RFC Abuse Allegations[edit]

I see no consensus to include the text in this discussion. This basically hinges on WP:SYNTH, and the argument put forth that the inclusion would be synth is strongly supported by those supporting inclusion having to reach for sources outside of what would be cited to support the connection. Furthermore in the two sources cited for the inclusion in the Sword of the Spirit article there is a single mention of the Sword of the Spirit, This family is part of another religious group, The Sword of the Spirit, that has strong ties to the celibate brotherhood that Treadwell was in. This demonstrates concerns of WP:DUE not being met were not adequately answered. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:23, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This RFC concerns whether abuse allegations against Jamie Treadwell should be in the article. Treadwell is a member of Sword of the Spirit (SoS) and, at the time of the alleged abuse, was a member of Servants of the Word (SoW), SoS's celibate brotherhood. Minnesota Public Radio reported that Servants of the Word leadership had received at least 4 reports of Treadwell's abuse before one family's allegations went public towards the end of the 2010s.--Jerome Frank Disciple (talk) 14:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jerome Frank Disciple's draft text[edit]

I drafted a potential version of the disputed material above; LinnCDoyle2 expressed agreement with this text; Arbitrarily0 did not. Here is the version:

In January 2020, Michigan Radio reported that it had spoken to two families who had accused a member of Servants of the Word, Jamie Treadwell, of child sexual assault.[1] At least one of those families had taken their concerns to Servant of the Word leadership, and the group's leadership subsequently admitted to knowing of at least four "similar allegations" concerning Treadwell that had been reported to authorities.[1] Treadwell cut ties with Servants of the Word in 2019 after an internal investigation, and, in May 2022, he pleaded no contest to attempted criminal sexual conduct—he was sentenced to 14 days in jail and required to register as a sex offender.[2]
  1. Smith, Lindsey (January 30, 2020). "Multiple families accused man "living single for the Lord" of child sexual assault. He's still free". Michigan Radio.
  2. Smith, Lindsey (April 13, 2022). "Man investigated by Michigan Radio sentenced to probation, will be on sex offender registry". Michigan Radio.
Factual errors in draft (fixed)

Summary of RFC by LinnCDoyle2[edit]

This RFC hopes to settle a disagreement between editors as to the removal of information regarding an abuse case involving a member and branch of the ministry which is the topic of this wiki by @Arbitrarily0:. Any input as to the inclusion or removal of this content from this article is highly appreciated.

@Arbitrarily0: believes the information should be removed. The case made is that:

@LinnCDoyle2: believes the information should be retained. The case is made that:

The following sources were included with respect to reporting of the abuse case: MPR Radio 1, MPR Radio 2, MPR Radio 3, The Independant, Belfast Telegraph

The following sources were included to provide illustration of treadwell role as a member of servants of the word within sword of the spirit - though are independent from reporting of the abuse case: Sword of the Spirit website (See pg28 - "Jamie Treadwell is a noted artist who works in pastels, watercolors and acrylics. He is a member of The Servants of the Word, a lay missionary brotherhood of men living single for the Lord, and he is the Regional Youth Program Director of Kairos in Europe and the Middle-East, the international youth program of The Sword of the Spirit."), Sword of the Spirit website 2 (See pg 89 "Jamie Treadwell is a life coach and a noted artist who works in pastels, watercolors and acrylics. He is a member of The Servants of the Word, an ecumenical lay missionary brotherhood of men living single for the Lord, and mission leader in the Sword of the Spirit. He is currently based in London, UK."); Detroit free press october 4th 1998 page 2H

Under the bio for jamie treadwell under 'occupation': "Director of Youth Initiatives, a cross-denominational youth group. Manges 12 full-time staffers and 30 volunteers. One of 40 members of Sword of the Spirit missionary organization active in seven countries". LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 12:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@LinnCDoyle2:, I edited your comment just slightly to make it a little easier to read and better align with WP:RFCBRIEF. Obviously feel free to revert.--Jerome Frank Disciple (talk) 14:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated. @Jerome Frank Disciple @Arbitrarily0 please feel free to edit my presentation of your cases made also if I have misunderstood anything here. LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 18:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

!Votes[edit]

Summaries for the discussion closer[edit]

User:Random person no 362478479[edit]

I think the decision whether to involve information about or relevant to one organisation in an article about another related organisation depends to a large degree on how close, how intertwined those organisations are. We have information that shows that Servants of the Word play a major role in Sword of the Spirit, so it is reasonable to include the information on Treadwell. A major allegation against Servants of the Word, i.e. that they new about allegations of sexual misconduct towards children against Treadwell, but let him continue working with children, is relevant to Sword of the Spirit. Just how closely intertwined the two organisations are can be told by the fact that of the eight leaders of Sword of the Spirit three are also leaders of Servants of the Word. For this reason I believe that the draft text proposed by Jerome Frank Disciple should be included in the article. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 23:42, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:LinnCDoyle2[edit]

I support the draft text proposed by Jerome Frank Disciple for inclusion in the article.'

The Servants of the Word are already a topic of this wiki, as is referenced description of the relevance of the Servants of the Word to the Sword of the Spirit. Additional background research performed by editors verifies the connection between the two groups. Additionally this source which is used in the proposed draft explicitly notes "strong ties" between the Servants of the Word and Sword of the Spirit.

The proposed draft describes handling of reporting of sexual abuse to Servants of the Word leadership over a decade, which I believe is notable, and of clear relevance to this wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LinnCDoyle2 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello![edit]

Maybe I'm missing something, but my understanding is that the closer gives a closing summary explaining his or her decision, not that the users involved make closing arguments. Could be wrong! Either way, I'll add this to WP:Closure requests since everyone seems ready for a close.--Jerome Frank Disciple (talk) 16:32, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're right "closing summary" has a specific meaning here. I have renamed the section "Summaries for the discussion closer". -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 18:18, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In hindsight, particularly given the new section title, I regret having created a subsection called "Hello!". Well, at least the closer will be able to quickly spot that I'm the village idiot here. :) --Jerome Frank Disciple (talk) 18:56, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Every village needs one. :) -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 19:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

General notes[edit]

Hello! I just wanted to check in on this page with some fresh eyes and give some feedback, in case anyone still, for some reason, cares what I have to say :) I really don't want to introduce errors into this article, and I'm not so arrogant as to think that a close enough reading of Csordas's book will render me competent, so I want to document my rationale for the changes. Namely, relying on the aforementioned book, I'm trying to make the timeline cleaner. We jump all over the place a bit in this article:

I'm editing the article to add some clarity, and I'm relying on the Csordas timeline, which I'll restate below:

1960s(ish) Word of God founded by Steven Clark and Ralph Martin.: 80 
1972 Servants of the Word, a celebrate brotherhood within Word of God, created; Clark is the leader.: 84, 90–91 
1980–81 Word of God leaders start a training course headed by Clark; the training course is noted for the rigid background principles that informed it—an understanding of faith that placed high demands on adherents. Many members are ostracized/condemned. There's considerable uproar that will reverberate for the next decade.
1981ish A thing called Association of Communities splits—some communities join Word of God, which calls the collection of communities (including itself) the Federation of Communities
1982 Federation of Communities, under the leadership of Word of God, changes its name to Sword of the Spirit
1991 A schism(ish). The Word of God leadership (i.e. Martin) effectively renounces the rigid vision that guided the training course. Clark, on the other hand, thinks the principles are sound and should be continued, even if he admits the training course was awkwardly implemented.: 93–94  Several communities, including the Word of God, seeking more autonomy, decide, by vote, to become "allies" of the Sword of the Spirit. (The "allied" designation is meant to indicate that the communities are still part of the federation but that the federation leadership will have less control.): 90  Servants of the Word—the celibate brotherhood led by Clark—claims that it is an autonomous organization and therefore not bound by the Word of God vote; it chooses to remain firmly within Sword of the Spirit.: 90–91 

--Jerome Frank Disciple 14:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JFD
Thanks a lot for getting involved in this article - it certainly is useful :)
  • An introduction for Csordas seems useful. I would keep it short and sweet - i.e. "Thomas Csordas, a professor of Anthropology who provides study of the Charismatic Renewal".
  • Moving the introduction of the training course to history seems like a prudent move to me - it would make the article more understandable.
  • I would agree that there are too many pull quotes in the article. That said - there is a lot of pushback on pretty much every edit recently - so it is perhaps useful to keep everything as true to the source as possible until that simmers down again.
  • WRT to timeline what you have is a good start. I do intend to get round to a bit more detailed timeline with more references here - there is a lot to add WRT the involvement of People of Praise Derek Prince and the Shepherding Movement as well as some peripheral involvement of John Wimber of the Vineyard Church and groups like the Promise Keepers. Unfortunately I have less time to edit currently, so this will need to happen as and when I have the time.
  • One thing I would appraise you off - Csordas recount of the 'Schism' does not seem to be entirely accurate. Rather than an internal disagreement between Clark and Martin over the training course (though this was a result, but not the cause) the split was largely due to several bishops and archbishops ordering parishes to disaffiliate with the Sword of the Spirit. This is mentioned in some of the news sources, and a little bit of OR confirms that this is indeed corroborated. I would still go ahead and make your edits - I just would not frame the root cause of the split as an internal dispute - as this certainly seems not to be the case.
As I say - when I have the time I adding a robust history here is on my "to do list" - so I will come in and tidy up anything after the fact if that is good for you?
LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 11:48, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Appreciate the thanks, though of course it's not necessary :) And I think reader understanding is key—for me, the problem wasn't so much that the training course was absent from a particular section as the fact that it was mentioned offhand in a section (without any explanation of what it meant).
I thought I saw Csordas say the schism also owed to that—or at least that he documented the bishops / archbishops dissatisfaction? But of course he does suggest the internal split caused it. Given that we rely on Csordas for a quite a bit, we should include his analysis but also include the others—we should reflect the reliable sources, even if there's disagreement, and our opinion of which source is correct doesn't count for much. It could be that both are right—that the Word of God adopted allied status in 1991, and then, as communities with Sword of the Spirit were censored, more communities joined Word of God (or disaffiliated altogether). Looking forward to your edits—always happy for more details! --Jerome Frank Disciple 13:05, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you to both Jerome Frank Disciple and LinnCDoyle2 for a fruitful and civil collaboration thus far. Hopefully we can involve more editors other than you, Jerome Frank Disciple, but thank you very much for your attention to this topic. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 15:10, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hope so too! I think the changes I made above were really necessary for article readability, I've made a few more edits in that vein today, but I do think the editors who are most interested and familiar with this subject—that is, you and LinnCDoyle2 (and maybe also Random person?)—should guide the expansion of the article—just bear in mind that Wikipedia is generally written for nonexperts (like myself!).--Jerome Frank Disciple 15:39, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jerome Frank Disciple: Can you comment on this? It is another case where the pre-foundation/post-foundation distinction comes into view. That said, like any conservative Christian organization, Sword of the Spirit presumably embraces complementarianism. Pinging User:LinnCDoyle2 as well. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 07:53, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
presumably does not make a good case. This seems like your original conclusion, and as previously noted is not stated in the referenced text.
Please review pg 89 - 130
There is extensive discussion of male headship.
It is discussed with clear relevance to Sword of the Spirit in addition to discussion of pre-formation history.
This is corroborated by other secondary sources used throughout this article. LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 11:33, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can't review 40 pages right now, but I think it's safe to say that nothing that is in the pre-foundation section should be included unless it's explicitly mentioned as being part of the org post-foundation. We can't just assume an idea continued.--Jerome Frank Disciple 15:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:LinnCDoyle2, can you provide a page number for where gender complementarianism appears post-foundation? That's all we would need. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 17:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From Csordas:
Pg 89, during discussion of tensions in Sword of the Spirit throughout the 80s.
"The intensity of behavioral restrictions created family tensions, particularly in two respects. First was the increasingly specific prescription of male headship and gender discipline."
Pg 113
"Stated in more theoretical language, the Sword of the Spirit's claim to leadership among Charismatics had been predicated on an implicit structural opposition between dominant male and submissive female"
Pg 118, when discussing the training course of the Sword of the Spirit in the 80s
"a gender ideology that explicitly subordinated women to men"
See for example of corroborating secondary source:
"Women are kept in a subservient role"
There is of course much much more throughout literature, however this seems sufficient to make it clear that this is an accurate description of gender roles in Sword of the Spirit.
If there is any dispute over interpretation an alternative quote can be pulled from Csordas research output:
"those in the Sword of the Spirit were taught that a motto for women should be “make a space” and a motto for men should be “seize the territory”. These mottoes are intended to prescribe distinct gender roles for women and men."
Do not use Complementarianism.
Complementarianism defines a difference in treatment between genders.
It does not, however, define a subservient role of one gender to another implicitly. LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 17:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Complementarianism ... obviously wikipedia isn't its own source, but the article you linked says, "Complementarians assign primary headship roles to men and support roles to women based on their interpretation of certain biblical passages." Isn't primary/support equivalent to "leader/subservient"? Regardless, I would say that we should use a term like complementarianism unless we have a source.--Jerome Frank Disciple 17:43, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The term is not used in the Csordas text at all.
The term did not even exist until 1988, so seems unlikely to be what Clark and Martin were teaching in 1982.
Maybe read more into the wiki article on Complementarianism.
There are interpretations that do not follow the traditional Abrahamic gender hierarchy of male over female - for example see the section on "Complementarian movements within feminism" - which specifically state a non-hierarchical interpretation. LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 17:59, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, claiming the Csordas text does not discuss gender roles in Sword of the Spirit is erroneous, and blanking related text seems unconstructive. LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 17:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine that we use the word "complementarianism" even though Csordas does not, as long as that's the most precise way to label what he's describing. I've linked it to Christian views on marriage#Complementarian view, which is unambiguous. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 21:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Arbitrarily0
That link relates to marriage.
The Csordas text does not.
It is clear multiple editors do not think "complementarianism" is suitable here.
Csordas does not mention complementatianism.
It is not suitable for us to assume an additional set of beliefs of the Sword of the Spirit, simply because they practice gender hierarchy in some form.
Please discuss here prior to further editing. LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 22:39, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jerome Frank Disciple: can you arbitrate on this? Thanks, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 10:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would lean towards not including a term of art (which I think complementatianism is?) without some source also using that term—doesn't have to be Csordas, of course, could be anyone.--Jerome Frank Disciple 12:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual Editing[edit]

@Arbitrarily0: @Jerome Frank Disciple: @Random person no 362478479:

There is some extremely unusual editing surrounding mention of Saint Paul's Outreach.

I am currently looking at a snapshot of this page.

This snapshot contains the text "We are linked with three significant organisations worldwide: Sword of the Spirit (SOS), University Christian Outreach (UCO), St. Paul’s Outreach (SPO)"

This snapshot was accurate when I viewed the page a day previous.

However it seems that in the hours prior to this edit by @Arbitrarily0: the page in question was modified and the prior quoted text removed.

I am unsure of how to manage this. Advice would be greatly appreciated.

I will add this source, which contains the same information for now.

LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 23:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LinnCDoyle2, I think your solution is fine. What's ultimately needed here is secondary sources for the "outreach" section, because the primary sources can be modified. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 10:16, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At any rate, I don't think we should include any items in the external links section for (1) independent communities, and (2) pages that have their own articles (e.g., Word of God (community), Saint Paul's Outreach. Otherwise it will be very unwieldy. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 10:27, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Outreach[edit]

@Jerome Frank Disciple: Can you give some input on what, if anything, should be done to the "Outreach" section? It's just based heavily on primary sources. Should we keep it as is? Compress it? Arbitrarily0 (talk) 10:41, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! So, the first thing I'd personally do is look for reliable sources that discuss any of those programs. (I might be able to help out a little later today! Schedule is uncertain.) If non can be found ... yeah it should probably be compressed.--Jerome Frank Disciple 12:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Religious practices[edit]

@Jerome Frank Disciple: Are you up for offering another third opinion? It seems like User:LinnCDoyle2 both respect your opinion, and at this point you know quite a bit about this subject. We have disputed over this edit. I think that the Charismatic Renewal should be mentioned here, as it was previously, because these practices are all typical of the Charismatic Renewal (the entire Charismatic Renewal is presumably disdained for these practices, not just this organization). Secondly, I think the reference to exorcism should be removed, because the linked source (p. 123) states that exorcism (in the usual, ritual sense) is not intended: “Exorcism” is simply a traditional word for either casting out evil spirits or telling evil spirits to leave a person or a place free. In explaining the prayer of exorcism we should say that we are simply going to pray the same kind of prayer that is part of every Catholic celebration of the sacrament of baptism. My argument is that by including "exorcism" in its technical, theological sense we mislead the reader. Finally, "demonology" is not mentioned in the sources. LinnCDoyle2, feel free to respond if I'm missing something. Thank you for your input, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 18:27, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not ready to give an opinion yet, but just for my sake, I'm going to tq2 both of these variations, because it seems to me like the difference here is subtle.

Religious practice within the Sword of the Spirit and other covenant communities within the Charismatic Christianity movement include a range of practices from Pentacostalism. These practices have historically included Exorcism and Demonology, Speaking in tongues, Spiritual gifts (or 'charisms'), Faith Healing and Prophecy.

or

Religious practice within the Sword of the Spirit include a range of practices from Pentacostalism. These practices have historically included Exorcism and Demonology, as well as practices seen elsewhere in Charismatic Christianity, such as Speaking in tongues, Spiritual gifts (or 'charisms'), Faith Healing and Prophecy.

(Completely unrelated ... should those wikilinks really all be capitalized?)
Unfortunately, I ... don't actually understand the "ritual" vs. "technical" distinction you're referencing.
I'm also a bit confused by the claim that exorcism isn't common through Charismatic Christianity ... I found a few sources that said otherwise?
  • Here's a book chapter by Michael J. McClymond :Charismatic gifts – e.g., tongue-speaking, healing, prophecy, and the casting out of demons (exorcism, deliverance) – were commonly reported phenomena in the Christian communities of the New Testament era and well into the second and third centuries CE. These phenomena are today generally associated with Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity and yet they have had a more continuous presence and role in church history than commonly recognized.
  • And here's an interview with R. Andrew Chestnut, the Walter Sullivan Chair in Catholic Studies and a professor of religious studies at VCU, which notes that Chestnut had opined that "charismatic Christianity has been behind a revival of exorcisms among Protestants".
@Random person no 362478479: If you have any background understanding on this subject, you are infinitely more qualified than me to help resolve (what seems to be?) a minor dispute here.--Jerome Frank Disciple 18:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks User:Jerome Frank Disciple. Sorry for making an unclear distinction. By "ritual" exorcisms I mean what are called "major exorcisms", usually dealing with someone who is thought to be possessed. "Minor exorcisms" (what I called exorcisms in the "technical" sense) are a part of the Christian rite of baptism, which are the kind intended by the source in question. Both forms are endemic to Catholic Christianity, but the major exorcisms are only done by priests. Since this organization is predominately Catholic, presumably that's why the (primary) source wants to make clear that only minor exorcisms (the kind found universally within Christianity) are to be practiced. That's why I think it's best to remove the exorcism part altogether. So here's what I would propose:

As a charismatic Christian organization, the Sword of the Spirit practices the charismatic gifts, such as prophecy, speaking in tongues, and healing.

And I would propose not putting this in its own subsection, but in the lede of the description section. On the other hand, since this passage does not say anything which distinguishes Sword of the Spirit from other charismatic Christian groups (neither my version nor the others), I'm also okay with removing it entirely. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 17:20, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for my radio silence. I've been taking a mental health break from wikipedia for a couple of weeks.
As far as I understand, charismatic groups perform exorcisms in the weak deliverance sense. If we include information about this we should make it clear that they are not performing the kind of full blown ritualized exorcism that the catholic church uses. Most people will understand the word "Exorcism" in the latter sense (or more likely they will picture scenes from The Exorcist or another horror movie).
Whether or not we should include the information at all depends on how common and how important it is within Sword of the Spirit. In particular we should not rely on information about charismatic groups in general, but only on specific information about the practices of SotS. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 09:48, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From Cultic Studies Journal, 1994, Volume 11, Number 1, pages 77-87
"In reading the testimonies and accounts of cults, covenant communities, and shepherding/discipleship groups from the Moonies to the Branch Davidians to the Sword of the Spirit, we discover a strong and consistent emphasis on evil spirits. It is an emphasis that differs significantly from that in traditional Christianity, and it becomes an important tool for control of the lives of the members of these groups. In what follows, we will outline the "demonology" typically used by the covenant communities."
It seems the primary source (the Life in the Spirit book published by Sword of the Spirit) and the secondary source (the journal article) agree that demonology and exorcism is practiced within Sword of the Spirit.
The primary source does imply prayer of deliverance.
However secondary sources like this one report individuals who through OR we are aware are SoS members and leaders, performing "the exorcist" type rituals.
Exorcism and Demonology are not absolutely typical of Charismatic Christianity - for example divisions of Wimber's vineyard church have been cut off for this sort of practice in the past.
In either case I think the current text is absolutely fine.
There is no reason to hide information on demonology and exorcism here. LinnCDoyle2 (talk) 09:25, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ralph Martin seems to be big on demons to too:
https://www.renewalministries.net/files/freeliterature/novaetvetera11_1martin_(2).pdf
https://vdocuments.mx/the-authority-of-the-good-shepherd-overcoming-evil.html
I'm still on the fence on the question of "exorcist style" rituals. In the case reported in that secondary source it isn't clear whether the affiliation with SotS was a factor. On the other hand the current text is not explicit on the question of what kind of exorcism is performed in SotS. I just wish they had google friendlier names. Whether it's "Ralph Martin", "Steve Clark", or "Sword of the Spirit", in each case most of the search results have nothing to do with what we're looking for. Finding good sources is a real challenge here. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 14:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Categories