Is Bethel Church Redding Faced with a Legal Emergency?

When Vanessa Johnson served as a Wayne County Michigan prosecutor, her work included cases involving sexual assault and crimes against vulnerable victims. Following her prosecutorial career, Ms. Johnson has devoted her energies to advocating for victims of sexual abuse and trauma. Today she released a video in which she evaluates the legal implications of comments issued by leaders at Bethel Church (Redding, California) in response to very public allegations brought by Mike Winger.

Ms. Johnson’s analysis offers an important and unique lens for evaluating the dilemma now confronting Bethel Church as an institution, and the leaders, Bill Johnson, Kris Vallotton, and Dan Farrelly. She argues that, in addition to the risks exposed by the Mike Winger video, there are new risks of legal liability caused by public statements made by these leaders in response to Mike Winger. She says she would not be surprised to learn that victims are lawyering up.

I encourage you to see how she reasons from the evidence contained in these statements. She brings prosecutorial expertise to bear on the situation Bethel leaders have created for themselves. When she expresses an opinion that stands apart from the law and the legal vulnerabilities facing Bethel, she is clear that she is offering an opinion. But here, as well, she makes compelling arguments. She concludes that spiritual failure on the scale exhibited by these men disqualifies them from continuing in leadership. And she advises people within the Bethel orbit who are not implicated in the actions of their leaders to leave for their own spiritual protection.

A major lesson of Vanessa Johnson’s careful analysis is that recent public statements may later become evidence that places the parties in question in a legal bind. These parties have confessed to having relevant knowledge of the facts, and this prior knowledge makes them responsible. The law does not recognize “pastoral care” and “church discipline” as sufficient remedies in situations of sexual abuse. Institutional responsibility is not cancelled by pleas of ignorance of the law or ambiguity of the circumstances. “Seeking discernment,” and other devices of pastoral framing can be interpreted as delay. That is not a good thing.

There are two things about this that I need to emphasize. First, whether Bethel Church is faced with a legal emergency will depend on whether victims become plaintiffs. Second, what transpires in that event will not be influenced by anger expressed in social media by Bethel Church defenders who believe their leaders are innocent of wrongdoing. Calling critics of Bethel culture liars will have no effect on legal proceedings that might emerge.

In addition, if I’m not mistaken, if an institution like a church responds to sexual abuse allegations primarily as either a reputational problem or a pastoral problem, that institution may be risking civil liability. It doesn’t matter whether the leadership thinks its response is compassionate. And, all cheering aside, if a congregation believes the narrative that compassion prevailed in the church’s handling of a matter, civil liability is not mitigated.

Some may suspect that Vanessa Johnson is simply an activist lawyer with an axe to grind or that she has an inordinate sympathy for victims. But that is not the case here. She is thoroughly familiar with prosecutorial practice and her statements about the legal risks seem to comport with California statutes. And it should be noticed that Ms. Johnson speaks with Christian concern that is quite conspicuous in her remarks.

My initial dip into California case law reflects much of what she is saying in her analysis. As I understand it, California courts deem the specific organizational or governmental structure of a particular church as irrelevant to duty of care. So as far as California case law is concerned, it makes no difference that a church is governed by an apostle and a prophet. The presumed authority of an apostle or a prophet would not absolve the institution of legal liability. This is not due to religious prejudice. The theology of the institution is not under attack. It is simply a question of whether leaders had relevant knowledge and whether they acted responsibly on the knowledge that they had.

*

Of course, a legitimate apostle and a legitimate prophet could be expected to have knowledge that issues in responsible action. For the likes of Bill Johnson and Kris Vallotton (the presumed apostle and prophet, respectively, at Bethel Church), discernment is not generally a lengthy process. Rather, it is a spontaneous awakening brought about by encounter with the Spirit. Even Kris Vallotton, in his volte face on Monday, January 19, 2026, spoke of an encounter with the Spirit that caused a reversal in the judgment he had expressed in a Bethel Church service only the day before (a fact he apparently did not share with the congregation until the next Sunday).

So their own conception of the mechanism of revelation needed for a ministry of protective covering for their congregation incriminates them. Quite apart from what case law might imply, these men teach a theology that entails that, in their role as apostle and prophet, and their attendant responsibility to provide a spiritual covering for the church, they would have had the requisite knowledge of the facts and they would have known what action would be most responsible. Their theology condemns them. This point has no legal significance, but it does mean, as we’ve argued repeatedly in various ways over the years, that they are not what they pretend to be. Bill Johnson is not an apostle. Kris Vallotton is not a prophet. Since the entire culture they have created at Bethel Church Redding depends on that illusion, the culture is a shambles.

It is central to the culture of Bethel Church—what Kris Vallotton has been calling “our movement” in his latest speeches to the congregation—to revel in what they call “reckless Christianity.” We have documented the dangerous effects of this folly in our book Reckless Christianity: The Destructive New Teachings and Practices of Bill Johnson, Bethel Church, and the Global Movement of Apostles and Prophets. Many have testified to this and escaped the delusory chains of a false prophetic narrative. Finally, because of sexual scandal linked to prophetic malfeasance, many more are today discovering that Bethel has sewn the wind and is now reaping the whirlwind.

Related posts:

• From Apostolic Covering to Corrupt Cover-Up

• Shawn Bolz, Prophet of the New Apostolic Reformation