GRACE is a crisis management company frequently hired by Christian churches who have attained public notoriety for various forms of abuse of women and men, girls and boys. GRACE is brought in to manage the crisis by investigating the bad actors, then make recommendations for cleaning up the church's public image.
GRACE sells itself as an impartial business that can be trusted to root out abusers of authority. At the center of their marketing is their claim of objectivity in their research and the reports they write up for their clients.
For instance, on their page promoting their "Independent Investigations," they tell prospective clients repeatedly that they are "independent" and "objective." The page contains a table comparing what they offer to others engaged in this same work. Here are the first lines of their table:
Up in the top right, note GRACE declares the expertise in exposing and stopping abuse possessed by officers of Christ's Church is "none." This is how GRACE sells themselves to prospective clients.
GRACE lives off this declaration they make, that the officers of Christ's Church have no "expertise" in guarding their sheep. Prospective clients find this reassuring:
They're the experts. This is too hard and dangerous for us. We need to be about the work of the Kingdom—preaching, baptizing, celebrating the Eucharist, putting together the order of worship, doing weddings and funerals...
We don't have time for this stuff. Anyhow, it's so messy. They're the experts. Let's get them do it.
Note (in this same table above) what GRACE claims concerning who is "objective" in their investigations.
Is GRACE objective?
"Yes."
Is the church objective?
"No."
Why not?
Because the "Church leadership directly conducts or oversees investigation."
Let's think about this for a second.
Someone has to do the investigation, right? Why is it impossible for the officers of Christ's Church set apart for the feeding and guarding and protection of Christ's sheep to find out and stop abuse of their sheep and lambs? Are all church officers stupid? Blind and deaf? Illiterate? Hypocrites? Careless of the sheep? Loveless toward the sheep?
Do church officers not fear God in the knowledge that one day we will stand before our Lord and give an accounting for those precious ones He purchased with His Own blood? Do the officers of Christ's Church not remember what Jesus reported to His Father concerning His Own work protecting His sheep just before His death, during His High Priestly Prayer:
While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished... (John 17:12)
What audacity GRACE has, telling everyone they the are the trustworthy ones, and the pastors, elders, deacons, and older women of the Church are not trustworthy.
Why can GRACE be trusted?
Because GRACE is objective.
What can't the Church be trusted?
Because the Church is not objective.
Have GRACE's employees read Acts 20 where the Apostle Paul reminds his former elders of Ephesus what faithfulness he showed in his pastoral work?
I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.
Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock... (Acts 20:26 ff.)
How does GRACE get away with trashing the officers of Christ's Church in this way? Has not God set apart pastors, elders, deacons, and their wives, to guard His flock? Where does Scripture declare this to be the work of some parachurch corporation?
What is never said, but must be: GRACE is a business seeking clients.
Here's a screen shot from the financial page of their 2022 Annual Report:
Of their total "revenue" of $1,063,000, only one fifth ($200,000) came from gifts and grants. Where did the rest of their "revenue" come from?
What they label "institutional response" and "safeguarding."
Payments are not gifts and grants. Payments are what someone hiring you pays you for your work. And what is GRACE's work?
Producing reports such as the following, and their first word in their title declares their absolute integrity and objectivity:
GRACE vaunts its own "independence," but of what or whom?
Are they claiming to be "independent" of Pennsylvania's law enforcement and judiciary? Independent of Philly's DHS (Department of Human Services)? Independent of Tenth's denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America? Independent of Tenth's local church governing body, Philadelphia Presbytery?
Maybe GRACE is speaking only of local church authority when it claims it has produced an "Independent Report?"
Of course they are only speaking of the local church when they claim independence. This is the significance of this word "independent" ubiquitous across GRACE's website.
But is their claim of independence from the local churches they investigate true?
From the FAQ document linked to GRACE's "Independent Investigation" page:
What is a third-party GRACE investigation?
GRACE conducts independent third-party investigations devoted to pursuing the truth. As investigators, we follow the facts wherever they may lead. Being independent means that GRACE investigators are never directed or controlled by any person or institution, including the institution that requests the investigation.
How does one little change open up our understanding of the above?
Being independent means that GRACE investigators are never directed or controlled by ...the institution that purchases/pays for the investigation.
Wait a second. Doesn't GRACE sign an "Engagement Agreement" with every church they investigate, and doesn't that agreement limit Grace's investigation to what their client wants to be, and does not want to be, investigated?
Again, from the same GRACE FAQ document:
What does the scope of an investigation usually cover?
some institutions ask GRACE to evaluate the institution's culture and environment, which includes understanding how the institution has historically responded to allegations of misconduct over time. Other times, an investigation is more narrowly defined in scope and GRACE is asked to investigate specific allegations about a particular person or a particular set of circumstances at a specific point in time. In either case, we provide feedback and analysis relevant to the scope of the investigation
"Scope of the investigation." Sounds innocuous until the reader realizes this "scope" limits GRACE's investigation to what their client agrees to in the "Engagement Agreement."
What is this "Engagement Agreement?"
It is the contract the church and GRACE negotiate and sign before the church pays GRACE.
When GRACE sells its expert services for money, then claims they are independent in their work investigating and reporting on the very people paying them, it's an indication of how credulous Evangelicals are today.
How does GRACE get away with it without being questioned or challenged?
GRACE knows they can make these claims with impunity because the project we're all about today is rebelling against, and destroying, proper God-ordained authority. GRACE is merely being very helpful in that project. Their real product that matters to the wider Evangelical community isn't simply write-ups on this and that abuse at this and that church, but the underlyinbg message constant in their work and ads that the Church and Her officers are incapable of protecting their sheep and can't/shouldn't/must not be trusted with that work.
The work of protecting Christ's sheep and lambs.
No one wants to think about the fact that GRACE gets paid to spin this tale.
Yet GRACE has agreed beforehand (and their pay is conditional upon their keeping that agreement) that they will direct their investigation and limit it to the "scope" the church hiring them has negotiated with them.
One final thing missed until just now, wrapping up this article. Take another look above at the financial page from GRACE's 2022 Annual Report—right side, middle:
"Discounts" on "investigations."
In other words, churches pay for their own investigation and limit that investigation as they choose. Then, sometimes, GRACE helps them with their payment by giving them a discount.
But that they are paid by those they investigate could not be more clear.
Journalists have a maxim: "Follow the money."
Musicians have a maxim: "He who pays the piper calls the tune."
There's no question many church officers fail to guard and protect their sheep. There's no question that, when such failures grow to the point of needing outside help, other church officers must be brought in to help right the ship.
This is Biblical. This is what the New Testament Epistles demonstrate and command, repeatedly. This is what Acts 15 documents, exhaustively.
Let GRACE get paid for crisis management by parachurch corporations.
Good article. A couple of thoughts:
(1) The problem this essay lays out starts because the Church does not investigate itself. It's not that the Church doesn't have the expertise--common sense and basic morality are enough-- but it doesn't have the will. In a presbyterian system like 10th's,the Presbytery is supposed to do it, and there was something done there, but it wasn't complete. Why didn't 10th pay the Presbytery to investigate thoroughly? But in an independent megachurch, there's no presbytery, no bishop to call in.
(2) Sometimes the Presbytery is corrupt too. Or the church is independent. The Church, capital C, can still help. 10th coul have asked some other local church to investigate, and could even have paid them.
(3) The essay properly notes that the "scope" of investigations is controlled by the church being investigated. They can say "Investigate Pastor Smith", but prevent the investigator from investing Smith's successor, Pastor Brown, when the investigator finds that Brown is even worse.
(4) Even if the consulting firm doing the investigation is truly independent, there is a problem. y "truly independent" I mean they can ask any questions, see any documents, and publish their report unedited by the church. Even then, however, the consultants are paid by the church being investigated. That's fine for the particular investigation--- the money is paid before the report is done. But think about future investigations. What church is going to hire a consultant who got the entire staff of another church fired for malfeasance? The consulting firm will be very tempted to go easy, and to limit damage, in order to get future business.
Thus, if a consulting firm *is* to be used for expertise or something, it should not be paid for or selected by the church being investigated; it should be paid by the presbytery or bishop or church called in as a helper.