Update 1, March 14, 2025 on Andrew’s Substack
In October, I published an article titled Sons of Charlatanry. This came on the heels of the announcement that Peter Bell was launching Sons of Patriarchy, a podcast ostensibly dedicated to exposing abuse surrounding Doug Wilson and his denomination, the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC). Prior to that I and others had investigated Bell in a matter concerning potentially falsified ecclesiastical credentials. On a prior podcast, Guilt Grace Gratitude, Bell was for over a year presented as a pastor, at times affiliated with particular churches and planting efforts in the Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC). Last June, Bell informed me that he was “leaving the ministry” (he never formally entered the ministry, as he never obtained a proper ordination credential) due to personal reasons unrelated to our investigation (he also left GGG then). However, it was only a few months later that he returned with SOP, and Bell’s unwillingness to address the concerns that prompted that investigation prompted me to publish the investigation’s findings.
Many new developments have arisen since October. At the time of my first article, SOP had not yet released any content, only some trailers and promotional materials. Since then, the show has now published several episodes, roughly divided between theoretical discussions with “experts” in ministry, abuse, and trauma and stories of abuse within churches. Initially, the focus was on claims of abuse surrounding Wilson and the CREC. However, it was not long before the focus shifted to abuse claims from the OPC and the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). It would be an understatement to say that my initial concerns about this project and Bell’s involvement within it have been entirely vindicated, and in fact, if anything, they were not sharp and pronounced enough.
While the matters surrounding Bell and SOP are vast and complex (I myself having investigated them for nearly a year), there are a few that I particularly want to draw public attention to. At the outset, I want to be clear that I have (even after my initial article) continued to try to exhaust every possible channel to obtain a valid ecclesiastical resolution to this matter that would spare the reputations of as many parties as possible. However, it has become clear to me that Bell has deliberately positioned himself outside of the realm where such a thing can occur. Therefore, in the interest of protecting the truth and the flock of God, it becomes necessary to make a further report (Acts 20:28).
A thread that runs throughout this story is hypocrisy. It is more than a little ironic that a project that claims to exist in the pursuit of justice resists and dismisses accountability and shields its proprietors from potential justice for their own sins. This is abuse being perpetuated in the name of anti-abuse, unaccountability in the name of accountability, lack of transparency in the name of transparency, lawlessness in the name of law, gracelessness in the name of grace, and evil in the name of good.
Continued Pastoral and Ecclesiastical Misrepresentation
My initial investigation into Bell concerned claims on GGG that he was a pastor when he had never been ordained. When confronted with this, Bell pivoted (without any retraction or apology) to claiming that he was a licentiate, even though he no longer had valid licensure by 2024.
Shortly after launch, SOP released a bonus episode of a conversation between Bell and Sarah Bader, a professing atheist and social media manager for SOP. The interview was enlightening for several reasons (including Bader’s casual use of profanity), but of particular interest to me was that twice during that episode (at roughly the 3:30 mark and again at the 46:25 mark) she referred to Bell as a pastor. Given that Bader is an atheist and thus would not likely know or care about the inner workings of church polity, it would seem to me that the only reason she would ever say that Bell is a pastor is if Bell or someone close to him had told her that. Furthermore, when she says this (in an interview that almost certainly occurred after my and Shawn Mathis’ investigation) Bell never denies this or offers correction.
It seems that perhaps Bell still wants to be thought of and regarded as a pastor, or at least someone who could have been a pastor under slightly different circumstances that were within his control. Consider the following exchange:1
Bell claimed in this thread that it was only his choice that hindered him from becoming a pastor. However, as I pointed out in my reply (and as was pointed out in our prior investigation) Bell failed to sustain a candidacy examination in Classis Southwest of the United Reformed Churches (the same examination and body I myself took and sustained in the spring of 2022). For those not familiar with the inside-baseball of Reformed polity, had he sustained that exam, he would have been eligible for a pastoral call. Had that call been within the same classis (a regional body similar to a presbytery), he likely would have been ordained without further examination. Not only did Peter not become a pastor, at least one body found that he lacked the requisite gifts and knowledge.
Sadly, this lack of truthfulness and transparency extends beyond ministerial credentials to Bell’s own church membership. He has repeatedly publicly claimed to be Presbyterian and Reformed. In an interview with Current magazine prior to SOP’s debut, he claimed to be part of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. However, despite making inquiries with several OPC ministers and congregations (including ones Bell himself claimed affiliation with at various times) I have not found any current or former membership of Bell’s in the OPC. The last membership I found for him was in a different denomination but was “dropped” according to my contact at that church. More recently, a fellow OPC presbyter of mine directly contacted Bell for church membership information, but Bell refused to provide it. It may be that Bell holds membership in a church somewhere, but I have not, despite many months of investigation, been able to locate it. This is particularly problematic as parties close to SOP have claimed at times that Bell is a “member in good standing” and used this to deflect criticism (and perhaps even subtly threaten those who would criticize Bell in the open). Being a member in good standing means being willing to subject oneself to church courts and any potential disciplinary action that may arise from public or private sins. At a minimum, Bell is deliberately concealing that information from those who could lawfully bring such charges (ministers in the denomination he has claimed affiliation with), and it is possible he lacks valid membership altogether.2
It seems that Bell wants the credibility of the church (be that of a minister or member) without any of the oversight and responsibility that comes with it. This is a dangerous formula, especially given the difficult and sensitive matters SOP deals with.
Ecclesiastical Anarchy and Slander
Not only does Bell continue to deal treacherously regarding his standing in the church, but he and the SOP team deal treacherously with the church in the content they produce. Lest I be accused (as Bell and his fans are quick to do) of neglecting the horrors of the alleged abuse and the power of the stories, I do want to touch on them briefly. I will refrain from most details as I do not wish to further scandalize what has already been scandalized or incite any harassment. But there are a few items concerning SOP’s approach that are quite contemptuous, unbiblical, anti-Christian, and potentially illegal.3
Many accounts in SOP bring allegations of sin against others while conveniently ignoring and neglecting obvious sinful behaviors on the part of the accusers and panelists. I know that by mentioning this I will likely be showered with allegations of victim blaming, gaslighting, etc., but proper biblical and Reformed standards of justice do not allow this to be overlooked.4 There are various admissions of adultery and fornication (sins against the seventh commandment), atheism and apostasy (sins against the first commandment), and other sins on the part of those who give testimony on SOP. Many of the alleged offenses (and it is not appropriate biblically or legally to say that they are more than alleged offenses because many of them have not been substantiated or tried in either an ecclesiastical or civil context) do not have any witnesses to them. Some (to my understanding) have been investigated and tried in church courts, but SOP provides none of the extant evidence and witnesses that might counter their guests’ claims. Some of the stories shared on SOP are shared anonymously, providing no potential defense on the part of individuals or churches accused. In some cases, the accusers admit that the matters of which they speak were never brought to the church or civil authorities to be heard and adjudicated. Lest I be misrepresented (something that often has happened as I have engaged with Bell and his followers), note that I have not rendered any judgments as to the truthfulness of the claims. It is impossible to do so, because the unscrutinized and emotionally-charged testimony of one individual in a forum which has no jurisdiction legally or ecclesiastically cannot properly establish anything on its own.
Not only are proper biblical and legal evidentiary standards not upheld, but many of the accusations do not particularly concern the accused individuals. For instance, SOP has gone to great lengths to try to cast aspersions on the Rev. Dr. Joseph Pipa, a PCA (formerly OPC) minister and retired president of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary. I have listened to a couple of the accounts concerning Pipa, and even in the accusers’ own stories, it seems that Pipa’s involvement does not extend beyond knowing some of the parties involved, visiting them, and occasionally providing counsel. The real problem that the show and its guests seem to have with Pipa are his particular teachings concerning the roles of men and women, which they blame for abuse while not making the necessary connecting arguments. There seems to be an attempt to hide a theological disagreement behind emotionally manipulative shock-and-awe tactics. The show’s episodes and posts (such as the one I noted above) also strangely seem to try to associate Pipa with Doug Wilson, which is odd given that Pipa has been a frequent critic of Wilson, including being one of the earliest and most vehement opponents of the Federal Vision.
The show has also had episodes and guests that, beyond seeking to publicize these scandals, have also tried to attack typical biblical arguments such as Matthew 18 requirements for addressing private sins and the necessity of the testimony of two or three witnesses in bringing charges against an elder (2 Corinthians 13:1, 1 Timothy 5:19). It calls into question what Bell and his associates (many of whom love to tout their alleged Presbyterian, Reformed, and confessional bona fides) really think about the sufficiency of scripture and Reformed doctrines of the church and church discipline. Whenever one enters membership in one of our churches, he or she takes solemn vows to submit to the church’s discipline. It does not suddenly become optional when things do not go the way we want.
Not only does this careless handling of cases result in slander, gossip, and disorder, it potentially jeopardizes any future legal or ecclesiastical handling of the case by prejudicing matters and making the accusers themselves liable for sin, as well as potentially tampering with witnesses and removing the possibility of fair trials in certain jurisdictions. I do not know if SOP is vetted by any legal counsel, but many of the accusations made on the show, if proven false, could potentially be defamatory. Lawyers might not be fun, but they generally tend to protect their clients, and there are valid legal reasons why certain things ought not be published. Similarly, church courts and biblical discipline exist not strictly for hearing and believing accusers but rather, as best as can be done, discerning the truth and what proper biblical justice requires. And should justice not be achievable in this world, it will not escape God’s eternal judgment, where all sins are either nailed to the cross or judged in the fires of hell. Christians, then, must heed the command of scripture: “Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord.” (Romans 12:19 NKJV) A quest for earthly and revolutionary “justice” that will destroy all in its way for a pound of flesh has no place in the body of Christ.
Monetization and Grifting
The lawlessness of Bell and SOP appears to extend beyond content and into operations and finances. While SOP initially launched under the guise of advocacy and nonprofit fundraising, it now appears to operate as a commercial and for-profit venture.
Initially when SOP was announced, Bell claimed on social media that the endeavor was not monetized, he received no pay, and there would be no ads.
And yet, only a little over a month later, at the beginning of Episode 5, The Reconstruction of Nationalism, Bell announced that ads were being turned on, and that only 25% of the proceeds would go to survivors with the balance going to the show’s team to cover production costs and their time.5 The ads are syndicated by a third party and seemingly placed at random, often interrupting interviews. Some are for products and services that no Christian podcast ought to endorse (I recently received from a friend a clip where an ad played during the interview with Pastor Wes Bredenhof promoting LGBT-inclusive tourism in Key West, Florida).6 SOP has also launched a paid subscription to provide ad-free listening, essentially charging to make ad-free that which was initially promised to be ad-free.
In December, Bell and Bader registered Sons of Patriarchy as a Limited Liability Company in Idaho. An LLC is a type of for-profit entity, as opposed to a nonprofit corporation or unincorporated non-profit association.
As someone who has co-hosted and produced a podcast for nearly five years, I can attest that podcasts are not particularly expensive to operate. In our worst years of Bavcast/Once for All Delivered, our costs have never exceeded a few hundred dollars, and even with our small audience and a much smaller group of listeners who financially support us, our expenses are usually covered. Now, if people want to produce content for profit or form for-profit entities, that is their right, but to initially deny monetization or compensation on a project that ostensibly exists for advocacy and helping victims then to very quickly pivot to monetization and profit-taking once the show is a hit seems dishonest.7 It sniffs of grifting and rug-pulling.
Character Matters
And yet, still more lawlessness and hypocrisy remain. When I published my first article, one matter I raised with some trepidation was that my past dealings with Bell (including his difficulties in truthfulness and failure to prove ministerial qualifications) made me quite nervous about him being in a position where he was working with particularly vulnerable persons. It is never a light thing to call someone’s character and integrity into question. And yet with Bell, the red flags continue to abound.
In October, in an X exchange, Bell admitted to having marital problems.8
In December, in another X exchange with Tullian Tchvidjian, Bell provided some apparent further details that seem to indicate the sort of marital problems he had.9
While specifics are not provided, it appears that Bell committed some sin akin to adultery against his wife. The irony and hypocrisy should be noted of Bell’s quickness to publish graphic, detailed, and scandalous accusations against others to build his own platform and profits while carefully curating and redacting descriptions of his own sin. When it comes to sins of sexual immorality in the church and perceived failures to deal with it, Bell has been a part of the problem, now seemingly interested in selling and monetizing a solution. While I would certainly hope and pray that Bell is being truthful that he is seeking repentance and reconciliation, it also seems quite dishonoring to his wife to publicize this matter, and particularly to make himself an exemplar and authority in it.10
Leaving the sin itself and related hypocrisy aside, it is entirely reckless and foolish for a man who has struggled with chastity in his own marriage11 to be working with and in close contact with many women who have not only allegedly been abused and victimized, but some who either lack or have lost their Christian faith and with it proper biblical and moral grounding. In an interview, Bell described how he will have several long (an hour to an hour and a half) and deeply personal conversations with accusers before their stories are recorded for SOP. This (coupled with the aforementioned lack of willingness to be accountable by Bell) is a recipe for disaster, an environment primed for abuse and sin if one ever existed.12 While it is the common therapeutic and psychological approach to employ standpoint epistemology, making victims (and even ostensibly-repentant perpetrators) of offenses able to be authorities in addressing such offenses, this is not in accord with biblical wisdom.
The End?
Much more could be said. As I was preparing this article for publication, SOP released an interview with Tim Whitaker of The New Evangelicals,13 a leader in the “deconstruction” movement, which encourages Christians towards liberalization and apostasy. In that episode, Whitaker (who was introduced to Bell by SOP’s first guest, Kristin Du Mez) espouses his ideas of deconstruction (and encouraging Christians to engage in it), leftist politics, queer affirmation, and more, to Bell’s affirmation and approval.14 Some particular highlights were Bell seeming to agree with Whitaker that women preaching is just a matter of differing interpretation (11:45),15 Whitaker using profanity (including various abuses and blasphemies of the Lord’s name) throughout the interview (at Bell’s encouragement) and Bell himself using profanity in one case (32:20), Whitaker calling defining two genders something done “arbitrarily” while touting the virtue of transgender theologians he knows (26:40)16 and later denying that trans-ing kids is happening (33:20).17 In Whitaker’s closing monologue (beginning at 49:05), he apologizes for what white men like him have done, then invites people to explore their faith but also to leave it, saying,
…you are not any less loved by God if you decide to walk out of the house, you’re not gonna burn in hell forever if you decide to walk out of the house, you have permission to reclaim your own autonomy, to find God even if it’s beyond the boundaries of what your faith tradition told you God exists in…18
All of this is said with no comment or correction from Bell (in fact, he doesn’t speak again in the episode, it ends on this monologue). Make no mistake, this is exactly what Satan wants those in our age to believe. To be outside “the house” (that is, the people of God governed by the Word and Spirit of God) is death, not only in this life but in the life to come (see Matthew 25:1-13).19
And that is the rub. Peter Bell through Sons of Patriarchy, in the name of some self-righteous crusade against abuse, is abusing and harming the church (the bride of Christ) and her members, leading her members astray and to their spiritual death and ruin, just as I have early and often warned.
If you do not find my warnings adequate, perhaps those of Paul in 2 Timothy 3:1-9 will suffice:
But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith; but they will progress no further, for their folly will be manifest to all, as theirs also was. (NKJV)
As I have said repeatedly publicly and privately, my desire for Peter Bell is that he would repent and bear fruits consistent with that repentance, including reconciliation to God and to the church. But if he will not, it is my charge as a shepherd in God’s flock to resist him.
Yet it would be helpful if more were willing to resist. Many faithful men have assisted me and stood alongside me in opposing Bell, but I am severely disappointed and frustrated at those ministers and other church officers (including in NAPARC churches) who have not only tolerated but partnered with Bell and his project. You know who you are. It is one thing for the laity and unbelievers to have such lapses of judgment, but entirely another for shepherds to fail to exercise discernment on behalf of themselves and their flocks. As we will receive a stricter judgment (James 3:1), having now read this, you can no longer plead ignorance before God and man. Bell’s folly, should it persist, will one day be manifest to all, and yours with it if you continue with him. Our churches and denominations are at a crossroads. We must decide if we will stand on sound doctrine and biblical belief and practice or entertain those who would subvert, undermine, and destroy.
Similarly, to those who hear and support SOP, you now know the stakes and the danger. Peter Bell is willing to let you be led away from the truth and away from your faith and into darkness. Will you go with him? Or will you heed the apostle’s warning and “turn away”?
Andrew Smyth is the pastor of Westminster Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Hamill, SD and a co-host/producer of the Once for All Delivered podcast. He is on X (formerly Twitter) at @ref_andrew.
This screenshot also represents one of the many times where I have called Peter to repentance, lest I be accused of not having dealt with him personally or directly. On another occasion, when responding to various accusations and harassment by Bell and Blake Callens directed to Shawn Mathis and me, I provided Bell with some particular, concrete steps of repentance that would allow me to consider the matter closed. Bell was generally unwilling to consent to those terms.
This is a very grave and serious matter, especially for one claiming to be Presbyterian/Reformed. The Belgic Confession spends an entire article (28) addressing the obligations of church members, stating among other things that “no one ought to withdraw from it, content to be by himself, regardless of his status or condition.” Similarly, the Westminster Confession (XXV.2) states that “The visible church, which is also catholic or universal under the gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children: and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.” If Bell is deliberately avoiding church membership to avoid accountability, this is a form of self-excommunication and apostasy. If he is a member but is concealing that information from those he has potentially sinned against, he is being a law unto himself and not being faithful to what our standards and his membership vows require of him.
Given how Bell and his associates continue to claim to be confessional and Reformed, it is notable that Q&A 144 of the Westminster Larger Catechism establishes the duty of “discouraging tale-bearers, flatterers, and slanderers…” making use of Prov. 25:23, Prov. 27:24-25, and Ps. 101:5 among other texts. WLC 145 also prohibits “speaking the truth unseasonably, or maliciously to a wrong end, or perverting it to a wrong meaning, or in doubtful and equivocal expressions, to the prejudice of truth or justice; speaking untruth, lying, slandering, backbiting, detracting, tale-bearing, whispering, scoffing, reviling, rash, harsh, and partial censuring…” and other activities in which SOP frequently and freely engages. These are also fifth commandment issues as they concern attacks against the lawful government of the church and men who have carried it out (See WLC 127-128).
Romans 2:1 particularly condemns this sort of hypocrisy: “Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.” The Larger Catechism in Q&A 145 draws on this to condemn the sin of “partial censure,” also appealing to the example of Judah commanding Tamar to be burned for a sin in which he had participated in Gen. 38:24.
WLC 141: “The duties required in the eighth commandment are, truth, faithfulness, and justice in contracts and commerce between man and man…”
If SOP defenders might respond that they have no control over the ads that are syndicated, that just makes it all the more important to not participate in such an ad program or other forms of monetization that provide no oversight/control. “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret.” Eph. 5:11-12.
I confronted Bell on the advertising issue on X on February 25th. He would not offer any explanation beyond referring to the previous explanations including the one on Facebook (below). Note that the post does not explain any specifics as to the costs, only to speak of costs vaguely and emphatically declare that no more questions about ads would be answered. If something did happen that caused the financial position of SOP to rapidly change/deteriorate in that first month, it would be helpful for SOP to be open and transparent about that.
Again, podcasts are not that expensive to operate on a base level. They can be made expensive by things like paid marketing, premium hosting services, outside professional consultations and services, equipment upgrades, and paid guest appearances (I do not know if SOP utilizes any of these). However, these are all optional/additional/luxury costs beyond the basic costs to get and keep a podcast online.
He also here again in this screenshot claims no remuneration from the show.
An irony in this exchange is the Bell is swapping one form of antinomianism (Tullian’s radical Lutheran brand) for another (a therapeutic brand which justifies all kinds of sins [like those well documented in my articles and notes on Bell] under the rubric of subjective experiences of abuse, trauma, and systemic injustice. We plan to address these topics more broadly on OFAD in coming months.
Bell’s questionable church membership status also calls into question the quality of counsel and support he might be receiving in this ostensible process of repentance and reconciliation.
“Chastity in body, mind, affections, words, and behavior” is the primary duty of the seventh commandment, stated in WLC 138.
WLC 138, addressing seventh commandment duties, requires the “keeping of chaste company,” citing Prov. 2:16-20.
UPDATE 10/17/25: This interview was deleted on the evening of Sunday, March 16th. This deletion seems to have nothing to do with my reporting or concerns but rather Bell learning of a report of alleged workplace abuse by Whitaker and TNE. In light of this deletion, I have added footnotes with the most relevant audio clips from that interview. I have not included ones proving blasphemy and profanity, and I bleeped out the profanity used in the clips I am using. The posting of these clips is fair use, as this is for review and educational purposes.
Related to an earlier point in the article, while Whitaker introduces TNE as a nonprofit, Bell admits starting at 7:25 that SOP is an LLC, for “reasons we won’t get into.”
Clip (added 3/17/2025 in response to SOP deleting the episode, see footnote 13 for explanation)
Clip (added 3/17/2025 in response to SOP deleting the episode, see footnote 13 for explanation)
Clip (added 3/17/2025 in response to SOP deleting the episode, see footnote 13 for explanation)
This phrase has been updated to correct a slight misquotation I made in the original. The original read, “Whitaker calling defining two genders “arbitrary” while touting the virtue of transgender theologians he knows (26:40)”
Clip (added 3/17/2025 in response to SOP deleting the episode, see footnote 13 for explanation)
Original footnote: Since the release, in response to criticism, Bell has stated on X and in YouTube comments that he disagrees with Whitaker on transgender issues. However, he agrees with Whitaker’s stances on Trump and far-right politics. I have thus far seen no further comment from Bell on the deconstruction and apostasy issues, which I find to be the most troubling of the lot.
Clip (added 3/17/2025 in response to SOP deleting the episode, see footnote 13 for explanation)
Bell has not only failed his Christian duty by platforming atheists, apostates, and heretics, but standing quietly by while they have espoused their evil. Such a thing incurs guilt before the Lord. See Ezekiel 3:18-20; Heidelberg Catechism Q&A 100 and proof texts.