by Matt Slick
This is a defense of CARM and Matt Slick as well as a serious warning regarding Cheryl Schatz.
It is unfortunate that I must defend myself against someone who claims to be a Christian. Such is the case with Cheryl Schatz and the many many hours of distraction and frustration she caused. I do not want to harm her, nor do I desire to destroy any ministry work she might be doing for the Lord. As far as I can tell, she is a sister in Christ. However, her incessant attacks and misrepresentation of my position and comments has forced me to release this information.
Again, let the reader know that it is my opinion based on extensive experience with her that Cheryl Schatz is working against the Christian church by teaching a politically correct view of the offices of pastor and elder and that if you get on her bad side, she will try and hound you into the dirt until she feels vindicated.
I've been hesitant to release this information. I've held back, waiting, hoping she would stop bothering me, hoping she would stop the attacks, expecting that she'd tire and stop manipulating the situation, people, and comments to make herself appear the victim all the while subtly attacking me. But, this woman has been a persistent pain with her demands for vindication. The last straw came when she posted that I had broken my word.
How it all started
Cheryl Schatz works with McGregor ministries and is a self-proclaimed defender of women in the Church. In 2007 she was on my Faith and Reason Radio show twice for a total of two hours. She attempted to defend her position that women can teach and exercise authority over men in the church (in spite of 1 Tim. 2:12). In fact, regarding 1 Tim. 2:12 Cheryl Schatz says that the entire Christian church has failed to understand it for 2000 years, and that she has figured out what it "really" means. That's a warning flag!
Our discussion on the radio was difficult because she tried to dominate the conversation by attempting to offer long and detailed explanations of why her various opinions on Scripture were correct (they aren't). Long detailed answers aren't good for radio and I was concerned that my listeners might get bored. When I asked her to keep her answers shorter, she had great difficulty complying. She would sometimes launch into stories and involved explanations to defend her position. She became very exasperating to deal with. This is why one of my listeners called her radio poison. (I received several complaints about her from listeners. When I repeated over the air that someone had called her radio poison. She then she said I had "sinned against her" by repeating someone's opinion about her radio performance.) Can you believe it?
I later commented that one of Cheryl's many erring positions could logically lead to a problem. I said basically, "What she's actually saying is that it is okay for a wife to teach her husband heresy." It is that basic statement that set her off. She wanted me to correct it. I did. I said over the air that Cheryl did not believe what her position could logically lead to. You'd think that would be enough, but it wasn't. Instead she said I purposefully misrepresented her and "sinned against her". My opinion of her is that she must absolutely be right in her own eyes and that it is a major part of her self-worth.
During the second show, if I remember correctly, I said that her view on women in the church was heretical. She asked if I was calling her a heretic. I said that in this area, yes, she is heretical. Because of this and some other issues, she has again said I "sinned against her" has brought charges against me per Matthew 18. She went to my discussion boards and started posting my "sin list". See Cheryl's Sin list against Matt Slick with my responses (Articles List Section: 1.A.).
This is ridiculous.
Not only do I think she is heretical concerning women in authority in direct contradiction to scripture, but I also believe she's dangerous to the Christian church. In my opinion, and it's based upon my interaction with her and my research into her doctrines, I believe that she contributes to the feminization of the church and inadvertently promotes men abdicating their God-given responsibilities. I firmly believe she has incorrectly interpreted scripture and goes against its plain reading. Just see my section Women in Ministry where I refute her and others' ideas regarding women in teaching authority over men in the Christian church context. I also believe her to be vindictive, abusive in her persistence for self exoneration, and that she is not eligible for ministry based on her blatant misrepresentation of me, of scripture, and her purposeful, documented deception. See Articles List Section: 4 regarding her deceptive tactics.
Did I go back on my word? Not at all!
At our so-called Matthew 18 meeting on August 22, 2008, I agreed to read a statement of "correction" over the radio. I agreed only because I wanted her constant dogging to stop. So, I read the statement that very night. There was no agreement whatsoever that the statement I read would be retained in podcasts for later distribution. Diane, who runs the podcast, edited out the statement in the podcast. The agreement was only that I would read it over the air. I did exactly what I agreed to do and now Cheryl Schatz is saying I broke our agreement by taking it out of the podcast version and has again publically gone after me by publishing her accusation on the MacGregor ministry webpage (mmoutreach.org/slick.htm) saying I broke my word. This is not true and she is bearing false witness! Again, she publically accuses me of sin and said I have broken my word. This is libelous. I did not break my word. I did exactly what I said I would do but she was not satisfied -- again! In fact, just for clarification, the show was repeated by the station on a Saturday and the "correction" went out for a second time. Schatz has emailed the station requesting a copy of the show. I told them not to give it to her because I do not trust her or what she might do with it. I believe she would find some way to twist it and try to use it against me so I refuse to help her accuse me yet again.
Was it the exact same statement?
To clarify, the statement I agreed to read was not the exact same one recited in the meeting -- which is another accusation of sin levied against me by her. I read a slightly modified version because after reviewing the original written statement we developed in the meeting, I did not like that it could possibly be taken as an admission of guilt. Since I cannot trust Cheryl, I figured that is what she would claim. So, I called her pastor and he and I worked out a slightly modified version; after all, it was he who originally wrote the statement during our meeting. So, with her Pastor's approval, since he was Cheryl's pastor, since he was at the meeting, since he'd written the original one, and since we both agreed the revised one was acceptable, I felt free to read that version over the air. Remember, it was per her pastor's approval that I read the statement. Yet, Cheryl again accuses me of sin even though I read what her own pastor approved! Her problem should be with her pastor.
She's never satisfied. I'm fed up with her incessant attacks. I'm fed up with her constant prodding and playing the victim while subtle 'jabs' are taken at me on her blog. I kept waiting, hoping she'd stop, but no. She hasn't.
She agreed to stop attacking me but didn't
In this meeting and subsequent conversations with Cheryl's pastor, I appealed to him to help reign Cheryl in. I trust him. I don't trust Cheryl. He and I agreed that Cheryl was not to accuse me any more of anything. In fact, we were to both stop with this whole thing and move on. She was supposed to remove her stuff about me on her blog. Apparently, all she did was move it to archive -- and left some of her attack on me public. Even then I didn't want to release this information. I kept waiting, trying to endure this ridiculous and persistent attack from her.
Then, I found out that she had published a statement at http://mmoutreach.org/slick.htm accusing me of going back on my word -- when I did not! She has continued to attack me even though she said she'd drop it. Therefore, I have been forced to release this information on 9/8/08 because in order to protect myself, this ministry, and my name.
A challenge to the MacGregors and any of Cheryl's supporters
Okay, it was all out in the open and I hoped that she'd just go away. I was wrong. Now, she's published a statement from Keith and Lorri MacGregor attacking me again.
She won't give up and she continues to falsely accuse me.
Therefore, I hereby publically request a dialogue with Keith and Lori McGregor, myself, and Diane Sellner, and anyone else interested (via phone conference) so they can hear the other side of the story. I am sure there is a great deal they are unaware of. I've emailed the MacGregors requesting communication and have received no response. Why is that? Why is it that Lorri MacGregor has no problem supporting Cheryl's accusations against me and yet will not speak to me personally to hear the other side? A friend of mine who knows the MacGregors has also tried to contact them about this and they have still refused to dialogue with me directly.
Cheryl Schatz has only told her side to her followers who are more than happy to cast me as the villain after reading her recitation of the facts. Why don't her adherents call me at the office at 385-246-1048 to hear the other side of the story? So far, I've received no phone calls. (As of Dec. 24, 2008, still no contact from the MacGregor's or anyone else.)
Articles List Section
- Cheryl's Comments about Matt Slick
- Cheryl's Claims
- Cheryl's attack on CARM
- Cheryl Schatz as R.D. Clarke exposes a deliberate lie on her part
- Cheryl's Comments about Diane
- MacGregor Ministry
A warning for others
I don't trust Cheryl Schatz at all. I have experienced her persistent dogging as she tries to be self vindicated over perceived injustices. I have sat face to face with her and heard her repeatedly lie to all of us in the meeting of August 22, 2008 in Boise, including her own pastor. I have seen her misrepresent me and accuse me of sins -- which I have not committed. She failed to think clearly about agreements and then publically accused me when she doesn't get what she wants.
If you tackle her, be warned. I believe that she might do the same thing to you she has done to me. Document everything. Be careful with your words. She might very well use whatever she can against you. This is my experience with her. It is Diane's experience with her as well.
Finally, I'm willing to remove a lot of what is written here on the condition that she apologize for her accusing me, that she remove all mention of me on her blog, and that she remove her article about me on the mmoutreach site.