[ POLL ] The "Billy Graham Rules".

Post Reply New Topic

Who else remembers the "Billy Graham Rule"?  It goes something like: "A man should never be alone with any woman other than his wife or his mother."  It is the second of four rules of conduct Mr. Graham and his team created decades ago to maintain ministry integrity.  This particular rule deals with upholding sexual morality.

All four rules are summarized as follows:

1) Avoid financial abuses.

2) Avoid any situation that would involve moral compromise or have even the appearance of moral compromise.

3) Avoid open criticism of local pastors and churches.

4) Embrace commitment to integrity in publicity and reporting.

What do YOU think of these rules, separately or collectively, and how would you apply them in your own life?

You may choose only one option, but you may change your choice at any time.

Please keep discussions civil and on-topic.

Thank you.

Fnord

(Source:  This Article )

Last edited by Fnord on 20 Apr 2022, 12:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think there have been enough reports of ministries and individual ministers who have had problems in those areas to readily show why the rules were made.

I whole-heartedly agree.

Believe it or not, there used to be a few well-known Christian evangelists who tried to practice what Jesus preached.

Sadly, most of them are now gone.

They sound good to me. I said the same when the usual angry red faces on this forum lambasted Mike Pence and his rules about eating alone with women. It was not a popular opinion back then.

It was and, in many cases, still is.

Some call it sexist treatment of women as weaker individuals.

Some call it a sexist insult because it implies that women would exploit the situation.

I call it common sense, because it prevents some malicious third parties from spreading nasty rumors.

I corrected a typo in the poll.  The results may have reset.  If so, please re-take the poll.

I apologize for the inconvenience.

What's funny in a way is that while I say that is a good rule for ministries and ministers, due to my disabilities and declining health I myself am often alone with a woman who is not family; any one of the number of employees of Hometown Homecare who drive me to appointments in the nearby city or help with housekeeping.

Not sure what 1) means, but if it mean don't engage in embezzlement, swindle or fraud, then that seems pretty obviously correct.
2) Don't know what he means by "moral compromise." I only accept "social" morality based on the principle of avoiding hurting people, so if he's driving at "cosmic" or "spiritual" morality, then where that deviates from social morality then I'd disagree with him. As for this idea of avoiding the appearance of "moral compromise," I think that's more a matter of wisdom than morality as such. If it looks bad, then you'll likely get into trouble for it. But if it looks bad without actually being bad, that's not actually wrong as such.
3) I strongly disagree with holding up pastors and churches as being above open criticism. I prefer that leaders of all kinds are subject to closer public scrutiny than ordinary people. I'd rather power was accompanied by accountability.
4) Yes. I'd rather all publicity and reporting was as open, accurate and honest as possible.

I don't know what's so special about those 4 rules that justifies them being presented as a particular code of conduct, or what's so special about Billy Graham that qualifies him to lay down moral rules, though he's welcome to try as long as he doesn't expect preferential treatment for his ideas just because they're his. If we just try not to hurt people and to look after them, I suspect that's enough, and it doesn't take much brain or any kind of spiritual superiority to figure that out.

I don't think he's going to be doing much trying given he's been dead since 2018.

I thought he'd been rather quiet lately.

If you're a preacher in the public eye- absolutely follow them all.

Pretty much the same if you're a politician.

I never understood the whole eating alone with women thing. Men and women, married or single, have friendships. Why can't they dine alone together?

Imagine being a married man "just having coffee" with a woman who is not your wife.  There are at least 3 possible outcomes:

1) You finish your coffees and go your separate ways.  Any reasonable person would probably give it no further thought.

2) Some unreasonable person sees the two of you "just having coffee", and decides to make trouble for you and her.  The rumor mill goes into overtime, and everyone begins to suspect that there is more going on than "just having coffee".

3) You accidentally make contact with her body or make a comment that she interprets as having been sexually motivated.  There are no witnesses.  It is your word against hers.  She files an official complaint with your employer and/or the police.  It is lawyer time.  Even though you clear your name, you have lost your job and the respect and trust of your friends and family.

I agree with Vegetable on this.

Men and women become friends all the time. They don't have to get into each other's pants. It's not inevitable that people have sex merely at the sight of each other. Many of us are civilized folks, and are able to restrain our "animalistic" desires.

I see nothing wrong with a married man having lunch with a single women (or vice versa) if there's no romantic intention involved. This is what is meant by treating people like "humans," rather than "sex objects."

Last edited by kraftiekortie on 20 Apr 2022, 3:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

First off, the women I hang out with our very good friends. None of that is going to happen, and I don't care about the "rumor mill." I don't care what anybody thinks.

You have a very rigid veiw of life and relationships. You might want to work on that. There's a whole spectrum of what you believe is right and wrong that you might want to explore.

There are so many people who believe men and women can't be friends. Some of my best friends have been women.