glass houses” “He who is without sin, cast the first stone” = multiple reasons why we should be as careful in written word as we should be with personal confrontations. We are ALL capable of mistakes and mis-judgements. Thank God – He provided a perfect plan of redemption.
Anyway – very interesting post & comments. Thanks.
Shaun Groves says:
Praying for your friend this morning. And for you. All’s grace.
Thomas says:
Yesterday when I read through the comments and even left one, I found this all interesting discussion. Today I feel sad about this discussion. As I am writing this it say there are over one hundred twenty five comments. Most of them seem to deal with someone else’s blog.
This post generated more responses then the debriefing post about what us the reader took away from the Kenya Compassion trip. Something just seems amiss about this.
Thomas
Saddened says:
I am a Compassion supporter and really believe in what you’re doing. I have always felt great about recommending CI to anyone and everyone and have taken pride in the fact that it’s a solid organization and stays ‘above reproach.’
I would just like to say that I am saddened that CI is now in the situation of having to defend its integrity and becoming involved in this situation. I am not saying CI should and always will avoid conflict and/or controversy, but I think it may have been a better decision to avoid it in this situation. Praise God for the sponsored children and may the outcome of this glorify God, however it shakes out.
Thank you.
Shaun Groves says:
I’m with you, Saddened. Unfortunately, Compassion has never been able to completely avoid controversy and conflict. It comes with being human ministering to humans. We do our best to make the best decisions possible – our vetting process for bloggers, for instance, is increasingly robust – but sometimes we make mistakes and sometimes those we partner with make mistakes and sometimes our accusers make mistakenly believe we’ve made mistakes. With so many mistake-prone people in the world (all have sinned) conflict this side of heaven is unavoidable.
But we can choose to meet it with transparency, grace and kindness. Failing to do so would be the greatest mistake of all.
Pray for everyone at Compassion always. For wisdom.
So sorry to have let you down this time.
Saddened says:
I think you hit the nail on the head – transparency. I think that’s what this whole situation called for from the beginning from all involved and I question if the “blogger in question” was. No one knows except for those involved, and there is certainly nothing to be gained by debating that fact, but I know CI has always been extremely transparent (and I think this situation just proves that further).
I don’t think you owe me an apology, but I appreciate it – I am now and will always love CI and the work you do in the name of Jesus. I will always be proud of making a difference in a child’s life because God values them. I will pray for them, the CI workers both there and here, and know that you are all doing the best you can to seek the Lord’s will first above all else.
I think this is one of those things that had to happen sometime and perhaps it’s best earlier rather than later since we’re navigating this new(ish) medium. I am also praying for wisdom for you and all involved at CI to know how situations such as this will be handled in the future. This is tough and I would never want to be put in your shoes! Thanks for being willing to face the fire head on; I respect you very much for that!
Saddened says:
I do want to add this though: I am frustrated that you are the only one dealing with this. I think all parties should be making an effort to address it with the humility and transparency that you are, especially if it was their baggage (right or wrong) that brought CI into this. I think your apologies are much less necessary than other might be and therefore mean so much more.
misty says:
It is always amazing to me how we women try to tear each other down rather than build up. We are NOT enemies. We need other women!
It is very sad to me how some people can be so mean and tacky in their words. It is never okay to be mean to someone else, to try to hurt their feelings and call them names. Regardless of the situation.
Shaun, I am sorry that people feel it is okay to do those things to you and I think you handle them very well.
misty says:
I have to say…I went back and read some of the comments on here and thank the Lord that I have NO idea what most are talking about. 🙂
But, I can say that God’s greatest commandment to us was to #1 Love Him and #2 Love others. When we love others people who don’t know God wonder how we CAN love. It is not natural to be a loving person. We want what we want when we want it and how we want it. Beating people up with our words is NOT acceptable in God’s eyes.
In regards to the person who went on the trip who had a record.?!? Seriously, anyone who is judging him is actually questioning Gods ability to work in and through someones life. I have been doing jail ministry for almost 4 years and I could tell you stories of changed, reformed, renewed Christ filled lives! Anytime someone wants to sit back and judge someone based on past mistakes (that they have repented for, turned from and God HAS forgiven) they just need to step back and take a look in the mirror. God forgives, He heals, He renews, He is a God of changing loves. Praise Him for that!!
None of us are perfect and it hurts my soul to see believers tearing each other down. No wonder the lost have no desire to know who Jesus is because they CAN’T see Jesus lived out in the professing Christian’s lives. Heartbreaking….
Yael says:
Shaun–
In response to your request(I posted this before but have tried to come up with some “better” words):
Opposing?
Dissenting?
Objecting?
Rival?
Antagonistic?
Averse?
Defensive?
Gainsaying?
Disputing?
Disputant?
The welsh in me could come up with some more but that would be a *whole* other list.
This actually, became a family discussion. Which than became *another* discussion about faith–as I am trying to find my own.
I want to thank you again Your response, and this site has found a follower–A Welsh/Jewish/Christian follower–but a follower just the same. A follower who has found one more paving stone towards Him in a quest towards faith.
As I said before–and will say again:
Great site, great debate. And interactions from those who don’t always agree that are friendly and warm. It is a wonderful thing to see.
Shaun Groves says:
Wow, I like several of those words. Let’s see if any of them start getting used here by others.
So glad to be a very small part of your passage to Him. And so very glad to have you reading along.
Jen says:
If you claim to be a Christian, scripture assures that you will be tested. The one thing the Lord is most zealous of is His Name and His reputation especially when it is being twisted and leading His sheep astray. The opposing site doesn’t exist solely because the people in question are so popular, thereby you have deduced they are haters. It exists because many believe they are hypocrites. Not just non-believers, although they are always good at spotting hypocrites, but also believers who see it also. You are overly critical and judgmental toward this other site even in light of the facts which they brought forward. God will most definitely use one’s “enemies” to get His point across if one’s hypocrite friends fail to see the hypocrisy; whether that be because they are blinded to it, or participating in it. While that doesn’t mean the enemies will not be accountable for their actions if they are unjust or with cruel intent, it does mean you should not continue to label them unjustly because God has used them to bring valid issues to the forefront. Many people came to the opposing site because of said family’s involvement with CI. They felt that CI validated this hypocrisy and because of that hypocrisy, CI’s integrity has been questioned. Many people went to the opposing site to contend for the faith in Christ, because they feel it had been perverted, and did so respectively toward all parties. Jesus had no problem confronting His accusers because they had nothing substantial to stand on. They walked away with their tails between their legs. If people really want the opposing site to “go away,” accountability among peers would be a good place for said family to start.
Shaun Groves says:
I’m not speaking for “said family.” They can love their own enemies.
I’d like to see more use of the word “alleged” in this comment though. Alleged hypocrisy, for instance. Not proven.
My biggest problem with the sight-formerly-known-as-the-hate-site is that people are often presumed guilty until proven innocent and anyone not agreeing with that verdict is vilified, feelings and theories are communicated as proven verifiable facts, and friends of enemies are counted as enemies. This undermines the credibility of the community, makes it appear hateful at times, and makes the task of an outsider like me who’s sincerely looking for the truth very difficult.
I think that’s unfortunate because surely there is from time to time going to be beneficial criticism coming from it that should be taken seriously.
That is what this post was about: When a criticism is important it is crucial that it be communicated well and respectfully or else it could and should be ignored.
Thank you for the respectful comment here, Jen.
Jen says:
After reading your response, I fear the point I was trying to make has been lost. If the opposing site had no merit, the accusations being made there would have been addressed by said family long before the opposing site gained any steam. The opposing site would then stand corrected and have no merit. This has not happened. The issue I see CI and you personally now having is that the link to these issues and they don’t seem to be going away. It may be that it comes down to being a “Jonah” scenario. The storms stop when Jonah jumps ship. Until that point, however, everyone suffers. I pray this is not the case.
Lisa says:
Dearest Mr. Groves,
____________ did not have a disease. He had/has a very common congenital CONDITION that I, myself, also have. Let me repeat: it is a CONDITION and NOT A DISEASE. It’s called Supraventricular Tachycardia (SVT for short) and it’s a manageable high heart rate. Babies and children oftentimes have surgery to repair it and bam! All healed. I take medicine and I’m 40. Have for years. And I’m not on death’s door. He also has a PFO or a Patent Foramen Ovale, which is a tiny hole in his heart. I also have this. If his hole was large enough, they’d take him in and close the heart. It wasn’t, so he’s fine. Just like me.
____________ MILKED ____________’s condition for what it was worth from Day One. In fact, most of her blubbering nonsense was empty air. I can only imagine what his nurses and doctors thought of her doctoring comments. Sooooooo overblown. Especially the flatlining part.
She’s so full of crap she wouldn’t know the truth if it slapped her upside the head.
But it got her clicks. And they were able to walk away from another foreclosure and move up into a bigger, better blog-worthy home.
She is a figment of her own imagination.
Shaun Groves says:
I’m no doctor. I don’t know a condition from a disease. Sorry for the mistake and thank you for the correction.
Perhaps I didn’t say this clearly enough in the post. For that I apologize: Criticisms often have merit and should be taken seriously. However, disrespect and public accusation undermine the credibility of any criticism made, render it unproductive and should not be responded to.
I think there are a few other explanations for the way she wrote about her son’s condition that are more likely and logical than what you posit here, but, as I’ve promised, I won’t defend her. She can love her own enemies and make her own explanations if she chooses.
However, if I were her, and those accusations were being made publicly and as disrespectfully as yours has been made here, I wouldn’t respond. As my post has stated: There are two categories of complaints I ignore. And yours, as posted here, falls squarely in both.
Have you ever brought your concern to her directly, privately, without the inclusion of “blubbering nonsense was empty air” “soooooo overblown” “full of crap” “wouldn’t know the truth if it slapped her upside the head” “figment of her own imagination” and the like? Perhaps doing so would gain not only her respect but a courteous explanation as well.
Hopeful.
Lisa says:
Thanks for your reply, Shaun.
Indeed I have contacted “fill-in-the-blank” privately, respectfully, showing grace, yada, yada, yada MANY times over. Those emails have either been ignored or met simply with, “Well, it’s nice we live in America and we can both choose to disagree” nonsense. My guess is she’s embarrassed to have been approached by someone who knows a few more things about these “life threatening” conditions than she, and didn’t know how to respond. Pride likely got in her way as it always does.
Let me make something very clear: I’m not looking for this blogger’s respect. On the other hand, she lost my respect a long time ago. And I’m really not even looking for anymore of her explanations. She can’t seem to keep track of them anyway. What I think all of us would like is simple honesty. Lies add up, you know. And you can pepper all the posts you want with God’s grace this and God’s glory that, but when you’re defending someone who has serious character flaws such as those pointed out by so many, you can’t explain them away. It starts to make you look like the fool, Shaun. Shouting God’s name louder or more often doesn’t mean a hill of beans. It’s what you’re doing and how you’re living when noone is watching and when everyone is watching. In fact, when you’ve turned as many people away from Christ as you claim you’ve turned toward Him, it might just be time to take a closer look at your so-called heart for God.
I think “fill-in-the-blank” is nothing more than a narcissist who feeds off of the validation of others. She gets her rocks off by creating drama and adjusts her stories to fit her audience (Christian mommies) accordingly. I also think she’s figured out recently that it can actually pay the bills (they choose to pay).
Period. The end.
Laura Anne says:
You are leaving out the fact that her child’s doctors have gone ON THE NEWS and have CONFIRMED her son’s condition and how life threatening it was. She is not embellishing that. You have never seen the child in person and do not have access to his medical records. Stop with the lies.
Lisa says:
Laura Anne,
Her childs’ doctors have most certainly not “gone on the news” or even “confirmed” his condition AS SHE DESCRIBED IT. In fact, in all the news coverage she garnered and pitched herself, NOT ONE TIME did any of the doctors — Dr. A or Dr. B — ever step forward and give an on-camera interview. Being a public relations consultant myself, I found that rather off that the patient’s family was always in front of the camera, but the doctors treating their son never were. It was both a missed opportunity (if things were truly AS BAD as she made them out to be) for the hospitals and for the “fill-in-the-blanks” to gain some credibility after all the taking they chose to do.
When the patients families are getting that kind of press (likely pitching the stories to the news themselves), and the medical facilities and treating doctors stay back out of the picture, there’s a problem. And things don’t add up.
The fact is, he had these conditions. And neither was bad enough to warrant open heart surgery. Of course, she used this threat to garner more traffic for her only income blog, but saying it over and over does not make it so. The only thing unique to his SVT was the fact that his accessory pathway was lying directly on his AV Node. That’s it. And Boston is in the business of saving lives of children who have such uniqueness attached to their circumstances. There was no miracle. It was simply God guiding the doctors’ hands in doing what they’ve been well trained to do. But the words “flatlining” and “miracle” garner more clicks and traffic than “he’ll be fine” or everything’s under control; the doctors have this.”
She preyed on peoples’ stupidity on the topics (SVT and PFO) and assumed she was smarter. It backfired on her sadly.
I don’t doubt for one minute that he had SVT w/ a challenging accessory pathway and a PFO. But fact is, neither required open heart surgery. Ablation is about as common today as getting a crown put on a tooth. It’s all about EXAGGERATION for money!
Shaun Groves says:
Lisa, perhaps I wasn’t clear enough in my post here. I apologize if that’s the case: The credibility of accusations, complaints and criticisms is undermined when they are made publicly and disrespectfully. I will ignore all public and disrespectful accusations, complaints and criticisms of me or anyone else.
Please refrain from making them publicly (here on my blog) or I will restrict your commenting privileges for a time until passions cool and respectful dialogue can resume.
Again, you’re very welcome to respectfully confront the blogger via e-mail and, if the accusation affects Compassion in anyway, you’re welcome to e-mail me as well. However, I will ask for evidence to back up any accusation since everyone deserves to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
[email protected]
Hope says:
Indeed, as I stated earlier, I don’t need to be cleaning up her back yard when mine has it’s own thorn trees. However, I can assure you, I did in the past email her about a concern and never received a response. I also commented on her blog, not bashing her, but disagreeing with a statement she made, very respectfully I might add, and was flogged by her supporters.
The thing is Shaun, unfortunately, while this doesn’t necessarily seem to be a CI issue, it’s following under the “avoid every appearance of evil” thing. There is strong guilt by association at work. It’s sad, but I have to admit, I was concerned this might be the case when she said she was going. I still believe that the children that were and are going to be helped are worth it, but I had to be transparent and share that I have indeed tried to do things as you’ve suggested. Also, I know you mentioned she has changed her procedures, but frankly, I am not in a place where I can test those waters.
Shaun Groves says:
E-mail her about your concerns. She can defend herself better than I.
I believe Paul said to “make every effort to live at peace.” I’m confident that I’ve done so. Compassion can never be without controversy because we communicate and serve through human beings. You have my word, however, that we will always make every effort.
We’d appreciate your prayers to that end.
Hope says:
I understood, Shaun, and I thought I was quite clear that I was trying to be supportive of you and CI. I was just trying to share from the other side as well. I understand you are frustrated, but being condescending, that’s not the best option I would imagine. Nope, you aren’t the person in question, but she represented CI. We are Christians and as such, ambassadors for Christ. He certainly takes the hits for what a lot of us do as believers. I think there is a lack of understanding on your part as well and as for me? I’m out. There are other organizations besides CI.
Shaun Groves says:
Hope, I certainly was not being condescending. I apologize for giving that impression somehow. The written word is a terribly inadequate way to communicate sometimes isn’t it? It would help me to avoid such miscommunication in the future if you could let me know which line or lines gave that impression. Thankful for the help on that.
I hate to see you leave Compassion’s sponsorship program but there are many wonderful organizations in need of your support. Praying you find another place to give generously and with confidence.
I feel somewhat responsible for you canceling your sponsorship. I’d hate for your child to be without a sponsor for any length of time. Send me his/her sponsorship number and I’ll pick up the sponsorship personally. It’s the least I can do.
Hope says:
Hmmm, the condescending tone came in a post of yours that is no longer here in which you stated again that you aren’t the one to complain to about her blog and that point is not being understood. You are correct that tone is nearly impossible to read in print. Let me be clear, I would never give up on a child because I disagree with things being said or done. None of this has anything to do with the children being sponsored. I am out of the conflict and I don’t have to promote or ask people to sponsor children through CI. That was my point. All of this boils down to a choice. We can choose to be behind the leadership of CI or not. There are fantastic organizations out there such as Open Arms Internation.
Shaun Groves says:
Ooooh, yes there was a comment here that was a reply to someone else. It (and two others) accidentally got posted in the wrong place so I moved them where they belonged. They’re posted as replies somewhere in all these comments! ; )
I totally understand now. Out of context like that it certainly would seem a little condescending since they had nothing to do with what you posted! My apologies.
Glad for the clarification on all points, Hope. Thanks for your patience.
Jackie says:
Hey Shaun,
I have been a fan of your since early 2001 when one of our hometown boys wrote a song called Welcome Home and sang it for all of us here in East Texas on KVNE.That was you! I was so proud and have followed you ever since. But right now I could not be more proud of you. You are handling this unfortunate situation with such grace, dignity and most important with integrity. Good Job. I have been praying for you and the continued good works at Compassion International. You guys are making a difference.
Laura Anne says:
Shaun,
I am not the biggest fan of the blogger in question. She has behaviors that I do not like. But she is a person. She has feelings. She is human. And she is a sinner just like all of us. She has made mistakes, and so have I. I am not perfect either. While I may not like her, I do have empathy and compassion for the hardships she has endured. And I do respect her for helping to get a record number of children sponsored.
I also do not think that the behavior of her adversaries has been appropriate.
I deeply respect you for trying to address the concerns of the haters of said blogger. However, you might as well be trying to bottle blown bubbles. These people are full of hate. Nothing the blogger does or says or tries to do to change her life or behaviors will be good enough for them. They want to tear down this person. They want to see the blogger miserable. While they may say that they do not or try to argue that they do not hate her, their behavior suggests otherwise. They want to destroy this blogger and her family. Do not let them fool you to the contrary.
If you continue to engage them in debate, you will weigh yourself down. Nothing you say or do will make them happy. The only good council I can give you is to step back and pray for them.
Good has been done here. A record number of children have been sponsored. God is at work here. Of course there will be resistance. Sadly some people do not realize that they are being used as tools for evil instead of good.
Stay strong.
Shaun Groves says:
Laura Anne, I appreciate your kind words for me.
I think listening and communicating respectfully with someone who is angry (with or without cause) is the most difficult and one of the most Jesus-y things we can strive to do in our relationships.
Thank God Jesus has never ended the conversation with ME because it seems futile. Love is never futile.
Overwhelmed! says:
I am amazed with all of the comments about the so-called-hate-blog.
If she is who they say she is, then maybe this trip will humble her. God works in mysterious ways.
Good luck Shaun! God bless you and the work you do with Compassion. Remember, people will always complain about something!
Saddened says:
As I thought about this and prayed about this today, it became apparent that I owed you an apology Shaun – I’m sorry for not voicing my concerns beforehand. I fault myself for not doing that and believe I should have sent my concerns prior to the trip instead of watching what has happened, knowing all along the “storm” was brewing.
I’m sorry for hanging on to my concerns instead of voicing them. Thank you again for the grace and humility you’re showing in this situation.
Shaun Groves says:
Thank you for the grace an humility you’ve shown me in return.
erin j says:
whew…you must be exhausted!…i’m exhausted for you!…
i found you/CI from what i assume/know to be the blogger in question…and sponsored a child…
just thought i’d share…
p.s. – i still have “damage done” on my running playlist!
Shaun Groves says:
Congrats! on your new sponsored child.
And, ahem, ironic song choice ; )
Joy says:
Shaun,
I have to disagree somewhat here about making a public complaint. See, money was involved along with some very “reputable christian bloggers.” Emails were ignored as well as tweets.
And while I am slow to anger, no one would speak up and help resolve. Except for one person.
As far as women on the web. I very rarely see men stirring up the drama that I see women on here do.
Maybe I am missing the mark?! 🙂 But it was my only way to solve the problem.
And I read your blog from time to time because I sponsor a child through Compassion.
Kelly says:
Joy, what you said gets to the heart of this matter for me: money was involved, both for people who sponsor a child through compassion and for the blogger in question, who is making “a lot” of money from her blog. That is why many of her blog readers won’t just simply “click the X” and stop reading or critiquing her blog. When someone in the community employs dubious business tactics, you tend to want to get the word out so that people who “invest” in the business do so with wide open eyes.
Shaun Groves says:
“Allegedly employs dubious business practices” would be more accurate and slightly more respectful.
I’ve not found any evidence to back this often-made accusation by commenters on the site-formerly-known-as-the-hate-site. Nor has anyone sent me any evidence after numerous requests for it on my part. If it exists, please respectfully and privately forward it to me. I’ll gladly look into it. Innocent until proven guilty right?
This post was not about one blogger or one community of critics against one blogger. As I stated, almost every female blogger enlisted by Compassion (by me) has generated some complaints/criticisms. I wrote this post to explain how best to have one’s complaints/criticisms taken most seriously in the future.
Yet some critics are still complaining to me publicly (here on my blog) about one blogger and at the same time not providing me any proof (privately and respectfully) of said blogger’s alleged offenses.
I’m willing to hear any private, respectful accusations that are backed by evidence of any kind. I’d take such evidence very seriously.
I promise.
Kelly says:
Point taken, Shaun.
I hope you won’t receive complaints about Compasison bloggers (male or female) in the future, but if you do, I hope they are communicated respectfully and in private.
Amy says:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdQBurXQOeQ
I know I have more substantial thoughts to share on this topic, but I thought this video summed things up pretty nicely, too.
Shaun Groves says:
Whoa.
Moms Sanity Is Making A Comeback says:
As a person whom is NOT a Christian I give you kuddos for writing this post.
I had never even heard of said blogger until becoming a member of a networking site a few months back when I started my own blog.
The absolute hatred on the Internet is disgusting. I have seen parts of the “hate” site in question and personally DO believe it to be a hate site. The women on there comment about how other women are obsessed with said blogger because they post something on her blog. Well, it appears the women on this hate site spend MORE time then the “followers” of said blogger watching every move she makes and every word she writes!
My interpretation is that they want to see this bloggers marriage and family fall apart. Then what? So they can all sit around and cackle at what they have done and pat themselves on the back?!
I used to admire the Christian faith.(Im baptised Catholic but no longer attend church). But, honestly with what I see from “Christians” on some of these sites/forums highly makes me question it/them. I would much rather be a non church going woman who loves and respects others then hide behind my religion and poke fun at someone else 24/7.
When I think of Christianity… I admire people like you Mr. Groves. Perhaps more people should take a step back and stop throwing stones at one another.
Sarah says:
Shaun,
I’m rather at a loss for words here, but since I’ve been following this whole mess and praying for you in regards to it for some time, I thought I’d finally comment. I’m of the opinion that if you don’t connect with/enjoy/agree with/appreciate a blog, you simply don’t read it. It seems simple enough. I read the blog in question when there was a very ill child who desperately needed prayer. When his condition improved and talk moved on to topics that didn’t particularly interest me, I simply stopped reading. When I knew the topic would be a trip to Kenya with Compassion, you better believe I went back to read! (I tried to keep up with all your Compassion bloggers.) I was, ironically enough, directed to the “opposition site” (or whatever you would like to call it) by the blogger herself via a post in the middle of the Kenya trip. And I was just broken hearted to see the things written about Compassion. My family and I are huge supporters of Compassion and have been for nearly 15 years now. I’ve worked at headquarters in CO Springs and traveled with them several times. I actually had dinner with Wess during the time you were in Kenya, and we talked about what the unique and amazing way you are bringing Compassion to so many people who might never have heard of the ministry. I am so sorry that you’ve been dragged into a mess like this. I am discouraged that Compassion’s good name was being dragged through the mud. My husband and I had the conversation several times of whether or not I should attempt to defend Compassion at this “opposition site” but each time ended up deciding not to. I was so relieved and thankful when you did address the issues and accusations. I thought also about contacting the blogger in question to ask that she at least address the accusations against her that painted Compassion in a negative light. Again, I came to the conclusion that it’s just not my business and the Lord will lead her to do that if/when the time is right.
All this to say: I am incredibly impressed with how you’ve handled this entire situation. You’ve gone above and beyond the call of duty. You’ve represented yourself, your family, Compassion, Christianity, and the Lord very well. You’ve shown grace, courage, dignity, restraint, and wisdom. I am thankful for all you are doing, and in awe of how many lives you are changing (both the children released from poverty and the Americans released from wealth!). I will continue to pray for you and I sincerely and fervently hope this is the last time you ever have to address this unfortunate situation.
Thank you for all you do,
Sarah
Jennifer says:
Shaun,
Sheesh. I hate that I even know what you’re talking about. Hate even more that it’s a reality that needed addressed.
On the upside, cannot tell you how grateful I am to the Lord for your honesty, integrity, and transparency. The way you’ve addressed issues and made application, I feel, honors the reality of our call to love God, love our neighbors, and recognizes that we are all created in the image of God.
Your wisdom encouraged me.
Marcie Porterfield says:
Okay, so here is a crazy thought, but if the said blogger that is being criticized is A BIT OFF so to speak than there is definitely something wrong with the blog culture that we all end up so captive to the drama. If it is sensed that a person might not be representing herself or her family truthfully than simply not following seems to be the best strategy rather than keeping the drama going.
Shaun, kudos to you! I love what you said in the blog about the biblical ways of taking complaints to our brothers an sisters privately. Furthermore, the way Compassion is getting such an important word out about supporting kids in need through the blogging trips and concerts is truly exceptional.
Dawn~Canada says:
Complainers…ugh. I find I have very little patience with people when they complain, swear, or are just plain rude/disrespectful. Can’t even imagine what it must be like to try to moderate all the stuff that goes on here. May you continue to walk with His wisdom thru this one! (Cuz everybody’s watchin…good opportunity, eh?)
Lisa Q says:
Well said Shaun! We let ‘stuff’ get in the way and judge people harshly and unfairly. If we could only show a tiny bit of the grace our Father shows us.
So sorry that you have had to deal with so much regarding this blogger trip. It has overshadowed the whole purpose in many ways, but I trust that God’s will is done for these children in need.
Elaina says:
I didn’t have my computer for almost a week and honestly, maybe I should just disconnect for awhile longer. Holy cow. Holy. Cow.
All I know is God worked in my life through ALL (ALL. Of. Them.) of the bloggers and their posts about Kenya. I stated that in the comments of your debrief blog. I’m thankful for the posts and the pictures. God moved in HUGE ways in my life while y’all were in Kenya.
I appreciate this post and your approach. I’m sad it’s necessary. But I appreciate your approach and the way you’ve conducted yourself.
Karen says:
Hi Shaun, have found your blog today and interestingly enough another blog which was a ‘hate’ blog a few days ago. I was shocked by the vindictiveness of the women posting there. Supposedly Christian women (well most seemed to claim that anyway) and yet none were showing any Christ like behaviour. While not a Christian I do believe the bible mentions something about ‘casting the first stone’. It is something I try and live by, not always successfully I might add, but I try. I enjoyed reading this post about that issue. I hope you continue on with the wonderful work and that you continue to ignore the public complaints.
Shaun Groves says:
Thanks, Karen, for the encouragement. And thanks for reading along.
Jenof3 says:
Just wanted to say that I read her blog despite the negativity surrounding her (and her family). I have for about a year.
Up until she went to Kenya I had yet to ever hear of Compassion.
Sponsoring a child is on my heart right now; without my husband having “experience” with Compassion, we are working through the decision in our marriage, properly.
However, without her blog, experience, pictures, etc. I would not be sitting with my husband praying about this decision.
Just saying . . ..
Kim says:
I am a blogger and I know well the public complaints and name calling of which you speak. I have been called a two-faced hypocrite, in league with Satan, ugly, witch and have been told I am going to hell, simply because I blogged about looking at some piece of scripture or Christian idea in a different way.
All of these comments have been made on my blogs/journals (Cafemom) and I have responded to them, not in like manner, but directly and head on. That only made the complainer more riled. I don’t know what the answer is, but I do know we need to be more supportive and less judgmental.