Solid Proof That PJ Smyth Has Known For Many Years That John Smyth Was Violently Abusing Boys Left in His Care

By | March 3, 2017

Hello Readers:

The following article provides concrete proof, by referencing a report created by a world-famous human rights lawyer and other credible sources, that for many years, Pastor PJ Smyth of Covenant Life Church has known that his father was violently abusing boys left in his care.

Please read it.

Thank you. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

 

19 thoughts on “Solid Proof That PJ Smyth Has Known For Many Years That John Smyth Was Violently Abusing Boys Left in His Care

  1. Jack

    Janna,

    CLC is soooo guilty of covering up of sexual abuse they deserve this guy if they don’t have the common sense to question his remarks. It kind of reminds me of when the Israelites made Saul King. They so desperately wanted someone to take over and tell them what to do. CLC wants someone to do the same. Someone to take over, fill the seats and the bank accounts. God will not be mocked!

    Reply
    1. JLC Post author

      I agree 100%, Jack. And even if this new Pastor hadn’t immediately turned out to be a dud who duped them, CLC’s days would be numbered.

      As long as they keep harboring an active pedophile ring, the “Church” will be subject to more and more criminal probes and lawsuits.

      That’s a mathematical certainty.

      End of story.

      Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

      Reply
  2. Christian

    I thank you for your reply. I am sorry you do not respect me. Perhaps a better understanding of my perspective would change the disrespect to perhaps disagreement.

    According to all reports, John Smyth acted alone. He chose to commit brutal crimes of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse. I hope he spends years in jail for it. I for one do not want PJ to suffer in any way for the crimes of his father. I do not want him to leave CLC, go back to Joburg, or lose all of his money and possesions in a lawsuit.

    Why? I will tell you.
    There is no evidence of any kind from any of the victims that PJ participated in any of these crimes. No one is saying that he did. His father acted alone, according to all I have read.

    His father may have told him repeatedly that all of the reports are rubbish – that they are lies. Who knows, his father may have even threatened him in some way.

    Out of understanding and compassion for PJ, it is reasonable for me to accept the possibility that no matter what he heard, read, was told, or saw, he could have found himself unable to believe that his own father would do what is claimed he did. With his father denying everything, his judgement could easily have been impaired. I think this is reasonable.

    Perhaps he did consider doing something . But what? Report his own father to the police? What if he felt threatened/intimidated by his father and thought he would be in danger if he did so?

    Out of compassion for PJ, it is reasonable for me to consider PJ an innocent bystander. Out of compassion for the victims, I pray for justice to be served by way of a long jail sentence for John Smyth.

    There is a long list of responsible adults who were aware of all or part of what John Smyth did who should have done far more than hold meetings.

    All of my comments on this blog focused only on the topic of JS and PJ.

    Thank you for your willingness to dialog.

    Reply
    1. 2samuel127

      Christian,
      As you have stated, nobody has stated that PJ Smyth participated with his father, John Smyth, in his well documented abuse of young men.

      My concern, and the emphasis of my reporting has been PJ Smyth’s lack of truthfulness regarding what he knew and when he knew it. He has clearly lied in his communications about the situation. PJ Smyth does not meet the biblical requirements of eldership. The facts are out there for all to see, if CLC members choose to ignore or excuse his behavior, that’s on them. If they choose to retain him as their lead pastor I would not be surprised, but I would hope that potential new members who exercise due diligence and check up on a church and its leadership prior to committing to membership will be warned away.

      As an aside, it stretches the limits of credibility to believe that PJ Smyth participated in several camps run by his father yet had no idea abuse was taking place. Did PJ think it normal to forbid the young men from wearing underwear? Did he think it was normal to have his father showering with the boys, skinny-dipping with the boys, observing the boys as they were jumping on a trampoline in the nude? Was he totally unaware of the beatings some boys endured that left marks one week after the camp?

      Reply
    2. 5yearsinPDI

      “Out of understanding and compassion for PJ, it is reasonable for me to accept the possibility that no matter what he heard, read, was told, or saw, he could have found himself unable to believe that his own father would do what is claimed he did. With his father denying everything, his judgement could easily have been impaired. I think this is reasonable.”

      I think a person needs a great deal of exposure to the charismatic movement to grasp how true this is. When a minister is perceived to be “anointed”- that can include a dynamic teaching ministry, gifts of healing or “words of knowledge” or other manifestations of spiritual gifts ( whether true or counterfeit), a church growing in numbers, etc- it can be impossible for the guy in the pew to accept that God could be moving in a man accused of great scandalous sins. Their mind just cannot put together strong giftings and sordid sins. Therefore they reject the accusations.

      Don Basham wrote a book on this years ago (1973) called True and False Prophets. Basham was in the Ft Laudersale 5 Shepherding movement, itself a conglomeration of bad teachings, but he was trying to warn the church about these Balaams who speak beautiful words to the covenant people and yet are in immorality. An excellent study. Anyway, it seems to be part of the trusting naive nature of Christians to listen to a Balaam and think he must be God’s anointed good guy in private as well as public. I used to be one of the naive pew sitters and it was a gut wrenching lesson to learn. I saw more than one truly “anointed” man ( scores of people led to the Lord, gifts of healing and verified prophecy) with a dynamic loving personality turn out to have a secret adulterous life.

      I would assume with you that PJ did not believe it and rationalized it away. The capacity of humans to avoid pain and shame so much so that we hang onto false realities is pretty strong. I think we have all done it in life at some point.

      But, Christian, the lies about the meeting in Z that he attended and got a report on- his memory loss- is just not credible. That he never believed the truth about his father is understandable and even typical. But the way he claims to forget the confrontation is not credible unless he has very serious psychological problems. Either way the man needs to be removed from the pastorate.

      Reply
      1. Brent Detwiler

        “PJ did not believe it and rationalized it away” and “never believed the truth about his father.”

        There is not a chance this happened with P.J. The evidence presented to him was clear, specific and overwhelming. Everyone believed it. No one disbelieved it. Why? Because it was documented in detail and concerned scores of boys. No one could deny its reality or veracity. Not even P.J. But your points are irrelevant. P.J. denied ALL knowledge of his father’s abuse in the UK and Zimbabwe. He never remotely suggested he knew about it but did not believe it.

        Reply
        1. JLC Post author

          Yes, and PJ never argued that his father was innocent. Instead, he wrote a letter to the Zimbabwe Pastors, several months after the relevant meeting, citing a bizarre so-called Biblical principle as to why they should keep their mouths shut regarding his father’s nasty little habit of beating up and sexually abusing boys in his care.

          Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

          Reply
      2. JLC Post author

        I know many people who have grown up in the Charismatic movement who handle allegations of child sexual abuse in a responsible, ethical, and legal manner.

        Therefore, I’m troubled by the suggestion that exposure to the Charismatic tradition should serve as an excuse for rationalizing covering up child sexual abuse.

        Further, I don’t think that PJ was exposed to the Charismatic tradition as a child. His family appears to have been staunchly Anglican.

        Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

        Reply
        1. 5yearsinPDI

          I have no idea about his childhood. But PJ has been firmly in the charismatic camp for a long time. He is an apostle with Terry Virgo’s New Frontiers:

          https://newfrontierstogether.org/about-us/

          He taught at Commissions Conferences. His buddy and fellow apostle Guy Miller, out of all the books and tapes on marriage in the English speaking world, picked Driscoll as the resource for marriage. ( with a reference to the fact that there was controversy and Driscoll had resigned, but it didn’t matter, Driscoll is the best).

          Do I need to clarify this? Are you aware of MD teaching that wives must submit to sodomy any time hubby wants, even if she doesn’t want to, despite the fact that the rectum and peritoneal wall are not designed for such activities and it risks tears ( rhymes with pears, not fears) and infection to the wife? That is just one part of MD’s disgustingness which I will not pursue. Would you be best buds and co apostle and a speaker with somebody who looked to MD as THE BEST teacher on marriage available? Doesn’t this scream unclean spirits/ perversion? If I can find it on google, CLC could have found it.

          http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/2015/08/20/the-police-report/

          This is the thread where I dug it all up a year ago. Links are at 12/14/2015 1:19, 12/16 at 11:21, and 12/17 at 1:36. I maybe have dug up more on that thread but I just don’t have time to pursue it.

          The men these people associate with like Chuck Pierce in the New Apostolic Reformation go up to the third heaven and come back with new revelation. Various guys come to their homes and tell them stuff- by guys I mean the Patriarchs, Isaiah and Jeremiah, etc. I linked to it on that thread. I am not saying PJ is into any of that himself, but some of his associations have high level demonic powers operating through them to control crowds of stupid, gullible, probably insecure and inferior feeling charismatics. Was PJ one of them, or duped by them? Is he into Driscoll? How would I know. But as far as him being charismatic, he very much is.

          The word charismatic is so vague anymore, it includes old fashioned Pentecostals, Catholics, Word of faith ( Haganite), Modern Prophet/Apostle groups, SGM, etc, In my experience the delusion I speak of isn’t so much related to the gifts, but to the concept of Satan and spiritual warfare. Satan does NOTHING unless God uses it for His purpose and ordains it. NOTHING. As Job said, the Lord gave and the Lord took away. The LORD took away, not Satan. Satan entered into Judas by God’s perfect plan. Paul had a messenger from Satan to buffet him by God’s design. These people use the Satan excuse to avoid God’s dealings.

          We know of a church where the pastor molested at least 12 women. For four freaking years the higher ups and congregation said it was the devil attacking. The women were liars, or if any of it was true it was because the women were seducing Delilahs to tempt the anointed great man. ( and outwardly, he was quite gifted). That is only one church. I know of other situations that reflect denial or blaming Satan.

          Usually the truth comes out eventually. These wolves can’t stop, they lie low for a while but do it again and get caught. I can totally picture PJ’s father telling him it was lies and exaggerations. I can imagine that the boys were labeled as unstable, not to be trusted, trying to destroy God’s work, ad nauseum. Brent claims it is clear. Maybe to us, not necessarily to PJ. Even with four men and numerous testimonies, who is PJ gonna believe? His Dad ( who “God is using”) saying it is Satan attacking, or a bunch of (upset, emotional, unreliable) teens? The capacity of the human soul for denial is enormous.

          The lawsuit- Susan Burke believes it. Many people don’t.

          I know a detective who deals with pedophiles- porn being sold of guys doing it with little kids. One two year old girl died, he was pretty distraught but they caught the guy. Nasty job, women do most of the visual research. He said the perps are doctors, lawyers, school teachers, church workers. He doesn’t really trust anybody anymore, the wolves are so slick and so smooth. They fool everybody. His unit has never lost in court with putting 100s of guys in jail because they go in and get the computers and it is all there. The wives are in shock, the kids too. These are respectable men in good jobs with secret lives of the most vile perversion and they hide it. Not even their family is aware.

          I am really rambling. Gotta get to work. Anyway, the definition of a tare among the wheat or a wolf in sheep’s clothing is that it looks exactly like the real thing. I have no problem thinking PJ was duped. I’ve been duped. It is easy to be duped when God’s blessing appears to be on a man.

          Having said all that PJ lied. Statement 1, then 2, then 3…..he lied. Time for CLC to dump the guy and get a pastor, a real pastor, not another celebrity apostle.

          I do hope you all are praying for revival. Things are bad out there and getting worse all the time. Pray for children.

          Reply
          1. Brent Detwiler

            5yearsinPDI

            You are missing the point. You are making an issue out of a non-issue and that is not helpful. It confuses people. You said,

            “I can totally picture PJ’s father telling him it was lies and exaggerations. I can imagine that the boys were labeled as unstable, not to be trusted, trying to destroy God’s work, ad nauseum. Brent claims it is clear. Maybe to us, not necessarily to PJ. Even with four men and numerous testimonies, who is PJ gonna believe? His Dad (who “God is using”) saying it is Satan attacking, or a bunch of (upset, emotional, unreliable) teens? The capacity of the human soul for denial is enormous. … I have no problem thinking PJ was duped. I’ve been duped. It is easy to be duped when God’s blessing appears to be on a man.”

            P.J. never claimed his father told him “it was lies and exaggerations.” P.J. claimed in his statement to CLC that he NEVER talked to his dad about any of the allegations. In other words, P.J. claimed his father made no attempt to deceive him. None. They never talked about the matter. P.J. asserted he knew of no abuse by his father in the UK or Zimbabwe. Therefore, it is impossible that P.J. was duped by his father. The subject never came up according to P.J.

            Here is some of what he said.

            “I never saw or heard anything that led me to suspect my father was engaged in the activities alleged. … I was never aware of any abuse. … I was not involved with those interactions. … I assumed that it was something relatively minor and it never occurred to me to press my father for detail.”

            Of course, these denials by P.J. are lies. He did in fact talk to his father and many others talked to him about the allegations of abuse including David Coltart, the leading civil rights attorney of Zimbabwe. In their June 1993 meeting, Coltart presented overwhelming evidence of guilt to P.J. and his father. So did four respected pastors from Zimbabwe. These men interviewed multiple victims of abuse from the Christian Brothers’ College and presented the details to P.J.

            But again, P.J. has never remotely said what you suggest that he heard about the allegations and was presented with evidence, but didn’t believe it because ‘God is using’ my father or ‘Satan is attacking’ or the teens are ‘upset, emotional or unreliable.’ None of this is part of the record. It is not a question of being duped by his father. It is a matter of lying. You have made something out of nothing.

            Given the facts, you shouldn’t even raise the possibility that P.J. was duped by his father’s lies and exaggerations. It is a non-issue. Yet you say, “I have no problem thinking PJ was duped.” In so doing, you have created a false narrative that is completely irrelevant and leads people to erroneous conclusions. People need to be clear headed about the issues. P.J. categorically denied all knowledge of abuse and all involvement with others addressing the abuse. He also claimed never talking to his father about the abuse.

          2. JLC Post author

            I agree. PJ Smyth has consistently publicly maintained that he was never informed of the allegations against his father regarding the physical and sexual abuse of boys.

            At no point has he said that his dad mislead him about anything. Therefore, implying that PJ was just a pawn in this situation because of (insert the excuses that have been put forward) makes little logical sense.

            Further, I think that the idea that PJ was duped by his father is demonstrably factually false because he asked for a meeting that included respected Pastors and a prominent lawyer to discuss the child abuse allegations at hand.

            PJ’s father likely did initially deny the relevant allegations, but PJ wasn’t dumb enough to be duped by his dad, who probably lied about many things.

            That’s why PJ asked for a formal meeting, with other credible parties, to get more details about the complaints about his dad’s treatment of the children in his care.

            And after that meeting, PJ did not claim that the victims were liars. Instead, he wrote the Pastors at the meeting a letter stating that they should not continue complaining about his dad’s violent beatings of boys, which could also be perceived as forms of sexual abuse in many cases.

            He just cited a so-called Biblical concept to justify covering up heinous crimes.

            PJ was no dupe in this situation. He methodically helped perpetuate violent acts of abuse against children.

            Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

      3. Lea

        >That he never believed the truth about his father is understandable and even typical. But the way he claims to forget the confrontation is not credible unless he has very serious psychological problems.

        Exactly. I never believed it was possible, plausible. I totally forgot someone abused my father of this horrific stuff? Not plausible.

        Reply
        1. JLC Post author

          Yes, especially since PJ Smyth himself went out of his way to request a formal meeting to talk about the allegations that his father was beating up boys in various stages of undress.

          PJ and the other CLC Pastors tried to make it sound as though the other relevant parties requested the meeting, because that made the idea that PJ forgot about it marginally more plausible.

          Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

          Reply
  3. Christian

    I have a question – and I am totally serious and out respect for you, Janna:

    You say that Brent’s latest post regarding PJ Smyth is “solid, concrete proof”, than how would you describe the proof you present here on this blog regarding PJ?

    Reply
    1. JLC Post author

      Hello Christian:

      I would describe the material on this blog as solid evidence and the material on the other blog as solid proof. You’re welcome to continue posting here but I am not interested in interacting further with someone who will not answer my direct questions about CLC’s past and ongoing cover-up of child sexual abuse.

      You know as well as I do that PJ Smyth is lying about his knowledge of his father’s abuse. Directing passive-aggressive comments to the people who have presented that evidence/proof won’t change things.

      I’m glad that you respect me. I do not respect you.

      Thanks for understanding. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

      Reply
      1. JLC Post author

        Let me qualify my statement by saying that I think that the proof in question is “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

        Reply
    2. Bill M

      “I have a question”
      I understand there are two intellectually honest tactics in debate, you can question errors or omissions in someones facts or logic. The “question” put forward was neither but was instead a poorly concealed dig at your credibility that betrayed the “totally serious and out respect” employed as an introduction. If someone speaks to me with such a level of deception, they immediately lose credibility.

      Reply
      1. JLC Post author

        I agree, Bill. The type of petty nit-picking in the original question would be considered a lame logical fallacy by any debate teacher. The child abuse/pedophilia-enablers at CLC are not able to defend PJ Smyth in a serious way because the proof/evidence of his guilt is so over-whelming.

        Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.