THE BILLY GRAHAM RULE

[Honoluluwindow]

the policy of never being alone with a woman other than one's wife.
I think that this type of rule is counterproductive and foolish.
Why do you think it's a good idea if you think it is that is.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

the policy of never being alone with a woman other than one's wife.
I think that this type of rule is counterproductive and foolish.
Why do you think it's a good idea if you think it is that is.

Whatever its drawbacks, it does stop a lot of wagging tongues.

 

[Honoluluwindow]

Whatever its drawbacks, it does stop a lot of wagging tongues.

True that. But God forbid my wife starts thinking this is a good policy. I mean how long is a Christian man supposed to be untrustworthy?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

That is not a rule for all Christian men. I, for example, as a caseworker often made house calls with another case worker, of the opposite sex, requiring us to be alone in the car together for a while. It was a rule for himself, because of his nationally exposed condition, that he followed.

 

[St_Worm2]

I believe Billy's point was that an affair, or even an alleged affair, not only has the potential of ending his marriage, it could permanently derail his ministry (even if a woman lied about the affair and it could be proven that she did).

That's why his office door remains open and his secretary remains in earshot, seated at her desk just outside his office, during any counseling session with a woman.

 

[NothingIsImpossible]

Is that what Graham is teaching today? Hmm. Well I think it depends on the situation.

So lets say a friend of my wifes was coming over and spending the night. But my wife had to go out of town last minute. So me and my wifes friend would be sleeping in the same house (in separate beds obviously). Ignoring that the situation makes no sense, probably best not to be like that together without my wife. But if its like we are at a friends house and my wifes talking to her friends husband (hes showing her the addon for the new babys room) and I went with the guys wife to check out the computer they just bought and needed help with. That I would be ok with.

For the most part I have no issues with being with the opposite sex. We are both loyal and honest so no real worries. NOW.... if she had like a "crush" or something on a guy because he was cute or what not, in that case I wouldn't want them alone. Often times when we go to my wifes friends house its my wife, her friend and a few other women. The husbands aren't always there. Granted we are all in the same room. But if I go to the kitchen to refill my drink and one of them women is there we may talk, nothing weird about it. Just friends.

In some cases some of my friends are long time friends who I enjoy to be around but have no feelings for. They are like sisters to me (and sister in Christ). Most of my friends on Facebook are women. Just because I'm not a manly man who is into stereotype men stuff (like sports) so I get along better with women. My wife is fine with that. I mean I wouldn't be going on trips with the women anywhere unless my wife was there of course.

 

[Honoluluwindow]

Billy was doing this so as not to give anyone a chance to gossip or bear false witness.
The problem I see is that it has gone beyond that today. It has become that men need not be put into a place of temptation.
Surely I would trust my wife with Brother GRAHM!

But some pastor who thinks he shouldn't be with smother female because of temptation? That's a fail in my book

 

[redleghunter]

the policy of never being alone with a woman other than one's wife.
I think that this type of rule is counterproductive and foolish.
Why do you think it's a good idea if you think it is that is.

That rule of thumb is used by most medical professionals as they offer a chaperone.

The US Army also employs such a rule. Why? Because men have been accused by females of inappropriate behavior behind closed doors. You then have a "he said, she said" situation which can tarnish a reputation.

For example, there was once a pastor who went to visit his elderly flock in a retirement home. He took the bus to the other side of town. Upon completion of his fellowship with his flock, he noticed he needed change of the bus.

He goes into the candy store and they tell him he needs to buy something. Same thing at the news stand. He goes into a bar and the bartender agrees to give him change without buying anything. He goes out the door and Mrs. Lumkins a church lady from his church sees him coming out of the bar. Of course by next Sunday the word is out the pastor frequents a bar.

Of course the pastor is the victim of a heinous gossip circle, however sometimes appearances can and will destroy a reputation in good standing.

 

[redleghunter]

Billy was doing this so as not to give anyone a chance to gossip or bear false witness.
The problem I see is that it has gone beyond that today. It has become that men need not be put into a place of temptation.
Surely I would trust my wife with Brother GRAHM!

But some pastor who thinks he shouldn't be with smother female because of temptation? That's a fail in my book

In this modern society not many people think of the honor of a woman. There is that chivalrous outcropping to consider.

 

[St_Worm2]

I would trust my wife with Brother GRAHAM!

Of course, thanks to his long-term, SEMI-private counseling session policy (where women are concerned), you wouldn't have "trust" her

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

the policy of never being alone with a woman other than one's wife.
I think that this type of rule is counterproductive and foolish.
Why do you think it's a good idea if you think it is that is.

Then there was the office I worked at where one manager was fired and they installed small windows into every door leading to a private office. We figured out what THAT was meant to stop.

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

I don't like being alone with other women besides my wife, at work or anywhere for that matter. It is just that, these PC days, anything can be misconstrued as harassment. And gossip can be a problem too. Trust factor?

 

[Widlast]

the policy of never being alone with a woman other than one's wife.
I think that this type of rule is counterproductive and foolish.
Why do you think it's a good idea if you think it is that is.

With things the way they are these days it is just good policy.
It matters not that a person is innocent.
What matters is how ignorant people can play the situation.
Don't allow yourself to be played.

In the end it comes to the same old adage:
Evil prevails when the good do nothing (or in this case the good don't cover their ass).

 

[Big Drew]

the policy of never being alone with a woman other than one's wife.
I think that this type of rule is counterproductive and foolish.
Why do you think it's a good idea if you think it is that is.

I was taught this, as a deacon, years ago. The pastor explained that if a woman needed to discuss something with you then you should have your wife or another minister with you, just so no one else would get the wrong impression and think something was going on between you and the woman...also helpful if the woman is known for stirring up trouble, that way you have a witness that can disqualify her story. Same reason why, as a manager, when I've had to discipline an employee I've always had another manager present.

 

[Honoluluwindow]

I was taught this, as a deacon, years ago. The pastor explained that if a woman needed to discuss something with you then you should have your wife or another minister with you, just so no one else would get the wrong impression and think something was going on between you and the woman...also helpful if the woman is known for stirring up trouble, that way you have a witness that can disqualify her story. Same reason why, as a manager, when I've had to discipline an employee I've always had another manager present.

Yup, never trust a woman.
Not even a dead one

 

[Noxot]

early Christians such as clement of alexandria thought it was a good idea and thought that the non-Christians would be suspicious if such things did occur. in this day and age and in parts of the world such as USA I would think that such things are not a big deal.

most things can fall into their opposite. not trusting your wife to be around other males without you can be a problem as well.

 

[St_Worm2]

Yup, never trust a woman. Not even a dead one

Nice! I'll assume that was said pretty sarcastically.

Concerning this subject St. Paul said:

"Do not let immortality, or any impurity, or greed even be named among you, as is proper among saints" ~Eph 5:3​

Pastors and Christian counselors cannot continue to minister effectively if their characters are called into question. Even the hint of an impropriety could have ended the career of a man like Dr. Graham (or any other pastor or Christian counselor for that matter). Of course, Dr. Graham will be 99 this year (Dv), so I don't believe he's in the counseling business anymore

It's also a necessary precaution to take for the women being ministered to, because it's amazing how quickly a comment from someone like, "hey, I stopped by church a couple of times this week around lunchtime, and I saw Linda coming out of Billy's office both times I was there", can turn into an ugly rumor that spreads like gangrene (even though nothing happened). Then both parties, their marriages and/or their jobs, could be in trouble. However, if there's always a 3rd party witness to the counseling sessions, no problem.

Yours and His,
David

 

[ViaCrucis]

One of the rulings set out in the Canons at the first Council of Nicea was that members of the clergy ought to not have women living with them other than their mothers, sisters, aunts (etc):

"The great Synod has stringently forbidden any bishop, presbyter, deacon, or any one of the clergy whatever, to have a subintroducta dwelling with him, except only a mother, or sister, or aunt, or such persons only as are beyond all suspicion." - Canon 3, Council of Nicea

A subintroducta was a non-married, often virgin woman. Note that this doesn't exclude the wives of deacons, presbyters, or bishops since a subintroducta would be, by definition, a woman living with a man in a non-sexual relationship; the reason for this canon was to avoid scandal.

It's not a terrible idea to have ways of keeping our pastors and people whose work in the Church accountable and to not let them be in a position where they may take advantage of it. I think the idea of a man, married or not, avoiding women entirely to be kind of silly; we should ordinarily expect adults to behave themselves and control themselves and their urges--both men and women, and not treat them like children or uncontrollable horny teenagers.

As such, as it pertains to ordinary lay persons, if a church attempted to force such a practice it would be incredibly wrong and authoritarian to do so; as a means of discipline on our clergy the 3rd Canon of Nicea still seems like a good practical matter so as to avoid even the appearance of impropriety or scandal, though I believe rather than straight fiat there should be discernment and practical discretion emphasized.

At the end of the day our chief concern ought to be the right treatment of others, and not establishing rules for the sake of rules. Ecclesiastical disciplines ought to exist to serve and support the Faithful, not control or lord over the Faithful.

-CryptoLutheran