Denhollander adds, “The work was done by the victims and the cost borne by them, and by advocates who you refused to heed for four years, or who you have outright maligned. … Use your voice and platform to point to the work they have done, the price they paid, the cost of not listening earlier.”
David French: ‘I should have covered this’
Journalist David French admits his own “negligence,” saying he “paid insufficient attention” to initial claims of Zacharias’ misconduct. “It is no excuse to say that I can’t cover everything,” he writes. “I should have covered this.” Adding to the difficulty, he notes, is his friendship with Malhotra and Sam Allberry (an RZIM speaker who had pressed for transparency), as well as his knowledge that the ministry “is populated with people who love Jesus and live with all the integrity that Zacharias claimed to possess.”
French says he’s unaware of any resignations by RZIM senior leaders, despite “the roles they played in enabling Zacharias’ abuse.” He criticizes organizational officials who, according to the final report, “ignored, marginalized, and accused of disloyalty” any employees who pursued the truth. Those truth-seeking staffers, French writes, “were like the proverbial blind men feeling out the elephant—except imagine that as they tried to get a full understanding of the creature before them, someone was yelling in their ear, ‘There is no elephant. There is no elephant.’”
Several lessons need to be heeded, French writes. Independent, transparent investigations are a must, especially when family members control an organization and have conflicting interests. Evidence must trump instincts, all accusers must be shown respect, and nondisclosure agreements must be avoided because they’re “poisonous and enable additional abuse.” Ministerial arrogance can spark zealous protection of a leader, French concludes, when “in reality, God will accomplish his purposes, with or without any of us, regardless of our gifts or talents.”
The future of RZIM is uncertain, with some people calling for a complete rebranding. “A ministry founded by a sexual predator [that] still carries the predator’s name can hardly continue in its present form,” writes French.
