Here is the second half of the transcript of C.J. Mahaney’s message, The Happiest Place On Earth, which he presented at Cornerstone Church of Knoxville this past August. You will find the first half here. You can access audio for this sermon here (click on “Media & Links,” then click on “Sermons,” then look for the message entitled, The Happiest Place On Earth). As has been the case in previous similar posts, my thoughts will be in blue.
—————————–
[Begin second half of transcript:]
And the eternal perspective is not only revealed with the writer’s intentional use of the word “soul.” The eternal perspective is also clearly revealed as he reminds the pastors that they will one day give an account. Yes they will. They’ll give an account to none other than the chief shepherd.
And, I can tell you, even this moment, their souls tremble. They’re perplexed. [Lowers voice to dramatic whisper] “Oh, why. Why did you delegate temporarily to me the souls of those for whom – which – you died? Doesn’t seem to be your wisest move.” But they’re aware of their weakness, their need for grace. They’re also aware of their responsibility. They’re aware – one day, it’s gonna be eye to eye with the one who did die for your sins, giving an account for how – how they did. And the questions are all here. Won’t be any surprise questions. You got all the questions for the final exam right here. “Did you watch over their souls? Did you prepare them for that final day? Did you?
Oh, there’s so much to be said, but we have so much more ground to cover. But the passage is deep, rich, with the eternal perspective, which really transforms – well, it transforms everything. I mean, once you’re informed about the eternal perspective, or reminded of the eternal perspective, then it, it makes the future – makes its way into the present, and then you live the present in the light of the future. So your awareness of the future transforms the present. And that’s what this passage does. It gives an eternal perspective. They watch over your souls, preparing you for that all-important day, and on that all-important day, they will give an account. That’s the role of pastors.
Number two, the responsibility of church members. The responsibility of church members. Verse 17. “Obey your leaders and submit to them.” I mean – I’ll read those words and I completely understand why any pastor would be reluctant to preach from this passage.
As I said earlier, it can appear self-serving. I also think there are many pastors who are aware that this is a most unappealing passage to the average American Evangelical. There are many Evangelicals who are uncomfortable with this language. “Obey” and “submitting to” leaders.
[Kris says: This is an interesting technique. Notice what C.J. does here. He says, "There are many Evangelicals who are uncomfortable with this language."
What's interesting about this statement is, most SGMers would NOT consider themselves primarily to be "Evangelical" in the manner in which that word has come to be defined. In fact, most folks who have landed at SGM have arrived at their SGM churches after journeying through other branches of Christianity, and they come to SGM expressly because they are looking for an antidote to the user-friendly, seeker-sensitive, soft-sell message of modern Evangelicalism, with its lack of emphasis on "sound doctrine."
SGMers will think of themselves rather proudly as "Reformed, with a distinctly Charismatic element," but most would not firstly define themselves as "Evangelical." After all, they came to SGM expressly to ESCAPE being one of those namby-pamby, easy-believe-ism Evangelicals! That's why they embrace such challenging and non-fun activities like joining a group where people are happy to confront you about your sin. That's why they sit around and talk about all their personal weaknesses and struggles. That's why they grit their teeth, tighten their bootstraps, and find SGM's "tough love" message bracing and invigorating.
SGM in its current form is a reaction to seeker-friendly "Evangelicalism!"
So, when C.J. points out that "many Evangelicals" are uncomfortable with talking about obedience and submission, he already knows that he's just now set up his audience to think the opposite of what these "many Evangelicals" think. He is well aware of their disdain for the wimpiness of typical "Evangelicalism" - he regularly capitalizes on it to boost SGM's standing in his people's minds.
So basically, when C.J. stands up and says that "many Evangelicals" think such-and-such, his audience already knows that they'd better think the opposite, or they run the risk of slipping back into being - horrors! - a mere "Evangelical"!
C.J. has now set up his audience so that even if they feel a nagging sense that something about this teaching is not quite right, they will immediately feel forced to accept it anyway. They will assume that their questions are coming from the part of them that is still attracted to "Evangelicalism."]
I think what we have to realize, though, is the scripture isn’t uncomfortable with this language. So if the scripture isn’t uncomfortable with this language, then…I shouldn’t be uncomfortable with this language, and…if I am uncomfortable with this language, then I need to find out, because it’s clear the scripture isn’t uncomfortable with this language. So you gotta ask yourself why, if you find yourself uncomfortable, if you find yourself doing this, saying, “Surely it doesn’t mean THAT. Surely in the original, the – I mean – it doesn’t mean – it doesn’t really mean OBEY. It doesn’t – NO WAY. And what’s up with the ‘submit’? That – no – no, I’m sure some intelligent individual who’s familiar with the original language could tell us why it – it – it – doesn’t mean THAT.”
And so if you’re anticipating me spending this – rest of this sermon telling you, “You know, it doesn’t really mean that,” or trying to soften it or alter it, you might as well start drawing a picture as well, ‘cause that’s not – that’s not what’s gonna be happening here today.
[Kris says: What's interesting is that there actually are plenty of resources around that DO call into question translation errors that have crept into our understanding of this particular verse.
But I don't think we even NEED to debate whether "obey" and "submit" are the right words to use here. I think we can easily assume that they are accurate enough to convey what God meant and yet STILL see major problems with the way C.J. has expounded upon them.
What I think IS so desperately necessary for this sermon is a much more detailed explanation of what this sort of obedience and submission translate into in real life situations.
We have definite instances spanning decades when SGM practices have converged with the harmful practices of authoritarian shepherding. We have recent accounts of members being counseled by their pastors to not move to a particular city, even after a family has decided that they feel led to move.
Are obedience and submission required in that sort of situation?
What of times when pastors simply miss the mark and get the sin-sniffing wrong? That's probably one of the areas where SGM has the most issues. Most instances of church discipline flow out of these types of situations, where a pastor makes an assessment about a member's sin in some area, and a member dares to disagree. Suddenly, the member is then "prideful." Further resistance, and the member is "in unrepentant sin" because he is not submitting to his pastor over the matter.
Does the obedience and submission discussed in Hebrews 13 mean that members are required to relinquish any and all ability or rights to disagree with a pastoral assessment of a sin or problem?
Or does obedience/submission now require members to agree with their pastors on all such matters?
It takes no imagination whatsoever to see why having only the vaguest idea of what is meant by "obey" and "submit" can create huge problems. C.J. needs to flesh out the scenarios where obedience and submission come into play.
For instance, what of a church's financial decisions? Are members always obligated to agree with everything pastors choose to do in this area? What if a member sees some crazy expenditures and disagrees? What if pastors pursue building projects that members believe to be imprudent risks?
Does the Bible require obedience and submission in these situations?]
Now, now look, it’s not as though I don’t identify with any uncomfortableness you might have with this…language. OK, so we gotta ask ourselves, “OK, why would we be uncomfortable?” Well, I mean, a – an obvious reason, a “duh” reason, would be SIN. I mean, it’s humbling. We arrive – we might not be aware of it – but, to differing degrees, we’re all arrogant. Self-sufficient. “Obey? Submit? OK, I can reconcile myself to that in relation to parents. In an age-appropriate obedience and submission in relation to parents. What’s up with this, though?” So it could be a sinful response.
[Kris says: Sure, there could be sin at work, making C.J.'s audience not want to submit to their pastors. But...what if these reactions sometimes happen because the Knoxville pastors are on occasion WRONG and THEMSELVES BEING SINFUL by wanting, for example, to institute some strangely negative membership covenant whose sole purpose seems to be protecting the church from lawsuits for pastoral misconduct during church discipline situations?
Must it always be sin at the root of this sort of reaction? Or, to rephrase that better - must it always be the member's sin that is at the root of worrying about obeying one's pastors?]
It could be, there might be some – I hope there are none – but there might be some, where you actually come from a context where a pastor or pastoral theme was authoritarian. And if that is true – and if that is true of you – [whispers intensely] I am SO SORRY. Because there is no excuse for that. And if any of us as pastors engage in that, may we be held accountable in this life. I’m sure we’ll be held accountable in the life to come.
And here’s what I can assure you of this morning: that will not be your experience in this church. That will not be your experience in this church.
[Kris says: How can C.J. assure his audience of such a thing? How can he do this?
First of all, he supposedly is "flying blind" in his presentation of this message. Supposedly, this has nothing to do with offering up correction to the Knoxville church.
So presumably (if we are to believe him), C.J. has no knowledge of Knoxville's current flap over the required signing of the new membership covenant.
If C.J. doesn't know about THAT, then how in heaven's name can he think he knows enough about ANYTHING to make such a claim? Why would he think he knows whether or not any Knoxville pastor has ever abused his authority?
Secondly, C.J. presented this teaching during his most recent vacation there, in August 2009, long after this blog and SGM Refuge were established. By now, C.J. is aware of the way that some pastors have abused their authority. He has even entered into discussions with a couple of injured parties. C.J. KNOWS ABOUT THE VERY REAL POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE. C.J. KNOWS THAT ABUSES HAVE OCCURRED. Therefore, brushing off concerns about pastoral abuse, rather than tackling them head on, seems really cowardly and further detracts from the credibility of this message.]
So, there – there are different reasons why we might be uncomfortable with this. Now, here’s what I’m gonna do, I’m gonna, just real quickly, I’m gonna make some qualifying statements. Because I think, given our uncomfortableness with this passage, these words, this topic, if I make a few qualifying statements, it might serve your soul. I hope it does serve your soul. I – I understand this can be misunderstood, this can be misapplied. Here’s – here’s my challenge. I’m supposed to teach this text to you. So I’m gonna give you some qualifying statements, but then we’re going right back to the text, because that’s my, that’s my role and responsibility this morning, that’s the best way I can serve you. So I hope these qualifying statements don’t weaken the text. Actually, I hope they prepare you to actually look with new eyes at the text. And if anything, if possible, I hope they strengthen the text in…your…soul.
So, so, there’s no misunderstanding as relates to the delegated authority of a pastoral theme and the exercise of authority by a pastoral team in the context of the local church, understand the following. Number one. The passion of your pastoral team. Their passion and purpose is that you know, love, and obey – that you know, love, obey, and serve – the chief Shepherd, the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. That’s – that’s their passion. That’s their purpose. Your pastors didn’t die for your sins. But it is their passion to draw your attention to the One who did die for your sins. And that’s what motivates them as they serve you and care for you and watch over your souls.
[Kris says: This passage would seem to indicate that C.J. is aware that he has thus far in the message placed pastors on too high a pedestal - an inappropriate, unscriptural pedestal. Otherwise, why would he need, even in jest, to make such a weird disclaimer like, "Your pastors didn't die for your sins"?
And otherwise, why would he be anticipating that his audience needs to be reminded that their pastors are only motivated to occupy this pedestal out of a desire to "draw attention to the One who did die for your sins"?
Strange, indeed.]
Number two, their authority is delegated authority, and it’s derived from scripture. Their authority is derived from scripture. Their authority should never be confused with the authority OF scripture. Your – your submission and obedience to scripture is absolute. Your submission to the pastoral team is not absolute. However, because of this clear command of scripture, “Obey your leaders and submit to them,” there is an appropriate obedience to leadership, an appropriate expression of your submission to scripture, that is by no means in contradiction to the authority and content of scripture. Uh, those are very important distinctions to be made about scripture, the authority of scripture, and the delegated authority to a pastor or pastoral team.
[Kris says: Again, even if we assume that "obey" and "submit" are the correctly translated words that should be used in this passage, I dearly wish that C.J. wouldn't just ramble on here about submission to scripture being absolute, while submission to pastors isn't absolute.
We desperately need some specific examples of when a pastor's authority is OK to ignore. When is obedience not a requirement? When is one off the hook for not submitting to his or her pastor?
I mean, C.J. has been very clear that the Bible requires us to obey and submit. So how can he say that pastoral authority - on the other hand - CAN be questioned in some circumstances?
He's really talking out of both sides of his mouth here.]
Three, their authority is defined by scripture. Their sphere of authority – their sphere of delegated authority – is defined by scripture. Their sphere of ministry involves teaching God’s Word, directing the affairs of the church, and watching over your souls. That’s – that is the – those are the spheres of their delegated authority from the chief shepherd. And your pastors understand the nature and the extent and the purpose of pastoral authority.
[Kris says: Do pastors REALLY understand "the nature and the extent and the purpose of pastoral authority"? Really?
SGM's theology focuses a lot of attention on the dangers of sin, and how our "remaining indwelling sin" can affect the eternal destiny of our souls. There is a lot of attention paid to sort of "proving" through one’s behavior that one is indeed among the elect.
In other words, in SGM's gospel, our sanctification (our righteous living) is absolutely necessary evidence of our justification (our right standing with God). And what is "righteous living," except for the day-to-day choices we make, the behaviors we engage in, the attitudes we display?
Therefore, in SGMville, if a pastor is concerned about our "eternal soul," his concern simply WILL extend to all the minutia of that member's daily life, since seeing "evidences of grace" in the member's daily life is part and parcel of the member's knowing whether or not he is saved.
See, either this "watch over your souls" business has ramifications for our salvation (“eternal consequences”), or it doesn't. C.J. seems to think that it does. He spent many minutes (and several paragraphs here in this transcript) hammering away at the eternal component of the word "soul." He whispered it at us dramatically. He almost wept over it - his voice nearly cracked.
Yet now he's acting like he's limiting a pastor's authority...sort of...and yet he keeps the mention of "watching over your souls." The truth is, there can be no limit to a pastor's authority if it has to do with our SOUL.]
Finally, number four. They serve you and lead you as a plurality of pastors. So when we read verse 17, “Obey your LEADERS,” plural, “and submit to THEM,” you are being served by a plurality. So, their authority is derived from scripture, their authority is defined by scripture, and their authority is exercised by a team of men. Authority in this church is not located in a single leader. So, major decisions about the direction and future of this church require unanimity, they’re a plurality of men who are called by God, qualified to lead and serve you through their proven character and gifting, with clearly defined spheres of authority, and their task is a temporary one, and they will one day they will give an account for this most important temporary task.
[Kris says: Again, I love how quickly he plows through this "plurality of leaders" thing. What does that actually mean? And is C.J. honestly saying that the Knoxville church has no one on the pastoral team who can finally say, "The buck stops here"?
Really?
The pastors at Knoxville all get together and answer to...no one and everyone? They don't really have a boss?
Really?
No one's in charge?
No one has any final say?
I don't think that's actually the case. I'm pretty sure that there is a senior pastor at Knoxville. And I'm pretty sure that if there's a major disagreement, he'd have the ultimate authority. Meanwhile, all the other guys on his "team" are still sort of like his employees. How forcefully will they feel inclined to argue against something the senior pastor wants to do, if they might actually be risking a pretty well-paying pastoral position to persist in the disagreement? Especially since, by not agreeing with their senior pastor, who is their own "authority" above them, they could be found in sin for their lack of submission?
Beyond that, the Knoxville church would answer to their area "apostle." Or overseer. (Or whatever other Reformed-Big-Dog-friendly term SGM is using these days for the men whom they used to call "apostles" not so very long ago.)
The truth is that in the SGM world, authority is concentrated in fewer and fewer men, the higher one moves up the leadership pyramid, till you reach C.J. Mahaney himself, all the way at the tippy-top of the pyramid.
So it is ludicrous for C.J. to assure his audience that they are ruled by a "plurality." They can bandy about the word "team" all they want, but the team ultimately does have a captain...who in turn has HIS captain...who in turn answers to HIS captain...and so on and so on and so on.]
Now, it’s important that I make this statement. It’s important that – I could make more, you’d be informed by these statements – but it’s equally important that these statements not weaken the text, because obey and submitting to godly pastors is a – is a divinely imposed privilege and responsibility ultimately for our good.
So, as a member of this church or any church, you are called and you are responsible before God and to God as church members to obey and submit to the leaders of the church as they teach God’s Word, as they direct the affairs of the church, and as they watch over your souls. It could not be clearer, “Obey your leaders and submit to them.” Again, don’t misunderstand, this bears no resemblance to the response of a subordinate in the military, this is not the obedience of a child to a parent, but, this is a very specific submission and obedience that is being commanded here. And so here is the appropriate biblical response to fallible human leadership. As defined in scripture.
[Kris says: HOW is this kind of obedience different from that of a child to a parent? HOW is it different than submission as we'd see it in the military?
Explaining that obedience and submission are required of us by God, but then telling us that they're "not" certain things that comprise a common person's understanding of obedience and submission is simply not very responsible preaching.
If C.J. is going to go around delivering this sermon, then he needs to do a better job of illustrating what this sort of obedience to pastors looks like, in real everyday life situations. And if he's going to tell us what it ISN'T like, then he needs to explain just HOW it is NOT like that thing.]
If you – these – again, individually, I cannot elaborate on them. But number one, here it is, a list of appropriate biblical responses to godly, fallible human leadership. There should, number one, be a joyful agreement with and responsiveness to their doctrine and teaching. There should be a joyful agreement with and responsiveness to their doctrine and teaching, which is why this church has what’s called a “Commitment Class,” a class where we can say to a guest, “Take a period of months to consider – let us introduce you to our doctrine, let us introduce you to our teaching (most important, let us introduce you to the gospel and our Savior), let us introduce you to our church life, we don’t want anybody making any commitment to this church after they’ve been moved in worship after the meeting this morning. We’re grateful that they were moved in worship after the meeting this morning. But it would be unwise to make a commitment merely because you were moved by worship or during communion this morning. You need to be educated about the doctrine and practice of this church so that your – you’ll – you can be in joyful agreement as you commit to this church.
[Kris says: So obedience and submission are demonstrated by joyfully accepting everything that one hears from the pulpit?
Yes, C.J. says something about "fallible" men here. But how does this work itself out in real life? Are there ever occasions when it's OK to question teachings? To reject something as unscriptural, since it's coming from a "fallible man"? If so, C.J. needs to explain this better.]
Secondly, there should be a joyful participation in the appropriate meetings of this church. There should be a joyful participation in the appropriate meetings of this church. Third, there should be a joyful service in this church for this church. Every member of this church should be consistently and meaningfully involved in some way depending on gifting and season of life. Ah, the only ones exempt for any period of time are mothers with small children who must always be held in the highest esteem and respect in the context of this church. OK? I know you do, but I – [laughs] – I mean, I, I’m thinking about – I wanna impress upon you the importance of pastors – their importance and the difficulty of their task in my experience is exceeded only by mothers of small children who must always hold, like, a separate category within Sovereign Grace. OK? I might return to that, to emphasize that. It needs to be emphasized. Every sermon that needs to have a reference to the gospel, and secondly, at some point, honor mothers of small children. OK? That’s how we want our sermons to be characterized here in Sovereign Grace. And I don’t wanna hear any men here whining about how hard you work. [Crowd laughs.] K? No whining about how hard you work, because – because in comparison to a mother of small children, you are lazy. [Crowd really laughs.] Every one of us. We’re lazy in relation to that. And if you doubt what I just said and you’re married and have small children, you take them. You take them alone, you take them exclusively, you won’t last 24 hours. Maybe 48. You’ll be more grateful to your wife than you ever have been previously. OK? So don’t – [laughs] – that’s the influence of my wife on my life right there. When we had small children, I said to her repeatedly, “You know, what you’re doing is so much more important than what I’m doing. And so much more difficult. What did I do today? I sat with the elders in the gate. Which for us is Starbucks. [Crowd laughs.] You know, I’m working with a – personally designed and chosen drink, I’m thinking, making decisions. You’re at home caring for our children. You have a much more challenging and difficult and unpredictable and exhausting…I’m reading books with pastors, making big and important decisions. And you’re doing the difficult work.”
None of this is previously prepared, so I hope somehow this makes its way – and this is a church that honors. Yeah. Maybe we’ll come back to this. [Crowd laughs.] Cuz you do. I just – I just wanna add my voice to what you do.
So, there should be joyful service, which relates to mothers of small children. I’m sure you understand that relationship. There should be joyful service in and for the church.
[Kris says: This is perhaps the oddest portion of the entire message. Maybe someone better versed in SGM's culture could enlighten me. This blather about affirming young mothers and exempting them from a supposedly "biblical" requirement for "biblical" obedience and submission is...just oddly disjointed and seems totally out of place here.
It's nice to affirm moms. But single people and childless wives are just as worthy in God's eyes of affirmation as moms of young children are.
And more importantly, if participating in church life is such an important part of "biblical" submission to one's pastors, why would ANYONE be exempt from it?]
And fourthly, and carefully, there should be a joyful disposition to trust and protect the pastoral team at this church. So any and all slanderous comments about a pastor or the pastoral team, ah, should be challenged. Followed up on. Resolved. In order to preserve the appropriate trust in the leadership and the unity of the church. That – don’t misunderstand – that does not mean that a pastor cannot be corrected. Oh, not true, your pastors welcome your correction as you are aware, they encourage your correction and observations. There’s a difference between slander and correction. Slander – slander produces suspicion. And suspicion over a period of time attacks trust. And without trust, no congregation or pastoral team will be able to work together and effectively advance the gospel, which is why every member of this church has to protect the pastoral team of this church and be particularly alert because of slander against a member of the pastoral team.
[Kris says: Ah, "slander." One of SGM's favorite redefined terms.
A non-SGM person would hear "slander" and understand it to mean what the usual definition means - false, malicious rumors spread around to defame or malign someone.
Using that normal definition, it would by all means be good to guard against the "slander" of one's pastors. Absolutely.
However...
SGM has expanded the definition of "slander" ("gossip," too) to include basically any discussion of anything that would cause a person to question or to disagree with his pastors.
I have no doubt that by interacting in the way I have with what is, after all, C.J.'s public teachings, made available to anyone with an internet connection via downloadable sound files, I will be accused of "slander."
But the Bible never tells us that we cannot examine - and deconstruct and debunk and even (gasp!) criticize - public teachings.
Disagreeing with C.J. (or any other pastor) is not the same as "slandering" him. Or even "gossiping" about him.
Yet in SGM's world, part of following the Bible's commands - to submit to and obey one's pastors - is now "protecting one's pastors from 'slander.'" In other words, although C.J. claims that the Knoxville pastors are eager and waiting to hear their members' correction of them, any dissenting discussion of what comes down from the pulpit is something to be guarded against. It's "slander."]
So those – those are all clear biblical – I could take you to passage after passage in relation to each one, and I’m sure they to some degree are obvious. A pastor cannot watch over your soul if – if – if you aren’t here, if you don’t participate, if you don’t obey and submit, if you don’t attend and participate and serve, how can a pastor watch over your soul? I can’t – they can’t – they can’t watch over somebody who’s not here. Can’t watch over somebody who’s not involved. Can’t watch over somebody if they don’t participate. So, this – this is your biblical responsibility, as I think clearly defined in this passage, and other passages. It – it is a description of your attitude toward the pastoral team, your involvement in this church.
Now, finally. Number three. The relationship between church members and the pastoral team. The relationship between church members and the pastoral team. So having made this distinction between the role of pastors and the responsibility of church members, here’s where I wanna conclude, I wanna conclude in impressing upon you really the inseparable nature of this relationship, because I said at the outset, as I said at the outset, the effectiveness of pastoral ministry is dependent upon a proper response TO pastoral ministry. So. If a congregation does not respond with the appropriate obedience and submission to their pastors, then the leadership of those pastors will not be fruitful, and those pastors will not experience joy in pastoral ministry. And here is what you as a member of this congregation are commanded by good and wise God. Look with me again at verse 17, where we read, “Let them” (your pastors) “do this” (watch over your souls) “with joy and not with groaning due to disobedient, uncommitted church members, for that would be of no advantage to you.” Let – let them do this with joy. Let them do this with joy.
[Kris says: I think it's interesting that this verse really could be read in a couple of different ways, even apart from how one would "really" translate words like "obey" and "submit."
Is the author of Hebrews commanding church members to "let their pastors watch over them with joy"? Or are the pastors themselves responsible for making sure that they do their task with a joyful heart?
Just who is responsible for a pastor's happiness?
C.J. has performed a really neat trick here. Basically, he says that church members are to obey and to submit to their pastors. They are to participate in church life (unless they're young moms...then C.J. would have them be exempt from this supposedly "biblical" command). They are to joyfully accept whatever teaching is given to them and apply it to their lives.
After all, "joyfully accepting" one's pastor's teachings does NOT really leave any room to question the teachings. Moreover, members are NOT to discuss their pastors. That would, of course, be "slander."
But - here's the rub. Even if a member does have a legitimate complaint against a pastor - even if a member has a real reason to be unhappy with his or her pastor in some way - the member actually has no place, using C.J.'s own teaching, to think like this.
After all, C.J. has already established that it is the church member's response that determines the successfulness of pastoral ministry.
In other words, the bottom line is that if you find yourself thinking that your pastor isn't actually very good at his job - GUESS WHAT? IT'S YOUR FAULT ANYWAY!
If you'd been responding to him the way you should be, he'd then be successful! He wouldn't HAVE problems with his job performance!
ANY PROBLEM YOUR PASTOR HAS - EVEN IF IT'S HIS OWN LACK OF HAPPINESS - IS ALL YOUR FAULT!]
God wants happy pastors. That’s what He wants. Wants happy pastors.
[Kris says: Really? This is what God wants? C.J., could we have chapter and verse, please?
I thought true Reformed theology focused little attention upon the happiness of humans. I thought it was all for God's glory, first of all.]
Because unhappy pastors misrepresent Him. Happy pastors accurately represent Him. Unhappy pastors misrepresent God. Misrepresent the gospel. Misrepresent the Savior, misrepresent the gospel of grace.
So, we all need to look at this passage, look up from this passage, and then ask ourselves, “Am I joy to pastor? Am I a joy to pastor?” And let me encourage you, don’t confine the evaluation of yourself to yourself. Because left to myself, normally I provide myself with a flattering evaluation of myself. Therefore I think I can safely assume, “Am I a joy to pastor? I am the ultimate joy to pastor! You obviously haven’t met me. I mean, if you knew me, you would know I am a joy to pastor. You would want me to be in your church.” So, I’m sure a number of you responded that way – “Am I a joy to pastor! Duh! Quite obviously. Yes!”
OK, here’s my response: I hope so. Maybe so. Probably so. But let’s be sure so. And in order to be sure so – hey – let me encourage you, why don’t you ask one of the pastors. Dare ya. Dare ya. For the good of your soul and the good of this church. You ask ‘em.
And if there is any resistance to doing that, let me just tell you, that is JUST YOUR SIN FIGHTING AGAINST IT. Saying, “Don’t do it! Don’t do it. You are. You know you are. You don’t need their confirmation. They’re thinking of you even as he’s preaching right now!”
[Crowd laughs heartily.]
No, just ask ‘em. Say to them – say to Mike after the meeting – “Am I a joy to pastor?” Don’t say, “Aren’t I a joy to pastor!” [Crowd laughs.] No, say, “Am I a joy to pastor?” And then follow it up with this: “And if not, why not? And I want – I want to make it a joy for you to be pastor.”
[Kris says: Does anyone else join me in thinking that this is all sort of gratuitous? Where is the reciprocal exhortation to pastors (whom I'm presuming are still in the audience listening to this), to go to their people and ask them if they feel OK about the job THEY are doing as pastors?
Where's the room for people to give pastors feedback?
Why does this type of humility only flow in one direction, which is UP, toward the pastors on their pedestals?]
Now, again, let me just insert here – you do. Man, the overwhelming majority of this church – huh – your pastors – they’re happy. That should be obvious to any guest here. Identify any of the pastors – you guys are happy. Here’s why they’re happy. Because this is a congregation made up of individuals who are serving. And obeying. And submitting. And supporting their leaders in the advance of the gospel. And therefore, happy pastors. And listen. That’s why, when I’m here, it’s so wonderful to feel the pleasure of God. I feel the pleasure of God because there are happy pastors here watching over the souls of those who are happy to be here and who are obeying and serving and submitting in ways that make it a joy to pastor here.
[Kris says: So C.J. isn't there because he's in town with his entire extended family for a vacation that was "made possible" by "the kindness" of the Knoxville congregation? I'm confused.]
But let us not assume that you are all a joy to pastor. Therefore, let us humbly go to our pastors and say, “Am I a joy to pastor? And if not, why not?” Listen, do this because – if – if – look at the end of this verse. “That would be of no advantage to you.” If they aren’t happy – if they’re groaning instead – if their pastoral ministry is characterized by groaning and complaining, that is of no advantage to you. It is of – listen – follow this – it is to your advantage for you to be a joy to pastor, through your appropriately biblically defined and described obedience and submission to the pastors of this church. It is to your advantage to be a joy to pastor. I mean – doesn’t it – when you read that, you – it seems like the writer is appealing to self-interest as a motivation. Actually, it’s just another illustration of the following: God’s commands are always for our good. His wise commands are for our good. This is what grace is like. Ultimately for His glory.
This – this – this – you show me an effective church, you show me a gospel-centered church – this is present in that church. You show me a church that’s fruitful, this is present. You show me a church where the gospel is advancing, this is present. Listen, whenever I encounter a fruitful church, I observe a demonstration of this particular verse. Which is why I thought it would be appropriate to bring this message to your attention.
[Kris says: Wow, so a church can't proclaim the gospel - the wonderful historical fact of Jesus' death and resurrection to pay the price for our sins and reconcile us with God for eternity - unless everyone is going around groveling in front of their pastors and begging to know if they're obeying and submitting enough so that their pastors are "happy"? What "gospel" is C.J. even talking about, then?]
And why I think it’s appropriate to now inform you of what Mrs. Fawcett said. Here’s what she said in that moment. This moment of separation. Sad congregation assembled around them. And around their wagons. As the sad members gathered around the wagons preparing to say goodbye to their pastor, Mrs. Fawcett said, to her husband John, “John, I cannot bear to leave. I know not how to go.” And John responded, “Nor can I.” He then gave the order to unpack the wagons. And John Fawcett stayed with this simple church until he died, on July 25, 1817. And in one of ensuing sermons, Fawcett shared the words to a hymn that he composed, that has been sung by and meaningful to the church for the past two centuries. Perhaps you’ll recognize these words and hear them with a new appreciation:
Blest be the tie that binds
Our hearts in Christian love.
The fellowship of kindred minds
Is like to that above.
When I, when I read this account, of John Fawcett and his relationship with his church, I think of you. I think of your pastoral team, and their relationship with this church. Now, please don’t misunderstand, in the days ahead, where there is a church planting, we can’t be having this happen. [Crowd laughs.] So, some at some point from your midst will have to go so that more churches like this can be built. But I can’t read this without thinking about this church. See, one day, John Fawcett is gonna give an account. He’s going to stand before the Chief Shepherd and give an account for his assembled congregation. Ha! I’m thinking that’s gonna be a pretty serious celebration. Can you imagine that congregation, assembled around John Fawcett, standing before the Savior, as the Savior – [CJ chuckles] – asks John Fawcett to give an account? It’s not difficult for me to imagine one member of that church after another giving an account for John Fawcett and communicating to the Savior their gratefulness for John Fawcett. It’s gonna be a wild, mad celebration, and all because of the Savior and His wounds that will appear afresh to all. Wild celebration. On that day, when you hear the name Joh – John Fawcett called out – ha! Pay attention. Gonna be a wild celebration on that day.
How about when your church is called? How about when your pastors are called? It’s gonna happen. Big day of evaluation. Day of examination. Edwards, after being dismissed from Northampton, in his final sermon officially to them, prepared them for that day. He said to his church, was the church he had served for some 27 years, “We will rehearse together all that has taken place among us on that future day.” That was sad then. I’m thinking yours is gonna be a happy day. I’m thinking from what I know of the history of this church, yours is gonna be a happy day. Here’s how to make it a happy day. Obey your leaders. And submit to them. For they are keeping watch over your souls as those who have to give an account. Let them do this with joy. Not with groaning. For that would be of no advantage to you.
[End of teaching.]
I never got the "meeting" thing, either. 
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Here is a shrt article in 2 parts about Hebrews 13:17
http://www.tracts.com/2XT3A(x243).pdf
http://www.tracts.com/2XT3B(x243).pdf
And here is one more good article on this subject:
http://www.theexaminer.org/volume2/number4/rule.htm
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Hmmm…here’s John Piper’s take on it, as well. These two sermons were given 12 years ago.
http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper97/10-5-97.htm
http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper97/10-12-97.htm
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:44 pm
Rich, thanks for posting those links.
Kindred, interesting stuff from Piper.
It’s similar to what CJ says, but then again, it’s a lot more balanced. Note that Piper, too, reads the verse the way that I think it ought to be read, with the “let them do this with joy” part as a directive to the pastors, not as a responsibility of the people.
Far, far more balanced.
Plus, to the best of my knowledge, there aren’t a lot of people at Piper’s church who have been “watched over” to the degree that SGMers have been…to where they were accused of pridefulness and disfellowshipped for not submitting to a pastor’s assessment of their “pride.” Or given seemingly binding advice on non-essential matters, like whether or not one is “released” to move to another city.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Kris,
Yeah, I remembered you saying that…that’s what caught my attention when I was reading the “Piper Notes.”
CJ’s “twist” on things are interesting.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Kris,
I’ve been reading the blogs for a few months, actually right before I joined a SGM church, I found them, although I still joined, I appreciate the insight yours and Jim’s sites provide. I noticed someone posted a link to a Piper sermon text, I thought it would be helpful for everyone to have the audio link as well!
(It is a two part sermon)
http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/ByScripture/26/?pageSize=25&pageNumber=4
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Hi, Kyle -
Thanks for your comment, and welcome to the site. I appreciate the link to the audio of the Piper sermons.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
I know CJ’s been traveling around and giving this “message” for a while, but when was it orginally given?
How ironic…SGM’s most popular sermon is also the “most telling.”
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Kindred,
I dialogued with a few correspondents about this transcript while I was working on writing out my own thoughts, and one of the folks (a long-time member of SGM) said that this message has been given periodically at his church for years. I don’t have an exact amount of “years,” or when CJ made his first presentation. Maybe someone out there will know. But it’s apparently been in circulation for at least a decade.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Kris,
This sermon was given at the Southeast Region Celebration Conference in 1999. I was there, and at the time had just left a church with an emotionally distant pastor, so, in my eagerness for change, I was terribly moved. It was also the first time I ever heard CJ speak and he can be a very powerful speaker, so I swallowed it, hook, line and sinker. Thankfully, my first SGM pastor did not abuse the whole obey thing. It wasn’t until his replacement came in that we began to see the negative nuances of submission.
September 23rd, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Kris, Thanks…it’s a ton to get through….
CJ says: “It could be, there might be some – I hope there are none – but there might be some, where you actually come from a context where a pastor or pastoral theme was authoritarian. And if that is true – and if that is true of you – [whispers intensely] I am SO SORRY. Because there is no excuse for that. And if any of us as pastors engage in that, may we be held accountable in this life. I’m sure we’ll be held accountable in the life to come.”
CJ, YOU ARE BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE! IT’S JUST NOT IN YOUR CHOSEN TERMS BY YOUR CHOSEN FEW WHO YOU SAY HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE. WAKE UP!
September 23rd, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Sidney – #10 –
September 23rd, 2009 at 7:38 pm
He also gave it on Nov 11, 2007 at Gilbert, AZ…where, by the way, the wheels are falling off. There was a family meeting last weekend and from what I have heard, things aren’t going so well for their senior pastor…
September 23rd, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Wait one minute here! Kris, why didn’t you mention this? Did I really read this right? Ok, I’ve read and reread this over and over and I can’t seem to make it go away:
“Look with me again at verse 17, where we read, “Let them” (your pastors) “do this” (watch over your souls) “with joy and not with groaning due to disobedient, uncommitted church members, for that would be of no advantage to you.” Let – let them do this with joy. Let them do this with joy.”
Ok, so the part where he says “and not with groaning due to disobedient, uncommitted church members”…..is he quoting scripture there? Can you tell by the teaching if he’s just slipping this in or what?
What is this? What sort of manipulative, mind-control brainwashing is this?
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Sidney,
OK, here (as you pointed out) are C.J.’s exact words, from the sermon transcript, where he is (supposedly) reading Hebrews 13:17:
Now, here is Hebrews 13:17 from the ESV:
Sure ’nuff looks like CJ decided to add a few words there to the Bible…doesn’t it?
He added the phrase in bold:
Carelessness? Maybe. But I wonder how many of his original listeners noticed that he did this? How many of them carried away the impression that God Himself actually addressed the notion of “disobedient, uncommitted church members” in this passage?
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:31 pm
I’m sure we’ve posted this link before on the excerpt from the book “The Discipling Dilemma” by Don E. Vinzant, but I just had to post it again.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/icc/ICC279.html
CJ’s “The Happiest Place on Earth” resembles so much of the stuff these guys tried to warn us about.
Here’s one quote from the excerpt:
“In 1980, George Bryson wrote a booklet entitled, “Excuse for Abuse: An Examination of Heavy-Handed Authority Doctrines.” This booklet begins by quoting one of the modern authoritarians who said, “What you need are people who will stand on their heads and spit nickels, merely because you tell them to, and never ask why.” He then goes on to discuss some of the issues involved,
Today, submission can mean the unqualified yielding to the one(s) in authority over you. In submission, as well as in shepherding, discipleship, and covering, right and wrong are apparently no longer determined by the merits of the act. That is, the intrinsic rightness or wrongness of an act (so judged in the light of God’s Word) is not of primary concern to those holding this view. Rather, obedience to the one in authority, regardless of the request or consideration, is of prime importance. . . . Under this false definition of “authority,” right is determined solely by obedience or submission to that authority or its representative. It is also contended that if the authority misdirects its “subjects,” the authority will be held accountable and not the subject who obeys, even if and when the act is obviously (from a biblical standard) wrong. … The notion that we’re responsible only to our “superiors” (and thereby absolved from responsibility to God) and that they will somehow have to answer to God for us, is totally foreign to Scripture.18
The false position which Bryson is refuting has a similar sound to the defense for the Nazi leaders at the Nuremburg Trials just after World War II. Even human courts of law will not allow one to be considered
p150
innocent when wrongdoing is practiced “just because someone happens to say so.”
In 1981, George Mallone continued these warnings in his book Furnace of Renewal. He noted that,
In the last few years, both charismatic and evangelical churches have been split over the “shepherding controversy.” In its extreme, it is extortion and domination of the worst variety. . . . The movement has created alarm by its failure to understand the potential sinfulness of leadership within the church. It is only one small step from “pastoral leadership to spiritual domination” and from “biblical submission to communitarian subservience.” What is true of Lord Acton’s phrase in politics is also true in religion. “All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”. . . Contrary to what we would like to believe, elders, pastors and deacons are not in a chain of command, a hierarchical pyramid, which puts them under Christ and over the church. The leaders of a biblical church are simply members of the body of Christ. 19″
———
As you’ve pointed out Kris, CJ really needs to revisit “The Happiest Place on Earth” and clarify some things. I’m beginning to understand why there’s been so much abuse by SGM pastors.
(If you haven’t read the excerpt, I’d highly recommend it. It’s a fairly short read.)
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:53 pm
This is going to make a lot of SGM folks mad, but it’s starting to look like ‘ol CJ is quite the “scripture twister.”
September 23rd, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Well said, Kris…
“…most SGMers would NOT consider themselves primarily to be “Evangelical” in the manner in which that word has come to be defined. In fact, most folks who have landed at SGM have arrived at their SGM churches after journeying through other branches of Christianity, and they come to SGM expressly because they are looking for an antidote to the user-friendly, seeker-sensitive, soft-sell message of modern Evangelicalism, with its lack of emphasis on “sound doctrine.”
SGMers will think of themselves rather proudly as “Reformed, with a distinctly Charismatic element,” but most would not firstly define themselves as “Evangelical.” After all, they came to SGM expressly to ESCAPE being one of those namby-pamby, easy-believe-ism Evangelicals! That’s why they embrace such challenging and non-fun activities like joining a group where people are happy to confront you about your sin. That’s why they sit around and talk about all their personal weaknesses and struggles. That’s why they grit their teeth, tighten their bootstraps, and find SGM’s “tough love” message bracing and invigorating.
SGM in its current form is a reaction to seeker-friendly “Evangelicalism!”
———-
That would make a good post for discussion. It seems everything about SGM is the result of their “reactions.”
(Okay, I’m going to bed now.)
September 24th, 2009 at 1:39 am
“Authority in this church is not located in a single leader” – CJ, if you believe this about your typical SGM church you are willingly self-deceived or still hitting the hash pipe you claim to have left at your conversion. Some SG churches have but a single staff pastor. In any of the multiple cases that I am aware of that pastor is THE authority. There is a sharp distinction in the minds of SGM brass between “vocational elders” (i.e paid full-time pastors) and non-vocational elders (those who have to do secular work so that they can tithe so that vocational elders can be paid). The full-timers have status above all others.
When CJ says “qualified to lead and serve you through their proven character and gifting” how does he justify the gifting, then degifting, then re-gifting in San Diego? How about the ex-apostle who is now an ex-pastor from the failed church plant in North Carolina? What about the chastisement of the senior pastor and pastoral staff that reportedly occurred recently in Gilbert?
September 24th, 2009 at 1:50 am
I was going to call it a night but then I read the comments Kris made about “illustrating what this sort of obedience to pastors looks like”. Kris, your analysis of this sermon is superb. Thanks for “serving us so well” with this.
You show that this overly-worn sermon ain’t nuttin’ but a
September 24th, 2009 at 2:06 am
I’m still not done for today.
CJ says “Secondly, there should be a joyful participation in the appropriate meetings of this church” and then gives no explanation. Huh. Then he launches into the young-mothers-exempt section. I agree with Kris here. This may be the oddest section.
CJ blathers “None of this is previously prepared”. How can he say that when this is leftovers that he has dished up over and over?
September 24th, 2009 at 7:19 am
newly,
If you listen to this sermon in its other incarnations (i.e. when CJ presented it to John MacArthur’s group, or Mark Dever’s church), it is uncanny how sections are basically word-for-word identical in every presentation.
CJ is obviously a very gifted communicator, able to memorize large amounts of material. But if he’s trying to give the impression that he’s delivering this sermon to the Knoxville church sort of off-the-cuff and unplanned, then that would be dishonest. It all is very much planned, including the seemingly random little jokes, like when he refers to himself as, “a former senior pastor, looking for work.” He’s gotten laughs with that exact same little self-deprecating joke in at least two other churches. If his jokes are so well-planned in advance, then I’d find it hard to believe that any of the important parts are just off the top of his head.
September 24th, 2009 at 7:39 am
Thanks for finding the actual verse because I thought I had lost touch with reality reading that transcript.
CJ actually twists scripture to the degree he saying the opposite of the actual verse.
IOW, CJ and the rest of you dear leaders, stop whining and be more joyful.
Which leads to the question that kept cropping up in my mind as I was reading, exactly who watches the watchers?
With CJ at the helm, that question is actually the forshadowing of a disaster waiting to happen because instead of watching the watchers, CJ is admiring his reflection in the rear view mirror.
September 24th, 2009 at 7:42 am
I know I already addressed this (in my “blue” remarks in the transcript), but I want to revisit this particular piece of the sermon:
How can CJ so sweepingly and so confidently declare such a thing to his audience? Remember, supposedly he is “flying blind” and has landed in Knoxville with this particular message for no other reason than that he thinks it’d be a peachy reminder. Supposedly, he has no idea if there are any problems in Knoxville or not.
So if he knows that little about the goings-on at Cornerstone Church, HOW IN THE WORLD can he be comfortable assuring his audience that they don’t have to worry about authoritarian abuses? If we are to believe him in his statements about the randomness of his choice of topics, then we’d have to believe that he knows nothing of the Knoxville church’s current issues with the new membership covenant that they’re demanding everyone sign. And if he knows nothing about the membership covenant issues, then there’s no way he can know anything about whether or not any of the pastors in Knoxville is abusing his authority.
So really, CJ has no right to declare to his audience that they never have to worry about pastors who overstep their authority.
Like I said, I know I’m repeating myself. But I think this is an important point to emphasize.
It hit me anew how meaningless CJ’s reassurances were. I got to thinking about the way this message would have felt to those sitting in the audience who HAD ALREADY suffered through abuses of pastoral authority. I know – because of situations that have been shared with me – that there are folks in the Knoxville church who have had firsthand experience with pastors who think too highly of their own authority. What were those folks thinking as they sat there during that “Sunday Celebration” and listened to this false declaration?
To say the least, that must have been highly confusing!
September 24th, 2009 at 7:59 am
“God wants happy pastors. That’s what He wants. Wants happy pastors.
Because unhappy pastors misrepresent Him. Happy pastors accurately represent Him. Unhappy pastors misrepresent God. Misrepresent the gospel. Misrepresent the Savior, misrepresent the gospel of grace.”
More than “HAPPY PASTORS” I think God would want Pastors of integrity. Pastors who are willing to do the hard work of investigating stories of abuse and dishonesty, especially when it is at the expense of children who have been adversely affected by this behavior. Rather than coping out with “sorry, I’m just not gifted to handle this” Pastors who actually have the backbone to respond to emails…..
Where are they in SGM?
September 24th, 2009 at 8:20 am
Thanks, Kris for your transcription work. It’s revealing, to say the least. So much could (and I’m sure will) be said about this sermon. As I was reading, this part stood out to me.
Who gives C.J. , or any of the other “elders,” the right to judge who should and should not be exempt from attending a particular meeting or serving for a season in the church? He gives mothers with small children a pass. What is troubling is that he would feel free to judge who does and doesn’t have a pass. What about parents who work long hours to put food on the table and then come home to lawns that need mowing, kids who need help with homework, spouses who would like a little time and attention, etc? What about folks who care for elderly parents, have to work second jobs to make ends meet, or who have health issues? The list goes on. Does anyone owe him an explanation? The issue here is the atmosphere created when our priorities are dictated by another. I imagine that this judgmental attitude would trickle down to home group leaders or other church members. Should we serve? Absolutely! But who decides how and when?
Rom 14 :4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand. One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.
September 24th, 2009 at 8:24 am
This is the part that stood out to me. Somehow, I managed to leave it out when I cut and pasted from my document.
C.J. said, “ There should be a joyful participation in the appropriate meetings of this church. Third, there should be a joyful service in this church for this church. . . .Ah, the only ones exempt for any period of time are mothers with small children . . .”
September 24th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Aside from the fact that CJ had to completely misread and twist the verse around to get to the point where it is the members’ duty to keep their pastors “happy,” there is just something so bizarre and anti-SGM about the focus on “happiness” to begin with.
Since when in SGMville is “happy” something that God wants for His people?
What would be the typical SGM pastor’s response if ANYONE came to him with complaints about a lack of happiness?
Based upon so many people’s experiences, I am convinced that SGM pastors are trained to respond to such complaints by directing a member’s attention back to his OWN behavior and attitudes that might be contributing to his lack of happiness. Moreover, SGM pastors would minimize “happiness” as a priority, focusing instead upon the member’s call to respond to life’s events in a way that honors God and scripture. (Which, by the way, I personally think can be a GOOD thing, if it is done with tenderness and understanding and compassion.)
But somehow, suddenly, when it comes to the pastors themselves, we are supposed to believe that God has started caring about “happiness”? That their happiness is God’s priority? And that it should be OUR priority?
That’s just goofy.
Why is a pastor’s happiness important to God, but a member’s happiness is not?
September 24th, 2009 at 9:13 am
Pilgrim,
I, too, thought CJ’s random exemption from serving in the church for “mothers with small children” was odd.
Maybe it was something that was on his mind because he had just finished up spending a leisurely couple of weeks with his daughters and their families at a lakeside vacation home with borrowed boat and all. Maybe he’s aware of criticism that has been leveled at some of these moms of small children for their lack of participation in church life. Who knows.
There’s nothing wrong with affirming mothers. But if “serving” is this “biblical” duty, then why is ANYONE exempt?
And, like Pilgrim says, why does CJ (or other pastors) get to decide which group of people are exempt from such a “biblical” requirement?
Odd.
September 24th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Would it have been appropriate during this teaching for someone to have a Joe Wilson town hall moment and scream out at C J – “YOU LIE”!
September 24th, 2009 at 9:46 am
Here’s something that I know is going to seem – at least initially – sort of random and “out there.”
But recently, someone sent me a link to an entire collection of videos of CJ preaching. I haven’t had time to watch a lot of ‘em, but in the ones I did glance at, I noticed something.
In almost every sermon, CJ injects the notion that he is “serving” his audience with his message.
He does it in this Happiest Place On Earth sermon, too. Notice this, which you can find toward the beginning of the first half of the message (in the previous post):
I also have noticed the “serve you” language in other SGM communications. For instance, that seems to be the refrain du jour nowadays, if pastors DO acknowledge former members’ grievances. They will express the sentiment of, “I am sorry that we did not serve you better.”
I’m not sure I’m going to be able to articulate precisely what I’m thinking, but I’m going to try. I know this might seem a little odd and tedious, but I invite you to hang with me for awhile, to see if I can’t flesh out what it is about the “serve you” language that is troublesome to me.
The notion that someone is “serving” us automatically sets up a situation where WE (the audience, or the average member) occupy a superior position…while the one who is “serving” us is lowly and humble. If we are receiving a “service” – especially a service for which we have not paid a price – we automatically will feel like we do not have any right to critique it or complain. The very notion that something is a “service” to us removes from us our ability to evaluate it or be unhappy about it.
After all, that would be the same as “looking a gift horse in the mouth.”
Yet the REALITY is that while CJ uses the language of “serving,” he is very definitely ensconced in a position of superiority, merely because of his position of authority over people. He’s not even a pastor at this point in his career – he’s ABOVE pastors…he is the authority to whom the pastors in his
denominationfamily of churches must answer.What happens when the LANGUAGE of “service” is superimposed upon scenarios where the REALITY is the exact opposite of “service”?
What happens when lingo that would normally denote a relationship of “servant to master” is used to describe a relationship that ultimately will still be “master to servant”?
Really…I think I’m on to something here…so please hang with me and tell me what you think.
In this Happiest Place sermon, CJ starts by talking about how he wants to “serve” his audience. In so doing, he becomes the “server,” or “servant,” of his audience. His audience is put in a position where they are practically obligated to accept whatever is being “served” to them, since they are receiving it for free, and since they are occupying this (supposedly) superior position of being “served.”
Yet the ultimate end of the Happiest Place message instructs the audience to go to those who are (supposedly) “serving” them and place themselves in this weird groveling position where they are asking their pastors if they are “a joy to pastor.”
The bottom line reality is that in SGM churches, members serve their pastors…even while the LANGUAGE that is used would seem to indicate the opposite.
This is a very crafty, manipulative trick. People are left feeling “empowered with powerlessness.” In other words, on the one hand, they’ve been TOLD that they are “BEING served,” while the BEHAVIOR that they are instructed to engage in is actually – bottom line reality – the behavior of one who is SERVING.
If CJ were really blunt and not so silver-tongued, he could just as easily have said, “Shut up and listen as I tell you to lower yourselves.”
The end result would be the same.
But instead, it’s all masked with this language of “I am serving you.”
When pastors can think of all that they do as “serving,” then they are automatically off the hook for what it is that they’re actually serving up. And the people are predisposed to feel like they have to accept whatever is “served” to them, because, as the ones supposedly “being served,” they have no right to critique what’s being given to them.
Does anyone else see what I’m saying?
September 24th, 2009 at 9:57 am
Kris,
WOW! And I do mean WOW! What amazing insight and discernment!
September 24th, 2009 at 10:15 am
Kris,
Have you ever seen the cartoon movie “A Bug’s Life”, where the waitress asks, “Who ordered the poo poo platter”?
Yes, CJ is serving – serving the poo poo platter as SGM swarms to feed on this dung.
September 24th, 2009 at 11:05 am
Rich,
The thing is, it’s not just SGMers who have been “served” with this Happiest Place message. CJ has delivered it to other non-SGM congregations, too. I’m not sure how this happens.
Matter of fact, one of the things written to me over and over again by SGM defenders has to do with the idea that these other ministries DO seem to accept and respect CJ and his teachings. People will say, “Really, Kris – do you honestly think that you’re smarter than John Piper or Mark Dever? They all think CJ is great. Certainly all those wise and learned men cannot be wrong, while you and all your angry, bitter commenters are right?”
I honestly don’t know how to answer these folks sometimes. I mean, if you read the transcript of CJ’s message, its errors seem glaringly obvious to me. I have no idea why others – especially the non-SGM folks – don’t see what I see.
I can understand why SGMers would be prone to accept CJ’s teachings. But I cannot understand what’s going on with other ministries who are “served” with these teachings. It’s very puzzling to me.
September 24th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Kris-
#30 = wow! So true.
And hence the weird cognitive dissonance/something’s just not right but I can’t put a finger on it feeling I and so many others have had. It made me feel sick just to read your explanation because it totally puts it into words, like it’s all just smoke and mirrors and sleight of hand. And they all talk like this.
September 24th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Kris,
The problem is that many others have taught this same trash about Hebrews 13:17, including some of the reformed big dogs. Years ago, I printed out an 82 page article on this very subject. I have the article now here in front of me. I know that 82 pages is much more than many would care to read, but it covers all aspects of this abomination.
The web site is:
http://freedominchrist.net/
Then click on Biblical Studies, then New Testamant, then New Testament again, then Hebrews, then “Obey Them that Rule Over You.”
I encourage everyone to please take the time to read this article or print it out. I have done much research on Hebrews 13:17, and this is the best resource I have ever found. It gives very, very, detailed info on the Greek, hermeneutics, linguisics, etc, comparing many related scriptures.
OUTSTANDING!!!
September 24th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
The other Reformed Big Dogs may have taught submission/obedience over the years. But as we can see with the Piper teachings which Kindred linked to above, they don’t twist the scripture nearly as much as CJ does.
The way he gets the notion of “happy pastors” out of that verse is just the height of scripture-twisting. According to SGM’s own teachings about other other areas of life, God doesn’t care so much about our happiness! So why would that same God suddenly be so concerned about pastors‘ “happiness”? Telling people that it’s their “biblical” (in other words, God-ordained) duty to be sure their pastors are “happy” is the height of inconsistency, not to mention breathtakingly audacious.
And of course, in that twisted world, if someone finds himself with a legitimate complaint against a pastor, that person is totally stymied from doing anything about it. Because – according to CJ’s logic – even legitimate complaints would simply be a sign that the MEMBERS aren’t doing their duty to submit well enough. After all, a pastor’s effectiveness is only as good as his members’ submission. If he’s not effective, it’s due to members’ poor responses to him.
It’s a total win-win scenario for pastors. And total lose-lose for members.
Even the Big Dogs ought to be able to see the strange inconsistencies. Especially the part about “happiness.”
Or does their “Reformed-ness” only stretch far enough to cover other people, and not themselves?
September 24th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
By the way – totally random aside –
I always feel like I’m doing Disneyland a grave disservice every time I type out the title of this sermon.
(Had to get that off my chest. I LOVE LOVE LOVE Disneyland! Comparing SGM to the Magic Kingdom is a real slam against ol’ Walt and Mickey.)
September 24th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
The hardest part of reading CJ’s message (which was foundational to SGM) is experiencing the old feelings of anger and frustration that came as a consequence of being trapped in SGM.
SGM is a trap, but the truth sets us free!
September 24th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Kris-
Spot on about the whole “serve you” jargon-it’s almost Orwellian. What CJ is doing is not really serving, but dictating to the audience how they should interpret this scripture and how they should apply (with the odd exception of young moms)-but how do you object to such a “humble, happy, servant?
I also think CJ’s strange style of preaching is more entertaining than hypnotic-which allows him to get away with throwing in a little extra meaning to a scripture-especially in Reformed circles outside of SGM. I think your average reformed conference goer, will find CJ entertaining-even if some of his teaching is odd or a little too strict for your liking. But if you’re not in SG land, where CJ’s word is the cannon-then you enjoy the little show he puts on and go back to your church life none the worse. I’m not so sure that other Reformed folks give CJ all that much thought after they’ve left the conference. JUst my thoughts on why others haven’t spent too much time picking up on what CJ is actually teaching.
September 24th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Musicman,
You’re probably right. The non-SGM audiences enjoy CJ’s charm and speaking style and find themselves moved by his messages. I can even see how in a healthy, non-dysfunctional church environment, the ideas about submission and obedience could work out well enough…ESPECIALLY if there is some type of formal accountability in place.
So the non-SGM audiences are entertained and moved…and then they go home and that’s the end of it. No real need to analyze what they were taught.
That’s likely it.
September 24th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Claireon,
You made me wonder, do committed SGM members actually feel anger as they listen to these teachings? I mean, do they RECOGNIZE their feelings as anger? Did you, at the time you were experiencing them?
It just hit me that this could be a really interesting topic for discussion…
Those of you who are no longer in SGM but did sit through some version of a Happiest Place message – how did this message make you feel as you were listening to it?
September 24th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Claireon, SGM *IS* a trap…that’s a great description…a sick, sick trap. It’s all about keeping the members “trapped.” Kris is right…EVERYTHING about SGM is a total win-win for pastors and a lose-lose for members.
It’s no wonder many folks go through counseling after leaving SGM. This kind of “twisting” messes with your mind.
And think of how it messes with the minds of kids. Their dads and moms basically parent the same way the pastors pastor. It’s a total win-win for the parents and a total lose-lose for the kids.
Everything’s about CONTROL…it’s CJ’s answer to EVERYTHING! E V E R Y T H I N G !
Well, guess what CJ? God’s in control. He controls it all…including your little “family of churches” and EVERY family within each individual SG church.
September 24th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
“Those of you who are no longer in SGM but did sit through some version of a Happiest Place message – how did this message make you feel as you were listening to it?”
I heard it for “the first time” at a celebration east in the mid to late 90′s. I felt a sense of obligation, and afterwards we were encouraged by CJ to find our pastors at the conference and communicate our response to his msg. I dutifully went up to my senior pastor at the conference and with a “thinking-the-best” open heart I said “I want to be a joy for you to pastor” (or some such thing …) And he looked at me with what I can only describe as smug satisfation of a “mission accomplished.” I was left feeling a bit like a fool and was very confused… more of that cognitive dissonance that’s been talked about. It took me 15 years before I got out. These sites were instrumental in connecting all the dots for me. Thank you.
September 24th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Kris, I attended CLC for over 20 years–and so sat through all kinds of sermons with CJ, Josh, Brent, Steve, and on and on. I didn’t feel anger then–while I was under the spell, I felt special.
When asked on an earlier thread what I thought about Mark Altrogge, the first thing that welled up was CLC-ese — “oh, he’s wooooonderful” and then I thought, “Huh, I wonder if he really is, now that the scales have fallen from my eyes.”
I got my response from my letter to CJ and here’s a summary:
CJ thanked me for my letter and said my story “is simply heartbreaking.”
He’s talked to two pastors involved–and they’re meeting to consider my “request to pursue restoring [my ex] to fellowship.”
He also asks if I want to meet with them with a mutually agreed upon mediator to resolve any remaining differences.
He concludes the letter saying he is “thankful for the grace of God that is evident in [my] life” and hopes that I “will pray for [them] in the days to come.”
The words were all very nice–but really it’s just the same old “roach” letter–an illustration that I think Larry Tomczak used about an a letter of apology that seemed sincere until you read that the secretary had accidently typed in the CEO’s note to “send the usual roach letter”.
And this was NOT an apology or an admission of any wrongdoing.
September 24th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Rose,
I’m glad you found something helpful here.
It must have been sort of odd to go and do what you were told to do – approach your pastor and express your support – only to have it feel like it was nothing more than what your pastor expected from you.
Acme,
INTERESTING, about your response from CJ.
I do have one question – did he use the phrase, “I’m sorry that you were not better served by Sovereign Grace,” or something like that, with the word “serve” in it?
September 24th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Hey Kris,
Yes…. It was very weird to receive that response from my senior pastor, but looking back now, I had already been in sgm long enough, that if I found something that didnt “seem right”, we were just so used to the training of “examine the grid” or perspective that we were looking thru and then assume that whatever it was – we were the ones misreading the response.
September 24th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Kris, the word “sorry” did not appear. The word “serve” did twice–as in the pastors in question “want to serve you in any way they can” and SGM wants to “grow in how [they] serve and care for God’s people.” Both worthy sentiments.
September 24th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
My thoughts are in ( )
….we all need to look at this passage..and then ask ourselves, “Am I joy to pastor?..” And let me encourage you, don’t confine the evaluation of yourself to yourself. Because left to myself, normally I provide myself with a flattering evaluation of myself. (really, that is different than me – I am my worst critic. Mostly my pastor is telling me to relax and not evaluate myself so harshly. And, where is the Holy Spirit-so I always need a church leader to tell me how I am doing-I can’t trust myself. I can’t trust the Holy Spirit. The bible doesn’t have the authority anymore to rebuke me if needed..or teach me) Therefore I think I can safely assume, “Am I a joy to pastor? I am the ultimate (ultimate joy–not enough to just be a joy- press on for ultimate-raise the bar-work harder-be the ultimate-be number one-I am sure somewhere God meant to say be an ultimate joy as I am an ultimate joy…instead of be holy)joy to pastor!…. OK, here’s my response: I hope so. Maybe so. Probably so. But let’s be sure so. (Ok, don’t pray, don’t ask the Holy Spirit to show you a thing-do what we do for everything run quickly to your pastor and ask) And in order to be sure so – hey – let me encourage you, why don’t you ask one of the pastors (yes, because they are the ultimate decision maker and evaluator of your behavior. You are what they say you are. They can define you. Their evaluation is the only way you can be “sure” you need them. Your very life and soul depend on it). Dare ya. Dare ya. For the good of your soul (yes, my soul will be better off if my pastor is happy because I am being obedient enough – and if not what is the state of my soul)and the good of this church. You ask ‘em (no thanks).
September 24th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Acme,
Could you explain this better for me, “The words were all very nice–but really it’s just the same old “roach” letter–an illustration that I think Larry Tomczak used about an a letter of apology that seemed sincere until you read that the secretary had accidently typed in the CEO’s note to “send the usual roach letter”. Was there something actually writtn on there about sending the usual letter?
Thanks,
BFly
September 24th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Acme,
Don’t feel bad, my letter doesn’t have “sorry” in it either.
In a 4 very short paragraph letter, he did say the word “serve” 4 times.
Sid
September 24th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
I think when I heard this preached, I was in a full blown, airway obstruction, head lock FEASTING on the poo poo platter. You see, I thought I NEEDED TO TO DO THIS. Because I wanted to be right with God really bad..
I did not know God for myself..I just wanted to worship CJ actually. I wanted to be perfect and to fit in..anywhere..
Kris, you crack me up with denomination of churchs, strike through, family of churches. I laugh everytime you write that.
Your “serving” Bull crapola definition is right on. This man is a slick rick and I feel safe that you are calling him on it.
I had a discussion with someone the other day. I was telling them to be careful and about something SG related. The person said “I was warned about people like you” “I WAS WARNED” I stopped for a minute and laughed, and said..you can’t beware the bewarer we’d never get anywhere..
CJ..beware of the bewarer…
September 24th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Little A…
“Beware the bewarer”
That really cracked me up! I have never heard that before.
You were warned as if there’s some disease that comes from those of us who “aren’t doing well” who have left SGM.
Spit…uh, Guy…I LOVE the barf icon…but could we have a spit icon? I could really use that.
September 24th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Kris,
Thanks for taking the time to transcribe this message and comment on it. You know what I was thinking after I read it–where’s the love? Where’s the grace and mercy? I mean, isn’t that what Christianity is all about? Didn’t Jesus say that the Law and the Prophets could be reduced to 2 things: loving God and loving our neighbors as ourselves?
Jesus didn’t say anything about joyfully attending meetings, joyfully serving, and being a joy to the religious leaders. If Jesus thought these activities were important, don’t you think he would have said it? In fact, Jesus rebuked Martha for being anxious about serving him (JESUS!) while commending Mary for sitting at his feet and listening to him. Wasn’t that story supposed to “serve” as an example to us?
Believing that I MUST do something to make someone else happy does not produce joy in me. It produces bondage. Jesus came to set us free from man-made rules that “served” as a barrier between us and the Father:
“‘Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone. Woe to you Pharisees, because you love the most important seats in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. Woe to you, because you are like unmarked graves, which men walk over without knowing it.’ One of the experts in the law answered him, ‘Teacher, when you say these things, you insult us also.’ Jesus replied, ‘And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them.’” –Luke 11:42-46
September 24th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
“On the Healing Journey–”
Well said.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:06 am
Kris — I appreciate your comments. It would be helpful to include a real definition of the word EVANGELICAL. I’ve been taught (not in SGM) that evangelical actually refers to churches/Christians who accept the entire Bible as the inspired, infallible Word of God — the only infallible rule of faith and practice. When reading CJ’s use of that word, I would automatically apply that definition. However, I realize that there is much confusion among those who confuse the word “evangelical” with the word “evangelism” as in “doing things to get people saved.” And perhaps your definition is different than the one I wrote (didn’t look up, remembered off the top of a very fuzzy head.) I’m not sure what definition Mahaney is using here. Sort of like trying to decipher Mormon vocabulary — we have different definitions for the same terms.
Although I find many things to admire in SGM, the CJ Mahaney presidency/papacy is the thing that worries me the most. Too much power in one man, with few checks and balances. I find myself comparing the “joy to pastor” issue with the “joy to parent” idea. Would I ever expect my kids to come to me and ask if they are a joy to parent? They ARE a joy to parent, but my happiness does not depend upon ease of parenthood. They are a joy to parent, regardless of their obedience level. Regardless of the circumstances. There is great JOY in parenting, and I hope also in pastoring, that has nothing to do with circumstances. “Consider it all JOY, brethren, when..” people do all kinds of horrible things to you, and JOY should not be dependent upon the sheep. I’m trying to find some way to flesh out a reason for this message, but it’s tough. In the natural. no way is a flock of sheep going to come to the shepherd with concern over his joy or lack of it.
September 25th, 2009 at 8:04 am
To answer your question about how us, former SGMers, feel when we hear/read a sermon like this…I feel a combination of emotions. For one, I am confused. How on earth could a huge group of such intelligent people sit there and not want to throw their note-filled journals at him??? Then, I move onto the anger stage of my response. “Seriously…the man is a liar!!! Why doesn’t somebody DO SOMETHING???” Anger comes and goes, slowly turning to regret. “Wait a second, I was once one of those ‘intelligent’ people worshiping at the altar of this man. Why? Whyyyyyyyyyyyy?” Obviously, sadness comes next. Then prayer. Then more prayer. Then more…… It’s a cycle and I feel like I still need a lot of recovery. The only thing that helps, other than God’s Word, is reading through these sites and seeing everyone’s stories. It’s a reminder that I’m not alone and that God spared me and my family from so much pain.
Out of curiousity, did the Knoxville church CJ is speaking to here know about the new membership covenant while this sermon was being preached?
September 25th, 2009 at 8:24 am
Square Peg,
You have a very good point…”my happiness does not depend on ease of parenthood.”
I am just now realizing this…HOW ON EARTH could CJ put so much pressure on people to provide the happiness to the pastors? That’s sick. The pastors feelings should NEVER be hinged on what someone OUTSIDE of them is doing.
I can’t believe this really. Because the teaching forEVER in SGM has been, and continues to be, that our ONLY satisfaction should come from Jesus.
September 25th, 2009 at 9:22 am
Pilgrim said:
“Who gives C.J. , or any of the other “elders,” the right to judge who should and should not be exempt from attending a particular meeting or serving for a season in the church? He gives mothers with small children a pass. What is troubling is that he would feel free to judge who does and doesn’t have a pass. What about parents who work long hours to put food on the table and then come home to lawns that need mowing, kids who need help with homework, spouses who would like a little time and attention, etc? What about folks who care for elderly parents, have to work second jobs to make ends meet, or who have health issues? The list goes on. Does anyone owe him an explanation? The issue here is the atmosphere created when our priorities are dictated by another.”
One of the problems is that C.J. has never worked a real world job in all of his life. He has no clue of the demands of working in the “real world”, especially now in corporate life with the increasing demands of downsizing and the threat of layoffs. Even the jobs he has worked in the ministry, he been in the position of control where he could decide his hours etc. He has never really been under a boss and had the advantage of subordinates that he could pass tasks to etc.
Thus Mahaney doesn’t really know what it is like for someone in the “real world” working a real job.
September 25th, 2009 at 9:29 am
Butterfly, re #49 (which was re #44), the letter I received was very nice, indicated sympathy and understanding, but did not make even a tiny concession that any of my family’s trials were related to SGM at all. When I saw Sydney’s letter, it was clear that a boilerplate had been used(“boilerplate” means standard phrasing and organization, often word-for-word).
Here’s the roach letter explanation:
One of the corporate legends that gets passed along from time to time has to do with an airline passenger who found a dead roach in his salad. As soon as he could, he fired off an angry letter to the airline – something along the lines of “I’ve flown this airline for years and I deserve better” (as if they singled him out for a special treat in his salad).
Very soon thereafter, he received a reply, from no less than the president of the company.
“Dear Mr. ____________,
Your letter caused great concern to us. We have never before received such a complaint and pledge we will do everything within our power to insure such an incident will never happen again. It might interest you to know that the employee serving you has been reprimanded and the entire plane is being fumigated. Your concern has not fallen on deaf ears.”
Needless to say, the man was impressed. That is, until he noticed that the letter was attached to his original angry correspondence, and the president had hand-written on it, “Send the usual roach letter.”
September 25th, 2009 at 10:07 am
“The Happiest Place on Earth” ???– When reading this title, I try to think back to my days in SGM, and never would I ever have thought of it as the happiest place on earth. There were many happy times; but I think of the Celebration conferences, and a worship conference or two that are my personal snapshots of corporate SGM. Celebration was wonderful in many ways, but I’d never have termed it as part of the happiest place on earth. I remember being shocked to find that the elite leaders didn’t seem to mingle much with the sheeple, having their own dining room, etc. The registration price, though a necessary charge for anything with so much administration/cost involved, seemed exorbitant considering the tithing rate of the attenders. And the crowd rushing into the auditorium as if it were a 5 AM Wal-Mart opening with a new shipment of Wii’s — I was so disappointed to see that Christians saving whole rows of seats for their buddies — the attitude was so odd. Most of Celebration was refreshing, but the first time I ever heard CJ Mahaney speak, I did not warm to him personally. I was mesmerized, but put off by the condescending attitude cloaked in “servant” language.
And, as someone else already mentioned, this emphasis on “happiness” is completely different from any Christian teaching I’ve ever heard, and especially in SGM where you ain’t spose to be happy, ’cause you’re a self-beating sinner, you’re just spose to be obedient, cheerful, and keep your problems to yourself because they’re your own fault anyway, and no matter who sins against you, it’s better than you deserve.
Hey, theologically, I LIKE “better than you deserve” — but personally and legally, we have rights, and the right to lay them down or stand up to them as we see fit or are led by the Spirit. Jesus laid aside his rights on His own accord, but he had every power to exercise them. Would anyone have ever said to Him, as he bore the cross to Calvary, “this is better than you deserve”?
Yes, the Church ought to be the most joyful place on earth. But the happiest? Poor choice of words.
September 25th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Kris – “Beyond that, the Knoxville church would answer to their area “apostle.” Or overseer. (Or whatever other Reformed-Big-Dog-friendly term SGM is using these days for the men whom they used to call “apostles” not so very long ago.)”
Oh, I HOPE they’ve stopped calling them apostles!
September 25th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Acme–
*sigh*
September 25th, 2009 at 10:34 am
“God wants happy pastors. That’s what He wants. Wants happy pastors”.
Whattttttttttttttt?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
I’ve been off-SGM for a bit, watching from a distance and a recent visit to my parents (who for those not aware go to the only England SGM church) – has re-worried me about what SGM are upto.
And I find this! As Kris wrote so excellent, reformed theology speaks about God’s glory being paramount and our happiness secondary (although John Piper would argue the two are linked).
C J Mahaney makes his views clearly known. The happiness of pastors?!?! I’m sorry …. didn’t the New Testament role model show church leaders who were persecuted, martyred etc for their faith – suffering, trials etc etc.
And SGM pastors it seems are exempt from that?!? Well-paid, protected from challenges from their congregation by an “apostolic” word from the Pontiff Mahaney.
I think a job as an SGM pastor sounds rather delightful actually. You only have to preach one sermon a week. You can copy it from C J Mahaney or Joshua Harris if you are really stuck, but still want to impress the top-brass. Minimal home-visits or counselling because it’s all down to your indwelling sin anyway. Paid for visits to conferences at CLC where you get your ego pampered and applauded by Mahaney himself if he turns up. Oh and a nice fat salary to boot! Lush!!
Okay I will shut up now. Just had to vent!!
September 25th, 2009 at 10:49 am
“The effectiveness of pastoral ministry is dependent upon a proper response TO pastoral ministry. THE effectiveness of pastoral ministry is indeed dependent upon a proper response TO pastoral ministry”.
I see that C J Mahaney still spends the majority of his time preparing sermons not by getting into the Word of God but by formulating clever sounding and impressive little phrases like this. Who remembers:
“All gifts from God are intended to direct our attention to God and create fresh affection for God”?!?!?!
They sound very impressive and indeed are easy to remember. But is this one actually even true?? Is it even Biblical!??!!? I would suggest absolutely not.
“The effectiveness of pastoral ministry is dependent upon a proper response TO pastoral ministry. THE effectiveness of pastoral ministry is indeed dependent upon a proper response TO pastoral ministry”.
Clearly every regular reader on this blog is well acquainted with Mahaney’s motives. He is trying to guilt the church into saying that if there is ANY fault with the church leaders, then it is the fault of the congregation.
But what about the apostle Paul and the church at Corinth? 1 and 2 Corinthians shows quite clearly that they had an appalling attitude to Paul. They thought they were better than him and they thought he wasn’t really up to much. Did that affect Paul’s ministry badly? No. He carried on loving them, and very successfully preaching the Word around Asia. Mahaney might argue I guess that Paul wasn’t a pastor – he was an apostle.
Well in that case, self-appointed apostle Mahaney too is exempt from his own law then? Because he certainly isn’t a pastor anymore!
Just my few thoughts.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Kris, you asked
While I was a committed member of SGM I didn’t experience anger while listening to these messages, but I always felt like I was being controlled while I was listening. You were trained to accept what you were being taught and say positive things like, “Wasn’t that message amazing!? That was such a great word!”
What made me angry while I was in SGM were the situations, the circumstances, and the people I encountered – which were the fruit of these messages. The die-hard SGM’ers were the worst. They had an air about them, seemed defensive and were quick to capitalize on any opportunity to reinforce their position in the pecking order. I used to dismiss these people at first (assuming it was ignorance or a personality quirk) but the problems and the occurances kept growing. Eventually I couldn’t help but notice that those people who seemed so out of sync – were the ones who were so in sync with SGM.
You also asked
Reading this message makes me angry now because I can see and hear the lies, which I was once duped by. I’m also angry at the fact that – even when others have spoken out (both now and in the past) in bringing these falsehoods to light – those that perpetrate the deceptions do so with brazen faces. But I’m mostly angry because it hurt my family.
September 25th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Dan (posts #63 & 64) was one of the first lone voices on the internet that spoke out critically of CJ Mahaney. Dan, I still remember reading what you wrote about Mahaney and his take on the Song of Solomon. It’s good to ‘see’ you again :-)
I’m sorry about what’s going on with your family and I’m sure it must be difficult.
We should have a survivors day of prayer…
September 25th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Claireon,,
I would love to see this. Is it here on Survivors blog or is it elsewhere? And also Dan’s family? I am confused.
Sidney
September 25th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Hi Sidney :-)
Here is the link to the article I read on Dan’s blog which hit the internet prior to this site:
http://ern-baxter.blogspot.com/2006/01/if-its-new-it-probably-isnt-true.html
And about Dan’s family…they are all in an SGM church in England (he referenced his concern for his parents in post #63) One can imagine his concern!
September 25th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Kris,
As you pointed out, in this message CJ used the word “serve” often. This is nothing new in SGM. People who have been at CLC since it was “Gathering of Believers” in the 1970s say that there was always an emphasis on servanthood linked with camaraderie. Here is a song they used to sing.
Brother let me be your servant,
Let me be as Christ to you.
Pray that I might have the grace to
Let you be my servant, too.
I will weep when you are weeping,
When you laugh I’ll laugh with you,
I will share your joy and sorrow
Until we see life’s journey through.
In those early days there was an expectation of “serving the church” and in return there was the reward offered of deep, lasting friendship. I suspect that some of CJ’s message here was influenced by these ideas in the roots of SGM, that is, that servanthood is a good thing that is connected to genuine love. Much SGM lingo has a long history behind it.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
I know this is a little off topic-but wanted to share it. I was reading Romans this morning when I cam across this passage-
“I am fully convinced, brothers and sisters, that you are full of goodness. You know these things so well that you are able to teach others all about them.”- Romans 15:14-15
Given the overwhelming messages in SGM about the wickedness of our hearts and how we NEED a pastor to watch over our souls-I find it almost laughable, in the face of Paul’s conviction that his listeners/ readers are full of goodness and more than able to even teach on the things he is reminding them.
Ok-back to your regular program….just had to share it
September 25th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Kris,
I just listened to a video with CJ being interviewed about worship. He used the word “serve, servant, serving” 8 times in the first 8 minutes. You were so correct in your evaluation. Here is the video for anyone that needs to hurl their lunch. Bring your Hefty barf bags – many of them.
http://www.sovereigngraceministries.org/Blog/post/WG09-Interview-Video.aspx
September 25th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Rich,
WHY did you do that to me? WHY did you just ruin my day? I don’t think I watched even 3 minutes of it. I cannot watch more.
Where he talks about how you “appear” to your congregation in worship? ????? WHAT?????
So, basically, he’s saying: “your congregation is watching you. forget about what’s in your heart during worship. make sure you put on a good show so that they will put be led by you to put on their good show.”
Oh man. That was bad. Really, really bad.
Bad bad bad.
Where is my “spit” icon, Guy? Please… I really don’t feel like
right now.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Musicman,
On a similar note, I really like John Eldredge’s books. He notes that time and time again scripture declares that, for the redeemed, God has made our hearts “good” (hearts of stone turned to hearts of flesh, etc). His teaching really helped unlearn the SGM “sinful heart” emphasis.
September 25th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
I think I can explain the mothers of young children part of CJ’s talk. I’ve seen very similiar things done in other SG situations. It’s not really a theological point even though it might be presented as such. It’s basically a form of throwing bones to dogs. Women are marginalized in SG culture. The lives of mothers who have children every year or two are hard. The exhaustion of these women is so profound even though they will deny it. These asides are bones thrown to them to acknowledge the difficulty of their lives and appease them. The pastors of the church I attended did it and I’ve heard Piper do it too.
September 25th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
@Kris # 14 – this was not careless. I was told that with all the CLC worship songs that they go over them for doctrine issues and accuracy word for word. Back in the early 90′s I was told that they re-did a recording of a song because of one word that needed changed. I would consider it to be intentional.
@Acme # 59 – that is funny and now I learned something new. Thanks for explaining it to me.
@ Musicman # 70 – Thank you so much for that verse. I will spend time thinking on that one tonight. Thank you!
@ CLCRefugee # 73 – My pastor did a sermon off of two of his books and I ended up reading most of them – really great stuff that changed how I view myself as a woman and my worth. So life changing that after hearing the message my secular boss looked at me and said, “something is really different about you” – Yep, I found out that my beauty and acceptance aren’t dependent on any man or any past experience because I bear the image of the one most Beautiful. I reflect His beauty and not by striving harder but just by being His…Great books.
September 25th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Hi, everyone…
I’ve been really busy today and am just now getting caught up with the comments. So much good stuff! I don’t even know where to begin.
So I’ll just quickly answer Square Peg’s question, which was what definition of “Evangelical” I was using when I spoke of how CJ subtly used the term in a disparaging manner in his Happiest Place message.
Yes, “Evangelical” in the most technical sense would refer, as Square Peg says, to “churches/Christians who accept the entire Bible as the inspired, infallible Word of God — the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” That is the traditional understanding of “Evangelical.”
HOWEVER, over the past decade or so, the term has taken on some additional baggage, depending on who is using it. For instance, when a “culturally liberal” person declares that someone is “an Evangelical,” they generally do not mean the term in a complimentary fashion. Rather, they use it to connote everything that goes with the conservative Bible Belt Christian culture, including the Moral Majority and Focus On The Family. To these liberals, “Evangelicals” are narrow-minded bigots who just want to cram their worldview down the throats of others and get everyone to accept Jesus into their hearts.
When a “Reformed” type uses the term, there are other connotations. It is a fact that many “Evangelical” churches have in recent years appeared to dumb things down with seeker-friendly services geared toward visitors, to the point where there’s little mention of hell, sin, and our need for a Savior. The “Reformed” folks who see themselves as standing for “correct doctrine” tend to sneer at the “seeker” movement – at the Rick Warren-style “easy-believism,” the “light” sermons filled with psychological and therapeutic jargon, and so forth.
That’s why CJ felt comfortable making the remark that, “There are many Evangelicals who are uncomfortable with this language. ‘Obey’ and ‘submitting to’ leaders.”
He knows that the majority of the people in his SGM audience do NOT consider themselves “Evangelical” in the most recent sense of the term. By virtue of the fact that they’re sitting in a Sovereign Grace church – with its “tough love” stances on sin, the therapeutic movement, church discipline, and everything else – the folks listening to CJ no longer meet today’s definition of “Evangelical.”
September 25th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Acme — I wonder if the lack of apology or omission of admitting fault in the letter you received is due to fear of legal action. Sort of like when you get stopped by a cop, lawyers advise never to admit to anything. Hmm.
September 26th, 2009 at 12:04 am
Square Peg, I do believe that it is a carefully crafted legal CYA move (which is, IMHO, completely antithetical to any claim to seek “biblical” reconciliation or Peacemaking).
The response I am crafting in my head and heart is to tell CJ that he needs to be a person first–to respond as a man (a father, a brother, a grandfather) would. Churches, books, all the “things I once held dear, built my life upon” will all burn–people last for eternity. The greatest commandments are to love God and to love one another–and CYA — even for the glory of a church or family of churches — isn’t ANY part of that.
I’d want to give him this example.
As a teacher (in — gasp — a public school), I choose to be a person first, not my job title, and I see my students as people first–and I challenge ANYONE who forgets thats that what these hormonal teenagers are. So, sometimes I hug a kid who needs it–even though the lawyers warn against it. When I mess up, I admit it (ok mostly). I talk to my kids on facebook and AIM and in the grocery store–even though the lawyers warn against it. I do the scary things I ask them to do–writing and speaking the truth about myself and about what we read–and I love them–teaching, warning, cajoling, training, and all. It is a joy (mostly
) and a privilege.
September 26th, 2009 at 12:22 am
and I would want to tell CJ that for me–and for others probably–getting a real apology would be a far better way to avoid lawsuits.
Here’s what I wish he’d said, “I am so sorry that we — your pastors and care group leaders — proudly thought we had all the answers. We should have listened more and preached less. We should have realized our insufficiency and encouraged you to turn to mental health professionals, developmental pediatricians, and family therapists. We should have protected you and your precious children right away–we should not have minimized the abuse, nor should we have blamed you. We should have visited your son at least once during his three long hospitalizations.”
September 26th, 2009 at 1:59 am
I have a friday funnies and it is early Saturday morning. On facebook, Little Josh Harris posts..”even if you don’t struggle with internet porn, you should still have an accountability partner to ask you how you are doing in that area”
Well I don’t have a husband either so should I have an accountability partner ask me how I am doing in the area of being mad at one????
And, and I don’t have a grandmother either, so should I set up regular accounability on the neglect of her????
And I don’t have any college classes I am attending, soooo should I get with a group of women and talk about how I am not devoting enough time to studies…
Littl’ Josh, where does this end. Are you to that out of touch with reality that you actually think I, (we) should have accountablity for something that we DONT STRUGGLE with…
and they gravel at his words….
September 26th, 2009 at 4:16 am
~wings
September 26th, 2009 at 6:24 am
Hi, wings -
Thanks for your comment, and welcome to the site. You can speak here anytime.
September 26th, 2009 at 6:51 am
Acme,
I so agree with you on this one -
Like “wings” said there up above, we can’t know what’s going on in Mr. Mahaney’s mind. But I think that is precisely why we examine his words so closely. Words matter. Saying something like, “I’m sorry we did not serve you better” SOUNDS like an apology, but it doesn’t have a whole lot of meaning.
Once again, using the language of “serving” sort of nullifies a person’s right to be mad about something. I mean, if all someone was doing was serving me, I pretty much am a rude ingrate if I find fault with their servanthood. It’s almost like saying, “I’m sorry I didn’t wash your feet better,” or, “I’m sorry I didn’t cook you a meal that was more to your liking.”
Automatically, the “server” is humble, while the “servee” really has no other option but to graciously accept whatever the “server” dishes up.
I know that this “serve” language is embedded so deeply into CJ’s mind and SGM’s culture that CJ couldn’t stay away from the word if he tried. But using it in his “apology” was regrettable for a number of reasons. One reason is that it was a vague cop-out. Another is that it allowed him to stay in his comfort zone of thinking that he’s still right and humble…and that the person with the grievance is just a demanding and ungrateful meanie.
Sigh.
September 26th, 2009 at 6:55 am
a,
I gotta say, you’re hilarious.
But you have a good point. Josh Harris’ instruction to find an accountability partner to ask us about the sins we DON’T struggle with is…well, it strikes me as overkill, to say the least.
I can appreciate that Josh is acknowledging how easy it is for a person to slip up and fall into that particular sin…even if they think they don’t struggle with it.
But…that brings up something else, something I’m gonna address in a separate comment. Stay tuned.
September 26th, 2009 at 7:07 am
Our new commenter “wings” said something that got me thinking. He/she said (and I paraphrase loosely), “We can’t know what’s going on in Mr. Mahaney’s mind.”
And that is so true.
We can’t know.
That’s why we examine his words. And deeds.
See, something that I’ve encountered again and again over the course of doing this site is the suggestion that if I don’t like something that CJ has taught, or if I have a question or a problem with it, I should “just ask him about it.”
On the surface, that sounds simple enough. And SGMers seem to think that “just asking” is akin to “following Matthew 18.”
But…
Something I’ve noticed in SGM’s culture is that this whole “just go to the person and ask” concept hinges on one tiny little detail, one that makes all the difference in the world.
And that is this: for the “just ask” approach to work at all, you have to believe that the person you’re asking is actually going to tell you the full and complete and gut-wrenchingly honest truth about whatever it is that you’re asking.
SGMers would seem to assume that people are 100% honest, 100% of the time. Like that advice from Josh Harris that “a” mentions up there, about finding an accountability partner to ask you about your porn usage even if you don’t struggle with porn.
The whole accountability partner thing, actually, is based upon the premise that people are never gonna lie, or never gonna skimp on the truth.
Is it likely that Joe Essgiem (sound it out…get it?…”Joe SGM”?
) is actually going to TELL his accountability partner, when said partner asks him if he’s found himself slipping into porn usage, “Yeah, I did go over to nakedgrlz.com the other day, but I regret it”?
Maybe. Maybe if Joe Essgiem is really really earnest about his faith.
But if someone is in sin, it’s been my experience that their honesty is the first thing to go.
That is why I always find it a little bit unreal when SGMers think that all they have to do is ASK THEIR PASTORS or ASK CJ about something. Do they honestly think that if their pastor (or CJ) has done something wrong, he’s just going to cave and crumple and confess, just because someone ASKS him about it?
Or if a pastor preaches something with manipulative undertones (like this Happiest Place message), he’s just gonna ADMIT it, just because someone ASKS?
I dunno, folks. Think about it. If someone is trying to manipulate people, they’re probably not going to be super-quick to just spill their guts about it.
I like the concept of the “just ask” approach. Really, I do. But it seems woefully naive to me.
September 26th, 2009 at 7:17 am
wow..
Kris, you’ve done a brilliant job dissecting this message.
CJ knows that SGM is rife with pastoral abuse. There was a time when he might have thought “we have a couple of isolated problems”, but that time was long past when he delivered this message.
To pull this message off the shelf during this time, when CJ can no longer say “I’m unaware” speaks volumes.
There has long been documentation that Emerson, Shank, and other “apostles” (they still use the term) were aware of situations that they later claimed to have no knowledge of. Much easier to throw someone like Rich Richardson under the bus, or to allow Bendi to “retire”.
There is now documentation that CJ is aware of extreme abuse of pastoral authority.
It’s time to put this message back on the shelf and let it collect dust.
September 26th, 2009 at 7:22 am
“Just asking” is also challenging because of the huge moat between pastors and people. You’re supposed to go up the chain of command–ask your husband, ask the Care Group Leader, then make an appointment to ask the pastor covering your sphere sometime in the next month, then make an appointment to ask the pastor over him, then maybe get to CJ.
thank you, Wings–and
September 26th, 2009 at 8:07 am
Jim said:
“CJ knows that SGM is rife with pastoral abuse. There was a time when he might have thought “we have a couple of isolated problems”, but that time was long past when he delivered this message.
To pull this message off the shelf during this time, when CJ can no longer say “I’m unaware” speaks volumes.
There has long been documentation that Emerson, Shank, and other “apostles” (they still use the term) were aware of situations that they later claimed to have no knowledge of. Much easier to throw someone like Rich Richardson under the bus, or to allow Bendi to “retire”.”
Something that is along the lines of this discussion is church discipline. I remember in the early 90′s when Mahaney showed an example of a church’s discipline policy (I believe it was a New Wine Church) it at least showed more of a balance.
By balance I mean is that they included in this document that one of the reasons for church discipline was to guard against the sins of a leader affecting the church. They weren’t just saying the purpose of church discipline was only about regular members sins but the document also acknowledged the need to have this to prevent the sins of leaders affecting the church. It acknowledged that leaders’ sin could affect the church a lot more than a regular members’ sin.
I don’t recall seeing this side or reason for church discipline in any of SGM’s more recent talks and publications. If this balances exists I would like to know about it and stand corrected.
Unfortunately this shows an imbalance and again the submissive pyramid structure that exists within SGM.
September 26th, 2009 at 9:01 am
ACME — You’re so right about the “moat” between the pastors and the people. Just last month, an SGM friend told me of a letter she’d written to her SGM pastor. One of his underlings called her up to discuss the matter. The guy told her the Sr Pastor didn’t have time to discuss it with her, so he’d passed it down the line. My gut reaction, was, “Wait a minute. You communicated personal, private, information to your pastor — and he shared it without your permission to an underling to get back to you about?” Inappropriate at best, unethical at worst.
September 26th, 2009 at 9:10 am
sjcalhoun writes: “These asides (how mothers of young children are the ONLY ones exempt from serving during any particular period of time) are bones thrown to them to acknowledge the difficulty of their lives and appease them.” I agree with you. Though I was in CLC for over 10 years (and PDI/SGM for many more) and appreciated that the role of mothers was honored at all, I didn’t realize until I had been out for many years how those who didn’t fit the mold (the marginalized step-ford ones) were subtly made to feel inferior (well, even more inferior than our gender dictated).
Steve 240 writes: “Thus Mahaney doesn’t really know what it is like for someone in the “real world” working a real job.” I agree with you too. I also think that his lack of “real world” experience (and his ivory tower, Starbucks existence) leaves him clueless about some of the issues faced by regular folks. One issue is his ignorance of the church members life struggles (one day he must give an account), but I feel the GREATER issue is his feeling free to step into areas in the lives of others where he has no business (authority).
I have read some of the stories (and know personally) where marriages suffer or are broken because some outside church “authority” feels free to judge the commitment levels of the marriage partners – not to one another or to family – but to the “church.” For a hypothetical example, if Acme spent lots of time trying to get the help her son needed and “neglected” some of church meetings, she would perhaps have been labeled non-committal ( I don’t actually know if this was the case or not) . I can also picture (based on having been part of PDI/SGM for over 15 years) that the lack of commitment would be of greater concern to the “pastors” than her family’s struggles. Maybe many in the church are “guilted” into attending so many meetings that they don’t have time to notice a hurting family or attend to THEIR OWN hurting family members. Worse yet, hurting members are judged for a lack of commitment resulting in more even pain. Also, they may be judged as being responsible for bringing on their own problems (as if that should determine whether they need to help or not), and the resulting pain is better than they deserve anyway. How many of the “pastors” take time to minister to a hurting child or a “low-profile” member? My guess is that most are generally about the “really important” business taking place at Starbucks.
September 26th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Acme — so glad to know you teach in public schools. After many years of exclusively having Christian, homeschooling friends (who taught me alot and I love dearly, I went back to teaching public school. I found wonderful people there who also taught me alot. It broadened my horizons, changed my legalistic bent, and gave many opportunities to let a little light shine. And I found out, that, HEY–GUESS WHAT! –there are many Christians in public schools, and they make a difference!
September 26th, 2009 at 9:48 am
Acme.
Our child has been ministered to and cared for by the teachers/counselors in the public school system and continues to be abandoned by the staff of SGM. Including this child’s Uncle, who is the Family pastor. This child was also hospitalized 3 times as a result of abuse and not one pastor offered to visit this child. We had attended this sgm church for 12 years.
Could we talk offline?
September 26th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Thank you Kris. This post was particularly well done. I would also like to thank the many bloggers here for thoughtful and helpful replies. I have been out for a long time but I wish this had been around ten years ago. Collectively, you all provide a wonderful service to our brethren in or escaping SGM.
Last August? Last August? He is obviously in some sort of deep denial.
I was thinking today about the verse that the thief comes to steal, kill, and destroy, but Jesus comes to give us an abundant life in Himself. I am sure they are sincere in their efforts to be Jesus to the flock, but oh the damage when a leader takes the place of the Lord in our lives. Been there, done that. We have a great pastoral relationship now, and have derived enormous benefit from the sort of counsel/ministry CCEF offers, and I know that people and pastors are often God’s great means of grace, but they can never be what the holy spirit alone can be. And He is the the One who ultimately comes to convict of sin and lead us into all truth.
Thanks again, and let me reiterate that this post was excellent.
September 26th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Cardinal, here’s my email ehlersacm at aol dot com
September 26th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Yep, Claireon – Dan’s blog was one of the first that I found back in the summer of 2007. Good stuff there!! And from his blog, I found Lydia and Julie’s blogs. They were the first lights shining in the darkness that I saw to help lead me out of the swirling confusion of my former church and I am grateful to them all.
Musicman,
What a wondeful verse, thanks so much for taking the time to share it!
September 26th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
September 26th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Welcome “Wings”!
I sure hope you are one of the teens at my former church. I think about those kids alot. It would mean so much to my kids and I if we could someday see that some of their (former) friends had broke free from playing the SGM game. Sadly, it seems that even some of the “rebel” ones are bending their knee and are on their way to becoming another “cog” in the “Machine”.
September 26th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Ellie, it’s almost funny to talk about this now as though it were ‘back in the day’, but before this blog, remember how many of us shared how we would look for someone to say something about SGM that echoed our experience? And oftentimes when there was a hint of criticism about CJ or SGM, it was met with a swift response by someone who flew to SGM’s defense? For example, this from Dan’s first article that I posted the link to here post # 68
That seemed typical. Someone named RJBrown responsed to Anonymous and said
Well, one thing is for certain, SGM is no longer unaware of the questions being asked, the concerns being raised, and the nonsense that people are exposing.
SGM is still acting like none of this bothers them as if what we’re saying won’t continue to dog them. As Winston Churchill said, “Truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but, in the end, there it is.”
September 26th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Hey, Jim -
Thanks for the shout-out!
Also, to all y’all who have shared kind words about these posts, I’m glad they’ve resonated. I was seriously nervous about doing another transcript, as I realize that these kinds of posts can be long and hard to slog through. I’m also aware that within SGM’s culture, it is highly taboo to even appear to be criticizing anything that CJ teaches. I wasn’t sure that I felt like dealing with the inevitable hate mail that my blue-fonted remarks might generate.
So I’m glad that people have found the transcript helpful.
And for the record, just to clarify – this sermon was preached to the Knoxville church in August of 2009. This year. This past summer. As in just a couple of months ago.
September 26th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Acme, Square Peg, Pilgrim…
Thanks for the reminders about the “moat” (perfect word picture, Acme!) that separates SGM’s pastors from their people.
It could be next to impossible to “just ask” a pastor about a teaching if there are all these administrative layers to get through.
Not to mention…WHY do SGMers believe that their pastors are going to be 100% truthful with them?
I mean, like one of the “observation”-type emails I received about this post – the reader demanded to know if I’d followed Matthew 18 principles. Before putting up the transcript and sharing my thoughts, had I gone to CJ personally to ask him for clarifications?
First of all, the conflict-resolution principles outlined in Matthew 18 presume, um, a conflict? Like, between people? People who know each other and have a relationship with each other?
Matthew 18 has nothing to say about addressing teachings. So there’s nothing in that passage that would demand that I go to CJ and ask him about the message he gave publicly, to several hundred people – and which the Knoxville church has made available to the whole wide world via their website.
Moreover, I tend to be of the opinion that if someone (in this case, CJ) is trying to be sneaky and manipulative with what he’s teaching, he’s probably not gonna just come right out and admit it, just because some Joe Schmo (or in this case, Kris Schmo) calls up his office and asks him.
Can’t you jut imagine what that conversation would be like, anyway?
SGM Receptionist: “Sovereign Grace Ministries. How may I serve you today?”
Kris: Um, I’d like to speak with Mr. Mahaney, please?”
SGM Receptionist: Please hold while I connect you.
(Musical interlude while hold music plays. Sudden clicking sound, indicating line was picked up.)
CJ Mahaney: This is CJ. How may I serve you today?
Kris: Uh, Mr. Mahaney? This is Kris from SGM Survivors calling. Um, I have a few questions about your Happiest Place On Earth sermon, particularly the one you presented to the Knoxville church last month while your family was enjoying a vacation *made possible* by the kindness of the Knoxville people. Uh, I got the distinct impression that you are overemphasizing submission and obedience so that you can manipulate the crowd into doing what their leaders tell them. Is this true?
CJ: Why Kris, I’m so glad you asked. Yes, that is true. I do like to overemphasize submission and obedience to authority. Thank you so much for calling!
************
See what I mean?
How stupid would that be?
I’m sorry, people, but if someone has successfully “motivated” thousands of individuals to submit to him and obey him and the men beneath him over the course of something like 30 years, he’s simply NOT going to reveal the tricks of his trade! He’s not going to give anyone a straight-up admission of what he’s doing!
If people are manipulative and controlling, why on earth would they ever decide to be honest about it?
September 26th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Kris,
That was great. That phone conversation was to funny.
Thank you so much for taking the time to transcribe that message for all of us. That was a lot of work I am sure but and it is much appreciated. Seeing it all written out like that makes things a lot more clear. For people who are still on the fence about things or not sure about the “funny feeling” they may have about SGM that message, I think, would clear it all up. I am totally blown away with the whole “it is your responsibility to make sure your pastor is happy” business. That is insane! I mean what kind of message is that sending to the pastors who are sitting there listening to this message too? What a burden to put on the people! I honestly can’t get over that one. That was just over the top.
The lack of scripture was telling as well.
September 26th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
In reading, re-reading this sermon and the comments, I was reminded of a former non-SGM pastor who is still a dear friend. He said that the folks who were hardest to pastor were the ones who kept him on his knees! He often laughed and said the difficult ones increased his prayer life. What a refreshing difference.
September 26th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
“Because unhappy pastors misrepresent Him. Happy pastors accurately represent Him. Unhappy pastors misrepresent God. Misrepresent the gospel. Misrepresent the Savior, misrepresent the gospel of grace”
What the hey! If we as Christians are to find our TRUE joy and fulfillment in Jesus Christ, if our true purpose in this world is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever, how can a pastor blame his unhappiness on the members of his church. When my children do not obey or meet my expectations, I am told by my leaders that my real happiness should be found in God and my salvation. My children’s messed up lives are not an excuse for me to be unhappy. So then why would CJ think it right to blame church members for the pastors’ unhappiness. Double standard and unfair!
September 26th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
Thank you for the welcome. To Ellie–oh, I hope I was in your church, too! It’d be nice to know someone else I knew got out, though I don’t really remember other kids my age who left. But that’s sort of the point, isn’t it? They slip off the radar and you forget whatever happened to them…that they were there.
I’m so sad to see many of the kids, good kids, nice kids who can be good role models and kind people…they’re so deep into it, so indoctrinated or “brainwashed” or whatever, from so young. Like they didn’t really have a chance. That’s one thing I’m thankful for, in that my mom didn’t believe it and I was closest to her. I think it musta been as late as me being nearly 14 that I figured out that “we” were even a Reformed church. I escaped that, though not some other signs, I guess, of kids who’ve grown up in sgm–low self-esteem, distrust of my own heart with any-authority-always-trumps mind games sorta-thing (not that I wasn’t sometimes a “difficult child” anyways x), control weirdnesses like extreme food/diets and schedules, loneliness, and despair, all which I never realised might not be ultimately my own fault somehow. 
I think if I’d heard this message when I was still in, for some part I would have shrugged it off because I distrusted sgm, but also would realise the (kinda ridiculous) burden it gives–so, erm, it’s my fault if my pastor’s not happy? My pastor barely knows who I am… (or so it felt) And well…for unhappy pastors misrepresenting Jesus…well, we’re human, flawed after all. And yes, He does get misrepresented; happens all the time, sadly. But, He can work around that, and use it for his good… There are good times and bad times, but He’s there all along…for me that’s a better realisation of his love than cheery, unreal people, sometimes. But just my two cents. 
~wings
September 27th, 2009 at 7:21 am
Wings said:
“I think it musta been as late as me being nearly 14 that I figured out that “we” were even a Reformed church.”
Wings, remember that “change is here to stay” in SGM, so there probably was a time in your short life when SGM wasn’t reformed. The Wikipedia article on SGM is a good resource for when this “change” took place. Of course, the name change soon followed. Let’s see… Is it TAG, People of Destiny, PDI International, or SGM?
The lastest “change” is expository preaching. C.J. Mahaney has suddenly become an expert on the subject as he goes around with Mark Dever teaching others how do this kind of preaching, even at Southern Baptist seminaries! Let’s see… we have a high school push out who never graduated from college teaching others how to preach. What is wrong with this picture?
Don’t get me wrong. I think expository preaching is the best way to deliver a sermon, and I prefer to hear the Bible taught in this way.
However, based on several messages I have heard C.J. Mahaney deliver (one in person), he IS NOT doing expository preaching, even though he believes he is.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Something just dawned on me. When this message is being hammered into the people’s minds. When it’s being preached as “this is what The Word Of God says.” When we are hearing this over and over again. What happens? We are compelled to honor it.
We have to make sure that we are making our pastor happy. That means by the way we live and the way we act and how “together” we are. We should be sinning less, having less trouble in our lives and pretty-much be all-around people with zero problems in life….so that we can obey the Word of God and keep our pastors’ jobs a joy by making it easy on them.
So, what happens when your spouse has an affair? Or what happens when your teenage child is doing drugs or having sex? Or, as one of our long-time friends here tells us, your kid is self-mutilating through anorexia, cutting, etc.
You will NOT make your pastor’s life easy. You will not be making your pastor’s job happy. You will not be exhibiting the characteristics that your pastor has hammered in your head and represented as straight from God himself, that you need to be.
The logical answer to these types of life-crises would be that you’d get a counselor.
There is a problem with this. SGM has positioned themselves, through YEARS of maligning and putting down the “pop psychology movement” even in christian counselors. They have positioned care group leaders and themselves to be our counselors. They have made sure that every member understands that God has gifted them to be counselors too, even though they have no formal and usually no life training in counseling.
But, you’ve had the “make your pastors happy” message beaten into your head.
You can’t go to your pastors with ugly mess life stuff.
So, what happens? “plastic faces” Everyone walks around with plastic faces. Dying inside. DYING inside.
You’re not allowed to have issues in your life….because then your pastor’s job won’t be the joy that God has said it needs to be.
Just my Sunday morning 2 cents…
September 27th, 2009 at 9:45 am
Sidney,
That’s actually very astute. If you’re hammered with the message that it is your job to make your pastor “happy” in HIS job, and if a part of his job is to do all the counseling, then you are automatically going to feel pressured on some level to look like you have your life together.
Even if you do have problems and seek pastoral counseling, you will have a nagging feeling that you’ve got to do things the pastor’s way and clean up your problems as quickly as possible…even if your pastor never actually SAYS this. It’ll be a subconscious thing, from all the times that the “make your pastor happy” message has been hammered home.
September 27th, 2009 at 9:47 am
Majorly duh moment -
But it just hit me again what a performance-based organization SGM is.
How weird is it to go to church and be taught that it is your duty to make your pastors happy? That God wants happy pastors?
How opposite of the true message of Jesus and the gospel.
September 27th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Paul — The Happy Apostle?
I’d love to hear C.J. Mahaney preach on this “happy” passage of Scripture.
“Are they Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I. Are they ministers of Christ — I speak as a fool — I am more: in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequently, in deaths often. From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep; in journeys often, in perils among false brethren; in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness — besides the other things, what comes upon me daily; my deep concern for all the churches. Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to stumble, and I do not burn with indignation? If I must boast, I will boast in the things which concern my infirmity.” (2 Corinthians 11:22-30 NKJV)
To put this Bible passage in context, here’s what the Apostle Paul wrote just a few verses before:
“But what I do, I will also continue to do, that I may cut off the opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the things of which they boast. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder? For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness whose end will be according to their works.” (2 Corinthians 11:12-15 NKJV)
Sobering words inspired by Almighty God…
September 27th, 2009 at 10:26 am
Maybe if some of the pastors were more concerned about following JESUS instead of of SGM, they’d know true happiness…?
September 27th, 2009 at 11:03 am
Kris,
The telephone call was priceliess. There are 2 things I wanted to add that are true…..
1. I would get the Sovereign Grace your a sinner “hold” music
and 2. I’m sorry your pastor is on vacation, or I’m sorry we will have to get back with you after the holidays…is more like it.
It was funny for you to say Kris Schmo, but for real…
I am praying for you.. a
September 27th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Sidney wrote, “…So, what happens? “plastic faces” Everyone walks around with plastic faces. Dying inside. DYING inside.”
“Plastic faces” was a phrase I started using a decade ago in my SGM church. When we first went there, folks were honest — if they were hurting, they bled like stuck pigs, and cried out for prayer and help. Later, it seemed that you had to look like you had it all together, and the faces became plastic, robotic,and conformed — not to the image of Christ, but to the the painted veneer of the perfect Christian home, with 6 kids, a stay-at-home mom, a husband with a good job, a large house in the Promised Land with no junk drawers …so you’re supposed to be consumed with self-punishment for indwelling sin, but the outside must look completely sinless. Whew.
September 27th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
The sermon quote, “And in one of ensuing sermons, Fawcett shared the words to a hymn that he composed, that has been sung by and meaningful to the church for the past two centuries. Perhaps you’ll recognize these words and hear them with a new appreciation:
Blest be the tie that binds
Our hearts in Christian love.
The fellowship of kindred minds
Is like to that above. ”
This absolutely cracks me up, as a side issue — if an SGM church had ever thrown that song up on the overhead and started singing that lovely familiar melody, I’d have thought I’d stumbled into the wrong building!
September 27th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Kris — your comment regarding the exclusion of young mothers seeming disjointed and out-of-place…
One of the things I noticed early on in SGM was that there was no recognition of different seasons of life — as most of us were about the same age, with same age kids, etc. We needed older people for godly wisdom, and I was blessed to see them come around — often because they had children in SGM. I don’t ever remember seeing moms of young children “excused” from anything — in fact, they were there, rain or shine and often exhausted from the effort of hauling toddlers, nursing infants and paraphernalia into and out of the building. So I’m glad to see some kind of recognition of that particular season of life coming from on high. Perhaps as the “apostolic team” ages, they will experience some seasonal changes themselves, and realize that all this legalistic participation is busywork and fol-der-ol.
When one late-forties couple joined, I remember a 30-ish mom saying to the wife, “It’s really not too late for you to have more children,” as if, somehow, the only acceptable role for a married woman was to continue having children ad infinitum. Surely something not pronounced from the pulpit, but a cultural slant within the SGM culture.
Sometime, they’re just gonna hafta “let go and let God.” Good pastoring shouldn’t be confused with micro-management.
September 27th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Square Peg -
When talking about SGM’s culture and the phrase “plastic faces,” you said,
Wow.
That is so profound.
That sums up exactly what bugs me so much about the way that so many SGM leaders – but particularly CJ and his family, because they’re the ones with the books and the blogs – portray themselves. They spend a lot of time talking about their sin, but by all appearances, they’re still so much more “together” than us average folks.
I mean, if the worst struggles (“sins”) you face have to do with neglecting date nights with your wife, or (for stay-at-home moms) fixing too-elaborate organic lunches for your toddlers, then maybe you aren’t called right now to be using your own life as an example when teaching about sin.
The thing is, I don’t believe for a moment that these SGM celebrities don’t struggle with the same garbage that the rest of us struggle with. But instead of authenticity – of getting REAL – and admitting the true down-and-dirty stuff (like…let’s say…when CJ feels major envy over some other Reformed Big Dog’s success, or like when Carolyn can’t help her scorn for some of the “common” women in her church and looks down on them for dressing like slobs, or…well, you get the idea), we’re supposed to believe that the worst these people struggle with is fluff like “not serving” their husbands because they got too eager to make a meal for a sick friend and forgot to consult his schedule. (Seriously – that was a “flaw” that Carolyn used for an example in one of her Biblical Womanhood essays on the CBMW website.)
I think this was the whole point of one of the more recent posts (Can You Be The Worst Sinner You Know And Yet Never Be Wrong?). It is really nauseating to me that even as SGM’s leaders TALK a good game about sin, they still have yet to show that they actually recognize any of their own misdeeds AS sin.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Regarding the job of mothers:
He just went over what a difficult job it is to look after the souls of those they lead. He whispered and paused making us feel so bad for what a difficult job it is to be a pastor. But doesn’t he look after their (the pastor’s) souls? Is he not THEIR leader? I would think he would look at his job a little more seriously than, sitting at Starbuck’s making decisions.
“And if there is any resistance to doing that, let me just tell you, that is JUST YOUR SIN FIGHTING AGAINST IT”:
A classic line to get people to do what you want them to do; come down the aisle, prayer the sinner’s prayer . . .
September 27th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
I finally had a chance to read the entire speech. First, CJ needs a public speaking class to learn how to stop all the “um”‘s.
Second, the whole idea is pure legalism. It’s all about “submitting” – it’s just the shepherding movement re-packages with “nicer” words.
3rd – holy cow, cj just shows how arrogant he is through the “message”.
Great comments throughout – cj is a master at twisting bible verses to serve his needs.
September 27th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
You know-it just hit me how silly this whole “make sure you’re a joy to your pastor” stuff really is-Wasn’t Jesus known as the “man of sorrow”?
Weren’t the Apostle’s rejoicing when they were found worthy to suffer (meaning physical abuse) for the name of Jesus?
How can you then turn this around and claim that a member is called to be a joy to their pastor?
What a load they have put on the shoulders of those who believe this junk?
September 28th, 2009 at 1:11 am
Wanda–Oh, I am aware that they weren’t always Reformed; that’s one reason I didn’t figure it out sooner, because it wasn’t like that my whole life. I think they started teaching it when I was about five (not that I remember).
Sidney–I liked how you described plastic faces and dying inside…I don’t always find the words to describe things, especially things that bug me, but that…that would have been like me. x)
September 28th, 2009 at 8:35 am
What, exactly, are SGM’s pastors supposed to DO in their job?
Pastors I know spend a great majority of their time helping their congregants – counseling, visiting the sick, hanging out before and after church to talk with the people, evangelizing the unsaved, meeting people over meals at homes, early morning Bible studies, evening Bible studies, some in addition to their own full-time or part-time jobs and their own family time.
September 28th, 2009 at 8:58 am
Wings,
My heart goes out you and all the other children who are growing up (or have grown up)in SGM. I fear they will never truly know the grace of God because they are caught up in such a legalistic system.
Ironic isn’t it? SGM espouses the “Doctrines of Grace”; yet it entraps members in one of the worst legalistic strongholds I have ever seen! Doesn’t sound very Christ-like to me…
September 28th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
KRIS — you wrote “we’re supposed to believe that the worst these people struggle with is fluff like “not serving” their husbands because they got too eager to make a meal for a sick friend and forgot to consult his schedule. (Seriously – that was a “flaw” that Carolyn used for an example in one of her Biblical Womanhood essays on the CBMW website.)
This strikes me as pure self-protection. We’re supposed to come up with some kind of confession of sin, but who among us can get really down-and-dirty and say REAL sins, so we come up with this kind of sanctimonious fluff in order to meet the confession requirement. (I thank God that I have a husband who would be embarrassed to think I’d put off helping someone in need in order to first fetch his slippers and pipe. And he’d help me help ‘em.)
Kris – I’m sure it’s posted somewhere on this site, but is there a way to send you a personal note that won’t be posted?
Thanks!
September 28th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Square Peg – use this link to contact Kris (she’s out of town and left me in charge…hahahahahahahaha)
http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?page_id=107
September 28th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Musicman re: post #118
SGM pastors who know about this blog probably shake their heads and think, “That’s what becomes of people who just aren’t a joy to pastor!”
“Joy to Pastor” = don’t ask questions and make us look good by doing everything you’re told!
September 28th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Square Peg, speaking of serving the needy, gotta love how CJ artfully dodges the question about SGM’s ministry to the poor (or lack thereof) in this interview:
September 29th, 2009 at 7:42 am
It’s hard to believe CJ is saying these things considering all the teaching we have received on personal accountability and responsibility for our spiritual welfare. After reading part of John Piper’s take on this I was reminded that pastors are part of the “five-fold” ministry mentioned in Ephesians 4:11-12. “And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers TO equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ …” Leaders are also to keep watch over our souls, like shepherds, watching for wolves who would come in with unsound doctrine. If all the pastors do is try to ferret out unbelievers in the midst of us they are not doing their job.
September 29th, 2009 at 8:03 am
Clareon- #125 that article link that you posted was interesting. i didn’t read the whole entire thing but yuck. so CJ became a christian when he was high, went right into public speaking with no training and started SGM so he could marry his wife- very interesting
September 29th, 2009 at 9:24 am
CJ says to obey it’s leaders. SGM has SENIOR pastors – can’t find those anywhere in my Bible. Nor can I find associate pastors, pastors in training, pastors college, etc. What about obeying the senior prophet, or the head evangelist?
And SGM wants us to return to Biblical Christianity?
September 29th, 2009 at 9:42 am
So why is there so much emphasis on the pastor today? What about all of the other callings and ministries? Why is the pastor the only one known by name? Where does the Bible teach that the pastor is the head of the local church? The noun “pastor” is found only one single time in the entire NT!
Who and where are the prophets today? Did they get thrown out? What is their role and function in the church? Do they have any authority? They are mentioned before pastors in Ephesians. Maybe the pastors are under the authority of the prophets!
Let the prophets give the Sunday morning sermon! That might shake things up a bit!
I asked a current SGM pastor about the role of the prophet in SGM, and he did not have a clue, even though they believe this ministry is still functional today. What about a prophets college!
September 29th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Rich,
I hear ya, about the lack of balance with respect to the role of “senior pastor.”
HOWEVER…
Your sentiments (and writing style) are starting to remind me way too much of those of another commenter, someone who got banned from this site more than a year ago because he couldn’t stay off his favorite hobby horses. So, even if it might be related to our discussion, please refrain from dissing on the role of pastor. And please – don’t even go anywhere near Universalism.
September 29th, 2009 at 11:02 am
I was thinking this morning that this is one of the messages that works to get people focused on pleasing man and not on Christ. SGM supporters wonder how we got to that point? This messages stresses the point home that we should be focused on being a joy to our pastors. Enough messages like that and our obedience becomes man focused. Our goal should not be our pastor’s happiness, joy or approval but to please our Lord in all we do. This is a grave error of SGM to make people pastor focused.
September 29th, 2009 at 11:18 am
I’ve been thinking about this Happiest Place message, and all its implications.
Butterfly is right – with the emphasis on telling members to go around and ask their pastors, “Am I a joy to pastor?”, what other outcome COULD there be, except a focus on pleasing men?
This message is seriously messed up, a really blatant and obvious piece of evidence that SGM is, in many respects, some sort of Bizarro World, where what is declared “biblical” is actually the opposite of what the full scope of the Bible would ever have to say.
Sure, we’re told (according to most commonly accepted English translations of this Hebrews passage) to obey our leaders and submit to them. But that’s pretty much all the verse says. It does not go into any more detail. There’s not a single place in scripture where we’d read anything remotely resembling CJ’s statement that, “God wants happy pastors.” That is the biggest bunch of bull hockey! And there’s NOTHING in the Bible that would lead us to think we need to go around asking our pastors if we’re a “joy” to them.
On the other hand, the Bible is full of commands about submitting to one another, about servanthood, about “not lording it over others,” about all sorts of attitudes and behaviors that would be the EXACT OPPOSITE of the type of yucky groveling that CJ would have leaders willingly receiving from their members.
It’s a Bizarro World, folks. Really, it is. This Happiest Place (apologies to Disneyland!) message proves it.
CJ can use the word “serve” all he wants, but ultimately, his sort of “serving” is really not servanthood at all. Members are the servants. Pastors are the leaders who are to be served.
Nice trick.
How did the Knoxville church sit there and listen to this stuff and not just want to hurl?
More importantly, how many of them went home and looked through Hebrews for themselves to see if the Bible actually says what CJ claimed it says?
September 29th, 2009 at 11:57 am
The more I read over this message, the more something in me grieves. Was a pastor “happy” when he came to comfort me over the massive health difficulties of a newborn child? Was he “happy” when he came to bury my father? Was he “happy” to ache with me over the emotional and physical toll of physical illness? Happy? I hope not.
He was glad to be of service, glad to be helpful, glad to be of comfort, and he wept with us, cared for us, and encouraged us. And I hope he was CONTENT to be doing the work of the Lord — focused on ministry to those under his care, helping us to bear up under the burdens, helping us to find joy in spite of painful circumstance, and pointing us to the strength and sweetness of the One who suffered for our sins.
Folks reading/hearing Mr. Mahaney’s message may find themselves reluctant to call for help in dark times, wishing not to disturb their Reverend’s carefully protected ivory tower and never-ending supply of Starbuck’s happiness.
September 29th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Last night, I had a good conversation with my dad as he read through the first half of the transcript. He remarked on this comment, early in the message, which was part of CJ’s introductory remarks:
My dad pointed out that if the Knoxville church were really such a “happy” place, then why would there be a need to tighten up policies and have everyone sign a new membership covenant spelling out the church’s rights in disciplinary situations?
Also, my dad said that it is a well-known manipulative technique, to commend a crowd for the behavior that you WANT them to have.
Matter of fact, here is what Kindred Spirit posted the other day, in connection with this very thought:
The whole idea of “happiness” as it relates to church or to pastors is just so jarringly opposed to everything else that SGM supposedly stands for. It fascinates me to track CJ’s manipulation of his audience. It’s very very obvious.
September 29th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
My wife and I have only recently found this and the other related websites. We have been amazed and relieved to see that those abused by leadership have been given a voice. We, like many others, assumed that our situation was an isolated one, that we had no right to speak, and that we were destined to suffer alone.
I have much to say, but I will start by summarizing that prior to any “membership agreement” being implemented, we were pursued and put under discipline after we had already left PDI.
I, in a deranged mindset (that had been drilled into my head), submitted myself to their “discipline”. I thought this was the right and godly thing to do. I was desparate to please them and receive their approval. It has taken me years to wake up from the fog and call it for what it is. Thank you to all who make these sites possible.
September 29th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Clark-
I’m sorry that you suffered in silence…I totally understand what you mean by the “drilled into your head” type of mentality. It really messes with you when you feel violated against, but not free to speak about what you’ve been through.
I hope you find some healing and freedom here….
peace to you-mm
September 29th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Our church was asked to sign these same forms and surprise, surprise, there were a few people who didn’t want to or had questions about them. One good questions was why do we need to sign a commitment form for a church we have attended for years? Even Peacemaker Ministries says that by our longtime attendance we are giving approval to the way things are done around here. As we read more about the forms we realized they were just a way to keep anyone from suing the church for church discipline being administered. We had a conviction the form was based on fear not faith in God. The form itself doesn’t provide much protection from legal recourse but a person’s continued involvement with the church would protect the church more. It’s all so ridiculous!
September 29th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Hi, Clark…
Thanks for your comment, and welcome to the site. I’m glad you’ve found us, and I hope you’ll share with us a bit of your story, if and when you feel ready to do so.
September 29th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Hi Clark and Mrs. Clark – Welcome!I too thought my situation was isolated. That I was the only unhappy person in the happiest place on earth.
I left and was pursued to my next church. They met with my new church and strongly fought for me to be ex-communicated as a means of forcing me back. My new church wouldn’t hear of it. I had a hard time moving on without their approval – but to be free from that is marvelous. I guard my heart very closely now. I am really close to people at my new church but I constantly guard my heart from wanting approval of any man. I won’t go through that again. It is horrible. Musicman said it correctly – when it happens you feel like you have been spiritually violated and it does mess with your head and heart. But, God is good and our healer and He wants us to be free. It is so hard going through it alone and I wish this site had been there when I was going through…but I am glad it is here for people now. Anyway, welcome!
September 29th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
I agree with what Butterfly said about man pleasing vs. God pleasing.
Paul in Gal 1:10 said “For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant [2] of Christ.”
According to this passage Mahaney’s message may be moving people away from being servants’ of Christ.
September 30th, 2009 at 7:01 am
Wow, excellent stuff here. Kris, your Dad is so right! This comment of yours was so succinct and spot on:
The longer the blog is here, the sharper the truth is becoming. SGM’s falsehoods are clearly being stripped away. God’s favor is in this place!
Speaking of God’s favor – SGM leadership usurps favor unto themselves. They teach the ‘favored’ ones are those in leadership. Being in leadership is equated to favor, and since SGM views themselves as highly favored among all the churches, then naturally they think of their leadership as being unusually blessed. In the world of SGM, if you aren’t in leadership, then you are programmed to think that God’s favor doesn’t rest on you. Your thoughts, your actions, your contribution doesn’t matter as much if you aren’t in leadership.
One thing I am aware of in my life is God’s favor. It is the source of my joy. When I was in SGM, there were times when God favored me in particular instances and gave me the confidence to know it was the result of His favor and His blessing. I’m sure you all know what I mean, because as children of God, we should all be aware of His favor –
God’s favor isn’t something you can fake. Someone like CJ Mahaney can’t continue to go around manipulating God’s people while at the same time thinking that God is in it. He has learned to manufacture a sense of His own importance in comparison to others, and developed a system of thinking that supports that idea. Therefore, in CJ Mahaney’s mind, a happy place is…
In other words, a place where he is exalted and given preeminence, as though the favor of God flows through him.
The amount of time SGM spends on promoting themselves and promoting their leadership bears this out. In SGM, you don’t hear too many messages about how much you are favored by God. They like to keep you thinking you’re under His wrath – a sinner – who must constantly be focused on his/her indwelling sin – striving to become one of the favored ones: an SGM leader.
September 30th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Hey, I just wanted to pop in with a follow-up to my comments regarding Hebrews 13:17.
You know why the author of Hebrews could so confidently say that “your leaders…will have to give an account”? Because Jesus himself said so:
See? That servant-manager will be called to account for his own behavior toward the other servants. And from what Jesus is saying, it sounds like he actually risks eternal damnation by treating the other servants roughly, as if he’s their boss.
In their efforts to be able to “give a good account,” it seems C.J. et al. are actually securing a bad one.
I truly fear for them, if they continue to walk in that path.
September 30th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
“I left and was pursued to my next church. They met with my new church and strongly fought for me to be ex-communicated as a means of forcing me back. My new church wouldn’t hear of it.”
If this wasn’t so awful it would almost be funny.
Can you tell us what church you were in, or at least what great apostalate? ( is that a word? I am thinking of the various apostolic territories).
So sorry Clark. God will work even the bad stuff for good for you.
September 30th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
5yearsinPDI,
It was CLC. They fought my new church hard. Thankfully, I had already told them the entire story so when they got the big dog phone call it was not a surprise. I have since moved but I told the church I am going to now as well that CLC could come knocking with clubs and torches to “kill the beast”. haha…bring it!
September 30th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Travis: #142. Astounding. Now, tell why the other people where CJ gives this message don’t correct his faulty thinking. That’s the thing that baffles me….
October 1st, 2009 at 10:45 am
Reading these posts reminds me “afresh and anew” of the horridly absurd teaching in SGM that “the preaching of the word of God IS the word of God”. Think on that. Disagreeing with CJ’s sermon is disagreeing with God Himself! Of course, CJ says as much in his sermon, doesn’t he? Disagreeing with his interpretation and application is rebellion towards God. And the gist of the sermon, as far as I can tell, is “submit to your leaders, obey them in every facet of your life that they deem to stick their noses into, or hell is your destination”. No wonder people are so terrified of the thought of leaving.
October 1st, 2009 at 11:52 am
(This comment was sparked by Travis’ comment #142…)
What’s confusing to me is that if you look at what CJ actually says in his teaching, he appears to be conveying the notion that pastors will give an account to God for how well they watch out for their members’ souls. Like, he’s taken Hebrews 13:17 -
and connected leaders’ “giving account” with watching over souls.
I can see how he reads this verse in this way. I can see how he comes to this sort of an understanding. And on the surface, this sounds good and logical.
And yet somehow, in the end, CJ manages to turn this notion of the accountability of leaders into some sort of exhortation for the non-leaders, the common members. How is that? How does he do it, and more importantly, is this an appropriate connection to make?
Should church members feel some sort of pressure to make it easier for their leaders on their day of reckoning? See, that’s what comes out of this sermon in the end – that somehow, it’s the members’ responsibility to make their pastors’ jobs a joy…that somehow, when pastors come before God to “give an account,” that account will be connected to members’ performance, more than it is dependent upon the pastors’ performance.
I’m just wondering how it is that CJ pulls this neat trick. How is it that the idea of accountability for LEADERS somehow ends up being all about MEMBERS’ behavior?
Like I’ve already said, I don’t think we can actually pull this from the Hebrews passage. I don’t think Hebrews 13:17 is telling MEMBERS to behave in such a way that their leaders’ jobs will be “joyful.” I think the passage is instead telling LEADERS to “do this with joy,” regardless of members’ performance. (Kinda like all of SGM’s injunctions in every other facet of life, except this one. Why is it that SGM can talk such “tough love” to everyone about everything, except when it comes to pastors and their level of “joy”? Why is it that if a pastor is joyful or not suddenly depends upon his circumstances and other people’s behavior, whereas all other complaints will be directed back around to the complainer and the complainer’s lack of performance?)
Anyway, I’m not sure if I’m doing a very good job explaining what it is I’m trying to get at. But in his Happiest Place message, CJ definitely puts all responsibility on MEMBERS, implying in all sorts of ways that how a leader fares on Judgment Day will hinge upon how well the members perform now.
There’s also an additional layer of implications to all this talk about account-giving, a layer that is more subtle. And that is – and I’m wondering if anyone else sees it – it FEELS like somehow, the “giving an account” on Judgment Day will, in CJ’s thinking, also involve leaders sort of speaking on behalf of their members, having some sort of input into how God judges the “souls” entrusted into leaders’ care.
And truly, I do not see this notion anywhere in Hebrews 13:17. Yet somehow, CJ manages to inject it into this teaching…that leaders will on Judgment Day play some sort of advocate role for their members.
October 1st, 2009 at 1:28 pm
There is so much good stuff on this website that should be on the Recommended Reading List of every SGM member. These last two threads definitely deserve to be given top billing. Kris, you are so gifted at analysis and critique!
Travis is so right. We really are looking at a situation in SGM that truly isn’t happy when viewed in light of God’s word. In fact, it’s downright scary…
October 1st, 2009 at 2:02 pm
#146 —”…the horridly absurd teaching in SGM that “the preaching of the word of God IS the word of God”…”
Was that an actual quote from a sermon or publication? The implication that the preacher is infallible is scary if not downright heretical. It scares me to think that I might have heard this in a sermon or read it in a publication, yet did not recognize it as wrong and dangerous. Does anyone have a reference for when or where this was taught?
I always thought I listened with an educated ear and at least a tiny bit of discernment, but now I wonder if I was even more brainwashed than I thought.
October 1st, 2009 at 2:35 pm
Kris said:
“(Kinda like all of SGM’s injunctions in every other facet of life, except this one. Why is it that SGM can talk such “tough love” to everyone about everything, except when it comes to pastors and their level of “joy”? Why is it that if a pastor is joyful or not suddenly depends upon his circumstances and other people’s behavior, whereas all other complaints will be directed back around to the complainer and the complainer’s lack of performance?)”
That sorta reminds me of a time when I was younger, and my best friend was the next-door neighbour. She was a six-year-old who could have a very forceful personality at times… When I was over there, it was her house, so she was “the boss”. When she was at my house, she was the guest, so she was “the boss”. So tell me…when am I the boss? XD
~wings
October 1st, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Wings -
Nevah. You are nevah evah the boss. That’s just the way it is.
Seriously, folks. In SGMville, it’s always the member’s fault. Even if you have a legitimate complaint about a pastor/leader, in the end, YOU are responsible for his poor showing in whatever area, because if you’d only been doing your part to “make his job a joy,” then he’d be happy and successful at what he does. His job performance is only as good as YOUR performance.
October 1st, 2009 at 3:59 pm
Why do SGMers buy this stuff?
You have all those sanctuaries full of smart educated people who tend to be plenty successful in all the other facets of their lives. Why do they suspend their logic when they walk through the doors of their SGM churches and listen without complaint to CJ telling them that it’s their duty to “make their pastors’ job a joy”?
October 1st, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Hehe…
Because that’s the effect cults have on people.
Yep – I said it – the “cult” word.
Yes, SGM’s “legit” when it comes to some of the stuff that qualifies as “church”, but the way they twist scripture, brainwash, control, and manipulate definitely qualifies them as a cult.
Based on pure observation over the past 30 years, there’s no way they can deny it. They can laugh and poopoo such accusations all they want.
They’re a cult!
October 1st, 2009 at 5:44 pm
Kindred!
October 1st, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Guy’s tweeting!
“I’m sitting on the porch”
October 1st, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Jim – how did I know you would be the one to say something like that?
October 1st, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Kindred – I agree with you 100%. What is the old saying, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be a duck?
October 1st, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Kris @ 147 – I get what you are saying. And people think CJ doesn’t know what goes on…he knows and manages the whole thing. He did take this passage and put all the weight on members. Ugh.
The Heb 13:17 I could see where it would be a mutual thing. If people were disrespectful of course their job would be harder. But, I see this alot like marriage. Submitting to a servant leader is easy…submitting to a tryant is not. And a good example includes both parties fullfilling the roles God gave them in the manner he gave it. Like with leadership it should not be lorded over but more of a servant. But I think the problem for me is the Lording over of leadership as exampled in this message that at SGM all the weight for behavior is on the little people. Then there is the extreme degree of obedience SGM expects. I think of the relationship with my non sgm pastor. I respect him and I strongly consider what he has to say because of that respect. I don’t even need to consider “am I obeying”. My respect and consideration flow from the honorable pastor he is – it comes natural to respect him. But, at SGM the obedience goes beyond bible teaching and extends to many areas such as small group attendence is required, membership contracts are required, obeying a pastor’s advice is required so thier expected level of obedience is higher than what scripture asks for.
I do think if people were rude, disrespectful, and argued with everything the pastor says of course his job would not be very joyful! But at SGM it would still be a good sized paycheck to be joyful about!(just kidding)…but I don’t think it is my responsibility to ask..am I a joy to you. Trust me, if you weren’t are joy to SGM they will come to you to let you know to ship up! I think they want you to ask to drive home the point of who is in charge around SGM and they are needing an even greater test of your submission. This message is so barfy to me. The one in charge should be our mutual Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and the bible should be the only standard of our behavior – and not what they stretch it out to say….Trust me the day CJ gives an account will not be as joyful of a day for him as he thinks.
October 1st, 2009 at 8:32 pm
I really dislike how there are different rules for SGM leadership than there is for the people. I can’t tell you how many times at CLC we were taught that YOU and YOU alone are responsible for your own behavior. If you are abused you are still supposed to respond with godliness. If you are yelled at, mistreated, wronged – nothing about your situation gives any weight to your response except your sin nature….
so why is their joy dependant on us.. Joy is a fruit of the Spirit…not a fruit of my behavior….
October 1st, 2009 at 8:41 pm
“God wants happy pastors. That’s what He wants. Wants happy pastors.”
This is such a bad intrepretation of Heb 13:17 That I am not lying or stretching the facts when I say reading this literally makes me sick to my stomach. At most the passage says so thier job will be a joy AND the verse does not state that their job being a joy is for thier sake BUT FOR OURS. …”for that would be of no advantage to you”. Of course a miserable pastor would not be to my advantage. Leadership is about us and Jesus…not them…the goal should not be themselves or thier own happiness. “God wants happy pastors”…I guess God doesn’t want happy children…just pastors….
God wants happy pastors is a more exaggerated translation that the amplified and message and living bible put together…come on CJ!
October 1st, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Butterfly said,
Amen!!
That’s exactly what I was trying to get at.
October 2nd, 2009 at 5:47 am
I have an idea…
Think of how many books we could sell if we took CJ’s “happy pastors” message and applied it to parenting – you know – “happy parents,” God wants “happy parents.”
Man, wouldn’t that make parenting EASY!!
Folks, we could make millions!!
We could title it, “The Happiest Family on Earth.”
October 2nd, 2009 at 5:51 am
Man, the father of the “prodigal son” sure could have benefited from such a book.
October 2nd, 2009 at 6:45 am
In Diciplined For Life (p.14) CJ tells us, (In regard to sanctification), that the goal is not happiness, not success, it is Godliness.
In the PDI/SGM series Suffering and Soverignty, CJ tels us repeatedly that God is not concerned with, nor does he ever promise us happiness, the goal for us is Godliness.
Seems that God has a diffferent goal for the Pastors than he does for the sheep.
So if you are feeling blah or out of sorts as an SGM sheeple, that is Gods plan for you.
If you are prone to bouts of Joy and Happiness, that is Gods plan for you the SGM Pastor.
Remember that the SGM Pastor is part of the SGM church
(that God so loves and intentionaly protectes) in a way that you may never be. (Well for one he has a voice that is listened to)
October 2nd, 2009 at 8:11 am
Unassimilated, you’re back!
October 2nd, 2009 at 9:33 am
Good points, Unassimilated!
I’ll say it again, that gravatar is perfect!
October 2nd, 2009 at 3:48 pm
CJ wants HPPPY PASTORS and RICH PASTORS…
October 2nd, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Ck out this teaching by Piper on the same passage:
http://www.soundofgrace.com/piper97/10-5-97.htm
“So the aim of spiritual leadership in the church is mainly the salvation of the soul. And that salvation is not seen in the book of Hebrews as a one-time event of decision, but a life-long battle against temptation and unbelief. The job of the elders of this church primarily is to help you persevere in faith and be saved. In other words, since perseverance is at stake day after day, the aim of leadership is not simply to get decisions for Jesus at the front end of Christian life, but to so teach and so live and so admonish that professing Christians in the church “not shrink back to destruction, but . . . have faith to the preserving of the soul” (10:39).
This is one thing that makes the ministry so serious to me. I believe what Jesus said in Mark 13:13, “The one who endures to the end will be saved.” This is the message of Hebrews. And it means that all messages and all meetings are salvation meetings. Not because they only aim at the first decision for Christ, but because our final salvation comes to us through persevering faith, not just a one-time decision. Salvation of the soul is the ongoing work of God month after month to preserve us safe in Jesus by preserving our faith. And that happens through the teaching and modeling and admonishing and correcting by faithful leaders in the church.”
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:49 am
Sorry I am late to the party but this comment by Kris caught my eye early. There IS a reason why CJ’s teachings are accepted by these men. Folks will not believe it but it is true: Because CJ is successful and is reformed. Becoming ‘reformed’ was a master stroke for CJ. It propelled him to heights you cannot imagine because he became accepted by the big up and comers like Mohler, Piper, McArthur, etc. Reformed is the big thing in American Christendom. And they view themselves as us against the Arminians. (They just don’t talk about it in public)
We tend to put these folks on pedestals and think they are so holy. But these are men who understand and celebrate success. Mohler did not become president of SBTS at 33 because he was so humble. Same for the others and their success. And they are willing to overlook much when they speak at each others conferences (for big money) and blurb each others books. There is an income stream in these relationships that is very important to them.
We need to stop looking at these folks as a different class of Christian with something special. They aren’t. There is no such thing as a Great man of God. If you read scripture you know that God works more like this:
26Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, 29so that no one may boast before him. 30It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. 31Therefore, as it is written: “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.”
CJ can talk the humble talk all day long but lets see him give up all the celebrity and nice income and lifestyle. And when it comes down to it, they are no more ‘holy’ than the celebrity Arminians out there.
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:49 am
LM Malone – Amen!
October 3rd, 2009 at 8:52 am
Hey, LM Malone,
Thanks for your comment, and welcome to the site.
This struck me -
Just the other day, in correspondence with a reader, I was trying to explain why I think some of these Reformed Big Dogs continue to turn a blind eye to SGM’s issues. I mean, it’s not like the RBDs are all still blissfully unaware that SGM has some problems. Lots of folks have contacted them over the past 2 years. Yet it’s like pretty much all efforts to get the RBDs’ attention have been met with deafening silence…while the cozy stage-sharing relationships continue.
The one response I did receive was from someone at MacArthur’s organization, who wrote and explained that oftentimes the face presented at conferences and such is not the same as what goes on in an organization on a daily basis…and that frequently, these celebrity pastors only know the most basic surface information about their associates. I had a lot of respect for that honest answer. And I think that’s a pretty good explanation for why CJ was so eagerly embraced. SGM presents itself quite well…
I mean, think about it – it’s difficult to articulate the subtleties of what SGM does, and it’s also true that not even everyone with an insider’s knowledge of SGM will recognize what goes on. So it’s no big surprise that the Reformed Big Dogs are oblivious. They experience a mesmerizing public speaker and share laughs with him. They like his teachings. And from everything they can SEE, on the surface, SGM churches look pretty good.
So that’s part of the explanation for the RBDs’ continued associations with SGM.
But the other part, I’m afraid, is – as LM Malone says – about money. Money, and a desire for greater numbers of people on the “Reformed” side of the debate. Power. Money and power.
These relationships among RBDs – and the conferences they put on and the organizations (like CBMW) they run – garner more attention for all of them, as a collective group. Their message gets out there, and reaches more people. Although SGM is a relatively small
denominationfamily of churches, people like SGM’s music, and adding an entiredenominationfamily of churches to the Reformed Big Dogs’ cause IS significant.So the RBDs get at least as much out of their relationships with SGM as SGM gets from the RBDs.
It’s way too easy to want to look the other way when concerns arise. It’s much simpler to just minimalize the concerns and accept SGM’s explanations (or maybe not even bring the subject up at all) than it would be to jeopardize the relationship.
October 3rd, 2009 at 8:59 am
I would just like to know how will you justify this to the Lord on the day you stand before him? I am not a member of Sovereign Grace Ministries but my wife does! And this is one of the most disturbing websites I have ever stumbled upon. So what! You disagree with their teachings? You have problems with their pastors? With people in their congregations? Thats fine, but that should be between you, them and the Lord! This website is just a venue for you to spout off about people who have done nothing that the Lord will not forgive, however you thinking your better then Him, have taken it upon yourselves to not forgive! Please all of you who read this check your hearts! Pray before the Lord! I know that even though you don’t like “SGM” that you still call yourselves Christian’s, well this website in its existence is against the things taught in scripture! What happened to forgive as you have been forgiven! The Bible teaches that bitterness rots the soul! I only pray that it is not too late for you all to see the bitterness in your own hearts! Please go to the people you are offended with at SGM ask for their forgiveness for harboring this bitterness! If you don’t want to do that then I suggest you get on your knees and pray to the Lord for forgiveness for He holds nothing against no one! So if he sent his Son to die for all sins and now forgives you for everything you have done, then why should you not forgive are you better then Christ? – A Concerned Brother
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:09 am
On p. 100-101 of his 2007 book, A Beautiful Fight, evangelical author Gary Thomas writes about the role of the Church in the individual believer’s discernment of God’s voice. I want to share it because it is relevant to the discussion about leadership in neo-Reformed churches. Sorry about the length! I want to err on the side of inclusion, so as not to misrepresent Thomas’ complete argument.
Thomas writes:
“We need to heed the warning of the Reformers that when anyone can claim divine inspiration, the end of the church is in sight. We listen to God humbly, as daughters and sons of God’s church. At moments in our history, some elements of the church have clearly been in error, but there still remains a collective wisdom that calls for our respect. None of us should delight in swimming against the current; we must do so only when we are convinced that Scripture insists on it.
On the other hand, I’m not willing to go as far as some of the Reformers did when they openly questioned God’s tendency to specifically guide us and speak to us. John Calvin was so suspicious of direct listening to God that at times he even seemed to question private Bible study. I know, I know – who am I to question John Calvin? While he has undeniably been a great teacher to me, he’s still not my God, and in this instance, by virtually limiting God’s speaking to trained preachers, he may have inadvertently helped create the personality-centered church that has existed for so long, a one-man show that can undercut the priesthood of believers. In this case, there must exist a happy middle, where we base our understanding on God’s Word, appropriately studied and applied, while occasionally receiving personal instruction, comfort, and advice that must be tested before it is received; and even then these things are always held secondarily, perhaps somewhat suspiciously, as possible applications of God’s written Word.”
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:13 am
Hey, “Concerned Brother” -
Thanks for your comment, and welcome to the site.
So, OK -
You’re not a member of SGM, but your wife does? Does what? Is an SGM member?
Hmm.
First of all, why don’t you go to church with your wife? I’d really love to know the answer to that one.
Secondly, I was just thinking this morning how interesting it is that people sometimes have been unable to understand or accept that this site is NOT motivated by “unforgiveness” or “bitterness.” It’s motivated, instead, by CONCERN.
I don’t “just” have a problem with SGM’s teachings. I am alarmed for all the people out there – people like your wife – who haplessly join in without understanding what has happened to so many others who have gone on before them.
I’m surprised, actually, that you’re showing more “concern” for the commenters here than you’re showing for your wife. If you’re really a believer, and yet you’ve nonetheless decided to neglect uniting with your wife and being part of the same church with her, then there’s got to be a good reason why. There must be something about SGM that you yourself don’t care for, something that rubs you the wrong way.
Now you supposedly stumble on this site, read the stories, and come away with…the notion that WE have problems?
Your first response ISN’T to think of your wife and wonder if SHE’S in danger by being part of an organization that you yourself don’t like well enough to join?
Really?
I gotta say, that’s mighty strange.
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:15 am
P.S. An aside unrelated to my previous comment: I’m personally bothered by the repeated “income stream” references on various threads here. I have yet to see a shred of evidence to support the notion that any of the neo-Reformed leaders are materialistic men oriented towards building financial empires.
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:25 am
Just a few questions that are provacative for many who have been in very authoritarian situations but are very important to consider when looking at CJ’s message:
1. Why does Hebrews 13:17 seem to contradict other ‘servant’ passages in the NT? Why is there not another ‘authority’, ‘obey’ passage in the NT for so called leaders? An important command is always repeated for our protection. (See Phil)
Kris, you said you did not want to discuss the translation of this passage but I cannot find where you can have a serious discussion about CJ’s message if you do not ask some serious questions about the translation. if one is in a false teaching situation they could find themselves drinking kool aid in Guyana. With all the false teaching, wolves and hirling warnings in the NT, it makes no sense for the author of Hebrews to give an blanket order to obey whatever ‘leader’ happens to be there. Are they assuming there are no wolves (see Acts 20 where Paul says they will even be among the elders!).
2. Why is the word ‘obey’ used? (the word is peitho and is not one of submission to authority; it is one of listening to someone out of respect and taking their advice. A better translation of peitho in verse 17 is “Listen to,” not “Obey them.”)
Peitho is sometimes translated “trust” in the King James Version of the New Testament and would have been an ideal translation in verse 17: ‘Trust them….’ in this passage.
3. Why do the translators use “Have the rule over you” (KJV) as the meaning of hegeomai? It is used 28 times in the New Testament and translated variously as “count,” “think,” “esteem,” “be governor,” and other miscellaneous words such as “chief’ and “leader.”
4. Where do you see the word ‘elder’ or pastor in that passage?
5. Name the pastors and/or elders of the Corinthian, Phillipian, Galatian and all other churches. You might get some right from the personal letters. But why don’t we know all of them if obeying leaders is a command for all believers?
6. How come all the letters were not written to the ‘leaders’ but instead most were written to the entire church. Would that mean the instructions were to the entire church? An example would be practicing church discipline in 1 Corin 5. The advice was to the entire church not a select group of leaders.
7. How many times is pastor mentioned in the NT? (Once as a spiritual gift given by the Holy Spirit. Not ones chosen by men) It is not clear that a ‘pastor’ teaches the whole Body. There could be many pastors. Some pastors might shepherd one person. There is no set rule in the NT.
8. How come the other spiritual gifts are not paid positions within the Body but pastor is?
9. Where do we see ‘authority’ over others attached to any function in the Body? (Why do we automatically assume this? We always assume it when we see submission, too. But submission is voluntary. Authority over others is a worldly construct. It is a sin trap and snare for those wanting authority. No matter how humble they act. In the NT, they sought to serve others. That is why CJ uses ‘serve’ so much but preaches cognative dissonance of authority. He is trying to align servant with authority.)
The authority is Jesus Christ. Elders are simply the spiritual mature who guard as overseers. They do not have special authority over adults but are the lowly humble loving servants to the Body. A true elder would NOT want authority over others and would not seek it. A true elder would look more like Matt 5 than a Pharisee with power and authority.
Adults are not children. Why does the goal of so many pastors seem to be to keep the other member of the body as spiritual children obeying daddy? Don’t they want them to become spiriutally mature?
10. If Paul had authority why do we see him (not only making tents so as not to be a burden) but spending so much time persuading and pleading with folks in letters. Why not just order them since he is their authority?
11. Where do we see Paul in word or action expecting the members of the Body to have a responsibility for his happiness?
I have been around these guys long enough to realize that anyone who questions their teaching or a translation is automatically labeled a liberal or rebellious. I know, I lived in that world, too, in the SBC. So, I expect to hear a bit of there here because I dared to question mere men and took it to the Lord instead to teach me.
Why are so many preaching/teaching what benefits them? IT only makes sense to be a Berean. The Word is inerrant. Translators are not inerrant and the Holy Spirit is the BEST teacher who gives us a hunger and thirst to test everything for pure truth.
We are so blessed to live in a time with free resources at our fingertips. WE can even teach ourselves Greek! We have no excuses. I often wonder about most of the population who were illiterate during the Dark Ages and HAD only the priests to interpret the Word for them. That is why we had a reformation!
Why do we act like those who are illiterate and not test everything including translations. Why are there so many translations and denominations? Why do we not seek the Holy Spirit to teach us? Why do we depend on mere men? This is NOT what our Lord expects from us. We are to be ‘walking’ with HIM. Yoked to HIM. Not to some humans who claim special knowledge or leadership.
Why would we simply accept the translation of something like Hebrews 13:17 that contradicts all the lowly servant, first will be last and last will be first, do not lord it over and all the one another passages? Not to mention Pauls exhortation about members of the Body in 1 Corinthians. Could it be a translation that fits the church state mentality of another age of ruler/Monarches? Where the magistrates showed up at your door if you were not at church?
Has anyone noticed that in comments many have gone to Piper to see how he teaches Hebrews 13:17? I beg you friends, go to the Holy Spirit. Study and ask the Holy Spirit to illuminate truth to you and you will soon find that our precious Lord has no special class of Christian with some special anointing you cannot have (see 1 John). If we are saved, we are all in the Priesthood.
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:33 am
Kris,
I appreciate your concern, “does” was a typo. I meant to say “is”. Anyways, I cannot attend church with my wife because I work on Sunday mornings unfortunately. I do however attend the small group meetings during the week which in no way seem “cultish” to me. I feel personally attacked by you though with that last comment. I do feel great love concern for my wife and that is my business, You have no right to question my love for her! I love the Lord with all my heart and if it weren’t necessary for me to work on Sundays then I would attend church with her, I didn’t appreciate that thank you! Back to my point, I am concerned for all of you! Because the Lord does not care about what others have done to offend you! He cares about YOUR heart! I understand that you all are upset with SGM, but their must be a better vehicle to get that out! Kris, please don’t take me as someone trying to destroy this little world you’ve created, but I will not be posting here again after the way I was treated by you. Please, everyone take to heart what I’ve said. Repent. – Concerned Brother
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:44 am
“I mean, think about it – it’s difficult to articulate the subtleties of what SGM does, and it’s also true that not even everyone with an insider’s knowledge of SGM will recognize what goes on. So it’s no big surprise that the Reformed Big Dogs are oblivious. ”
I happen to know Mohler knows about the stories of the handling of sexual perversion at some SGM churches. But you must realize that he most likely commiserates with CJ instead of rebuking him. He would believe CJ over some peon church member nobody.
Poor Mohler has had some problems, too. He had to apologize to faculty and staff a few years back for his childish temper tantrums he throws all the time. They are scary. I had a friend get a transfer away from him because of them. But then, some started commenting about it in comment streams of various blogs. And over time, it became something he could no longer deny because they were constant. So, he did the PR thing and apologized. Is he still arroagant and condescending to his underlings? You bet. but they consider him so brilliant and Holy they think God overlooks this with Mohler because he is so special.
If it were announced onCNN and Fox that CJ Mahaney was presiding over a denomination that excused sexual perversion, you know how the RBD would respond? ‘We know CJ and he is a wonderful man who loves the Lord and has dealt with this situation in a biblical manner. Our prayers are with him as he goes through this tragic experience’…… Case closed. Never mind the victims. Who cares about them? This is business!
Do not forget. They have blurbed each others books, sold each others books at their MANY conferences. Spoke on each others conference stages and at each others churches and seminaries. Do you really think they are going to admit they had no spiritual wisdom or discernment? There are future books to write and future stages to grace.
October 3rd, 2009 at 10:24 am
“Concerned” Brother -
[I'm replying to you because with human nature being what it is, I know you're still reading here, even if you won't further participate in the conversation.]
Look, I wasn’t questioning your love for your wife. I was pointing out how odd it is that you’d stumble upon a site discussing your wife’s church, and detailing that church’s abuses of people, and your first concern would be for the commenters and site moderator, and NOT for your wife?
If my husband attended some church alone, without me, and I happened upon a blog that described how his church organization teaches all sorts of weird garbage about (for instance) how pastors are a separate class of people whom God wants to be “happy”…and how members must obey those pastors…which is what this post is about…
And if I read further and realized that my husband’s church had abused a bunch of people…
My first concern would be for my husband! I’d be really worried that he was part of something that could harm him.
Why are you more concerned about the commenters here than you are about the fact that your wife is part of an organization that could hurt her?
Also, I think you’ve set up a false dilemma for God. Of course He cares about how people respond to insults and injuries. Of course God doesn’t want us to end up bitter. (That people here are “bitter,” as you’ve so judged, is debatable, anyway.)
But God is also concerned about the people who are doing the injuring!
And I’m pretty sure God would also be concerned about stopping abusive behavior. Not to mention the twisting of His truth.
October 3rd, 2009 at 10:35 am
Seeker,
A person can make his career/reputation/organization a big priority without necessarily being materialistic. When people mention “money” in connection with the Reformed Big Dogs, they’re NOT necessarily implying that the RBDs are in ministry to satisfy their fleshly desires for material goods. I’m not getting the sense that anyone is saying that the RBDs want to drive fancy cars, reside in mansions, or otherwise live the “high life.” I, for one, do NOT believe that the RBDs could ever be described as “materialistic.”
Being concerned about preserving one’s career opportunities does connect with money, but not necessarily in a way that is about indulging oneself personally.
Rather, it’s about influence.
And it’s not necessarily wrong to want so badly to influence people in a certain direction (in this case, being “Reformed”). But I think sometimes leaders can become so singularly focused on advancing their cause that they willfully ignore the stuff that might distract (or detract) from their cause.
And money IS involved in that. Not necessarily money as in Jim-and-Tammy-Faye-Bakker gold faucets and air conditioned dog houses. But money as it is necessary for continued influence and celebrity.
October 3rd, 2009 at 10:49 am
“Because the Lord does not care about what others have done to offend you!”
Yes, He does.
6 “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. 7 Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!…” (Matthew 18:6,7 NKJV)
Never, never think He doesn’t care.
October 3rd, 2009 at 11:02 am
Welcome to the site LMMalone.
Great posting! You are dead on! You said…
“Reformed is the big thing in American Christendom. And they view themselves as us against the Arminians.(They just don’t talk about it in public)”
I’m not looking for a debate on Calvinism vs. Arminianism – we’ve went round and round with “that one” numerous times on ALL the blogs – but there’s no denying that there’s an intense battle going in Christendom right now between these two camps. You’re right, Malone, there’s no way the RBD’s are going to do ANYTHING that would hurt the “reformed camp’s” PR. What they don’t realize is that it would actually gain them alot of respect to call SGM out.
One of the top complaints the reformed bunch have to deal with is the accusation of arrogance and pride. Everyone knows that when you struggle with arrogance and pride it’s hard to ever admit you’re wrong. They could certainly win points for the reformed side by addressing SGM’s issues and persuading CJ to publicly repent and ask for forgiveness.
October 3rd, 2009 at 11:06 am
Luna,
That the Lord is the defender of the weak and the champion of the downtrodden – well, that is a theme throughout all of Scripture.
And, frequently, PEOPLE are the instruments God chooses to use in order to mete out justice and stand up for the injured.
See, I know that when we say things like, “God is the defender of the weak,” immediately someone will want to argue that therefore, since God will defend, that means that we must sit back and do nothing.
But that’s ridiculous.
Throughout history, God typically has not rescued the weak by sending angels to do His bidding, or by flashing lightning bolts from the sky. Typically, God works out His justice through PEOPLE – people who don’t remain silent but who are willing to do something when things aren’t right.
No blog is gonna be perfect. No moderator will ever get everything right. But I can say that as God is my witness, I’m not sitting here typing these words (and interacting with SGM defenders) out of some twisted desire to be a “famous blogger” or otherwise gain something out of the deal. (And how can I even be famous when I’ve never made my name or identity part of the equation, anyway?) I’m also not motivated out of bitterness or anger, or even because I was personally hurt by SGM. (I wasn’t hurt by SGM. As I’ve explained over and over again, Guy and I did not have a particularly negative SGM experience. It just wasn’t for us.)
This site is here because people need to know what SGM has done. Plain and simple.
At least then they can make an informed decision.
Like, if “Concerned Brother’s” wife wants to keep on attending her SGM church, great. But at least “Concerned Brother” now knows what to look out for, should his wife ever find herself in the strange position of being unjustly accused of some random sin like “pride.” “Concerned Brother” might even now have a better handle on why his wife may someday be treated like a second-class citizen because she’s a “Sunday widow” and doesn’t bring all the glories of a “Biblical marriage” to the SGM table.
At least the other side of SGM is being talked about. At least people can’t say they were never warned.
That’s why I’m here.
Cuz really, I have a whole full life of good stuff to enjoy. Eric Somebody-Or-Other was wrong, at least in my case, when he described bloggers as losers still living with their mothers and hanging around in their pajamas while blogging in their (mothers’) basements.
I’m not looking to “create some little world” (as “Concerned Brother” so uncharitably declared). Coming on two years ago, I threw out a couple of random posts about my ambivalence about SGM, and basically, a “little world” was then created by those whom SGM had hurt.
NOBODY could ever engineer something like this.
Thanks for the compliment, “Concerned Brother,” but really – I’m just not that smart or creative to have made this SGM garbage up.
October 3rd, 2009 at 11:26 am
Kris #183…
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Dear Concerned Brother in Christ,
I would just like to know how SGM leaders will justify this to the Lord on the day they stand before him? I am not a member of Sovereign Grace Ministries but I used to be! And it is one of the most disturbing churches I have ever stumbled upon. I disagree with some of their teachings. I have problems with some of their pastors. I have fully forgiven them and the leaders in their congregation that wronged me.
It should have been between me and them and the Lord but they chose to attempt to expose my sins to as many people as they could with no concern that they might be wrong or any concern for my reputation. They refused to have any conversation with me about the things they did that clearly violated scripture. This website is a place where I can process all that happened and maybe help someone else. The Lord will forgive those at SGM and I have prayed for Him to do just that. I do not think I am better than them and I have taken it upon myself to forgive in spite of the fact they they had no concern for the harm they had done and violated many biblical principles in the process; and continue to do so by not leaving their gift at the altar and seeking first to reconcile with me.
Please all of you who are quick to assume that we are bitter, angry, unforgving, unholy, sinners – check your own hearts! Pray before the Lord! I know that even though you don’t like “SGM Survivors” that you still call yourselves Christians. Well, SGM’s lack of concern for those on this website is against the things taught in scripture! What happened to accepting and loving others as God has accepted you? The Bible teaches that if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you…and if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you?
What good has SGM done for those that are on this site? and what about the charge to first take the plank out of your own eye and then you will see clearly to remove the speck form your brother’s eye? What has SGM leadership done to remove the plank from their eyes so they can help with the specks here?
I only pray that it is not too late for you all to see the judgmental spirit in your own hearts! Please go to the leaders of SGM and ask them why they have not left their gifts at the altar of God and sought to reconicle with those they have offended instead of harboring judgmental attitudes! If you don’t want to do that, then I suggest you get on your knees and pray to the Lord for forgiveness for He holds nothing against no one! So if he sent his Son to die for all sins and now forgives you for everything you have done, then why should a church like SGM think they have the God given authority to declare people that disagree with them as not forgiven by God for their sins and kick people out of the church for minor disagreements and not for clearly evident serious sins – are they better than Christ?
– A Concerned Godly sister.
(You do remember that I am God’s daughter too right? Maybe you should get on your knees and ask God about the tone you jumped in here with, my brother.)
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:26 pm
PS. My post # 185 is in direct response to post #172
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Some bits and pieces of comments from my dear Concerned Brother:
From post 177
This is almost laughable. Look at this language and this brother feels personally attacked? How dare you Kris! My concerned brother – you sure do live on the SGM manly planet. Because this is so typical. You come on this site barrelling your strong message of repent you angry dirty sinners…and then cry that you were personally attacked? Yep, SGM through and through. You must not have read any of CJs books on humility.
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Seeker Wrote:
P.S. An aside unrelated to my previous comment: I’m personally bothered by the repeated “income stream” references on various threads here. I have yet to see a shred of evidence to support the notion that any of the neo-Reformed leaders are materialistic men oriented towards building financial empires.
Me: Why is this a concern? CJ has gain financially greatly from SGM, from the books that are pushed to the members, from the “relationships” with rest of the non-reformed “rock stars”. All of these men enjoy a life style that most of America doesn’t. They may not be “materialistic” as making ungodly amounts of money like Tiger Woods or Warren Buffet, but they are living the life style that many high ranking executives in corporations enjoy. They are not living the life style of average (NON-SGM) pastor in America. I have no problem with someone getting ahead in the USA, that is what we are 0 if you want to eat, you work., If you want to get ahead and make more money, you work. That is the way America works. My issue is that CJ et all are doing in the name of God and acting like God himself appeared to them as a burning bush. Yes, they are living their life style off of the name of God.
Concerned Brother – you should be concerned, about SGM. DO you honestly think that this site is full of liars? DO you honestly think that these things that happened are just one off situations? Just because you didn’t see these things personally, doesn’t mean they didn’t happen. Also, I do question if you really are someone whose wife is a member and you are not. Per the membership “covenants” that the SGM churches themselves have posted, you can;t attend care group unless you are a member. But, hey maybe your sgm church and experience is different. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I do question whether or not you are just a defended coming to stir up trouble among people who have been damaged emotionally AND spiritual by sgm.
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Butterfly,
Heh. I never even noticed the irony.
But yeah, it’s kinda funny. “Concerned Brother” goes on the attack in his very first comment…and then gets all “poor pitiful me” on us because he misread my response back to him and thought I was insinuating that he didn’t love his wife.
Oy.
I always get a little bit suspicious, anyway, when a defender claims that he isn’t part of SGM. I mean, if I’m not PART of an organization, then I typically won’t have such a vested interest in what is being said about the organization. I’d be more like, “Hmm, interesting stuff, I’ll take it under advisement and keep my eyes open.”
That’s all I was trying to say to “Concerned Brother” when he claimed I questioned his love for his wife – just that I found it puzzling that he’s more worried about random strangers on a blog than he is about his wife and her involvement in an organization like SGM. That’s not really a normal response to this site…at least, not from a “non-SGMer.”
October 3rd, 2009 at 1:03 pm
I’m not looking for a debate on Calvinism vs. Arminianism – we’ve went round and round with “that one” numerous times on ALL the blogs – but there’s no denying that there’s an intense battle going in Christendom right now between these two camps. You’re right, Malone, there’s no way the RBD’s are going to do ANYTHING that would hurt the “reformed camp’s” PR. What they don’t realize is that it would actually gain them alot of respect to call SGM out.”
I am not looking for a debate on Calvinism, either. I lean toward reformed but I live in the heart of the reformed/arminian controversy and I am well aware of the covert actions of both camps for preeminance in the SBC right now.
So when I am asked, I reply that I am a Jesusists. I do not follow men. Neither Calvin or Arminius. There is not one single human I listen to teach that I do not test it. There is too much at stake to just believe anyone because of their exhalted positions and titles.
Someone mentioned, either in this thread or another, that this focus on reformed is a backlash to the seeker watered down church growth movement. That is correct. EXCEPT, that both movements are big into authority over others. The seekers are just have a softer approach. You still sign a membership covenant at Saddleback(and other seeker megas) that includes something about not critisizing the church or leadership. Sounds good but it is used to squash any questioning or dissent at all. You either go along or get out.
The reformers are dogmatic about their authority over others. Everything is focused on the Greek chain of being. A very worldly approach to authority and something Jesus Christ warned us about. Even down to their promotion of ESS (Eternal subordination of the Son) an Arian heresy revived to try and prove inherent authorties in the Body. That is why anyone who disagrees with them is automatically labeled as liberal or heretic as someone else mentioned in this thread. It works. Who wants to be a liberal? I don’t.
When men focus on their perceived authority, no matter how it is presented, it is a red flag we must all recognize. All believers have the indwelling Holy Spirit if they are saved. They do not want authority over others. They know that leadership is really being a servant, taking the persecution, being poor, humiliated and stomped on. It is not an exhalted position that lives comfortably off the offerings of other believers in the Body. (Do a deeper study on double honor and not muzzling the ox. And look at examples in the NT of how offerings were really used)
The pardox of the Gospel is that we are both free and bondservants in Christ at the same time.
If more would seek the Kingdom first, not following men, they would not be taken in by this message of CJ’s.
October 3rd, 2009 at 1:16 pm
“P.S. An aside unrelated to my previous comment: I’m personally bothered by the repeated “income stream” references on various threads here. I have yet to see a shred of evidence to support the notion that any of the neo-Reformed leaders are materialistic men oriented towards building financial empires.”
Well, you have not worked in Christian marketing.
And you won’t see public evidence of building big financial empires. I will give you ONE example of what you will NOT see: One well known up and coming reformer now makes around 130,000 salary (It might be more now) at a seminary. He also makes quite a bit from constant speaking engagements and books. Keeping the royalties even though written on the job. When he was about to adopt some children from a foreign country a fat cat donor walked into his office and handed him a check for 10,000 to help fray the cost.
That is what life is like for them and that is ONE example. Never mind the free and very nice vacations in Hawaii, Aspen, etc., rides on corporate jets, company cars etc. Never mind the book writing and speaking engagements WHILE they are being paid a salary to do something else.
In my Christian marketing days, it was not unusual to pay a well known speaker 5000 for one day plus travel expenses and put up in a nice hotel. A lessor known might get 1000.
These are not stupid men. They don’t buy jags and live in Mansions. But they are well heeled and never have to worry about making the mortgage or sending the kids to college, thanks to guys like you. And that is ok. For me, I would rather give my money to help the single mom in the Body who needs braces for her kid but cannot afford them. Or maybe her car needs a new engine.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Dear Concerned Brother…
I wonder…are you mine? Although your name is “concerned” your tone and sin pointing was “condemning”.
Ok, OK,,,yes I am bitter. It comes and goes. I have good bitter days, and bad bitter days, but you asked…how will I justify myself before the LORD on that final day…????
Condemning Brother, aren’t I justified by the blood of Jesus, or must I have perfect responses to a body of christ that lacks integrity, where the leadership has been neglectful and abusive, and where the young and inmature lead blindly continuing the misinturpretation of Gods Word.
Luna Moth, thank you for the scripture and the reminder.
Hi Kris…
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:32 pm
@ Kris – Yep, that was a classic drive-by attack if I have ever seen one. Too funny really. I later thought to myself, Wow, nice to meet you brother.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:43 pm
LMMalone…I like you.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:49 pm
That’s okay, Butterfly.
If “drive-by attacks” inspire you to make comments like your #185, let ‘em keep on coming.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:51 pm
LMMALONE’s comment income stream is closer than many of us may want to admit.
Some of these men do live quite well and some, at times, have been questioned for things like buying $80,000 cars on the ministry expense and putting their wife on payroll while she’s really at home raising their kids…. (this example is from a Reformed ministry, not a name it claim it type)
I really don’t want to get into naming names or how my experience with some of the trade shows for these authors was quite enlightening to these uncomfortable facts….but if you really need to know, the facts are out there on the charitable/ Non-profit ranking sites.
All this to say-money is still a temptation-even to Reformed Big Dogs.
October 3rd, 2009 at 2:53 pm
You’re welcome, little a…
October 3rd, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Concerned Brother-
Your thought that the Lord does not care what others have done to offend you is just so wrong….you are serving some other angry God.
My God is a god of love and Justice….Justice is ALL about caring how one person has treated another…how dare you say such untrue things about the Lord. The Lord cares for our hearts and for Justice-divorcing the two is a serious doctrinal error.
I am concerned for anyone who would believe such falsehoods.
MM
October 3rd, 2009 at 3:04 pm
My sister and I were talking a minute ago…
And as we talked, something occurred to me.
“Concerned Brother,” if you’re still reading, I have a good challenge for you. (I can give you a challenge, can’t I? I mean, you challenged us to repent, so I guess turn-about is fair play.
)
Here’s the challenge:
Go to your wife’s SGM pastors and sniff around and just see for yourself what they actually think of a man who would let his wife attend church alone most Sundays because he “has to work.”
See for yourself.
Truth is, you may call yourself a “Concerned Brother,” but I can basically guarantee you that SGM pastors would believe that you are an inferior Christian because you’re not making involvement (and membership) in a “local” church more of a priority. Moreover, you’re neglecting your duties to “lead your wife” because you are placing a higher premium on your job than you are church.
Just ask.
All that acceptance and “Things are A-OK” that you’re experiencing right now when you manage to attend your wife’s small group with her – well, I hate to break it to you, but I am confident that your wife’s small group regards their kindness to you more along the lines of evangelism and outreach to an unsaved (or at least unenlightened) guy…NOT as warm fuzzies extended to a “brother” (equal) in Christ.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:03 pm
I don’t disagree that lucrative speaking and writing opportunities both further a ministry and create temptations to sin. All of us are presented with various temptations of one sort or another, all the time.
What I’m saying is that I see a HUGE difference between reasoned analyses of Mahaney’s actual spoken words (and implied policis) like those Kris offered in her post versus innuendos and idle speculation about how neo-Reformed leaders respond to financial/power incentives surrounding the growth in their ministries.
October 3rd, 2009 at 4:38 pm
At the Sovereign Grace Ministry Church I left, if you had to work on Sunday your name would be in the church directory in parenthesis…
Concerned Wife, Sonney boy
JR, Sweetie Pie (Concerned Brother).
It was to make everyone aware you were not conforming to the RULES.
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Yep, at CLC working on Sundays would be a big NO. Missing meetings for any reason was cause for being questioned. Plus, even for those of us that are free from SGM oversight – I love going to church on Sundays and wouldn’t work a job where I couldn’t attend my church. It is a highlight of my week and I always look forward to it. But that is just me.
I also love this argument that people say to just forgive – as if forgiving means keeping your mouth shut when people are being treated wrong. May I introduce my brother to Gal 2. “When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong….I said to Peter in front of them all….” This was a very public confrontation – not a I will just forgive you and keep my mouth shut way of dealing with error that was harming fellow Christians.
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:20 pm
“a,”
Hi to you, too!
Are you kidding or serious about the names-in-parentheses thing?
That’s hysterical, either way. But if it’s the literal truth, it’s quite sad for people like (Concerned Brother) who are “believing the best” about SGM and thinking that they’re being extended full love and acceptance as actual “brothers” in Christ when in reality their SGM friends are marginalizing them as only (at best) semi-believers.
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Kris,
Not sure if the () is literal but the concept at CLC sure was. For years everyone wondered why I wasn’t helping lead a care group. I found out years later it was because of a sin that I confessed and repented of years prior…it marked me as no longer eligible to them no matter what my current walk with the Lord was. My name from the day of my willing confession without any prompting or confrontation by anyone…that my name was permanently marked in ( ). So, concerned brother knows nothing of how CLC views forgiveness. There is no sea of forgetfulness at CLC but only ( ). Of course, I was marked such until I got married and was cleansed by my husbands holiness and allowed to help him as he lead a group. All of this is almost laughable now because I see such irony. Sunday after Sunday they tell you what a depraved horrible sinner you and Christ is constantly crucified for your sin…yet they mark those that do sin….should sin be a surprise if you think we are totally depraved and teach that we should look at everything with the view of how our sin plays a part? Focus constantly on your sin…because you are a sinner…but don’t ever sin…makes my head spin.
Also, if I missed one Sunday or Celebration my CGL was quick to ask for my reason. It was also preached from the platform that you shouldn’t work on Sunday mornings, if you weren’t 10 minutes early you were late, and you should turn down any promotions that would take you away from CLC because that would not be making God your priority.
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:40 pm
That’s no joke…..
in our directory the “unsaved” were in parentheses…..
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:43 pm
Cardinal,
That is really just sad.
It is sad that (CJ) would allow such a thing…haha…couldn’t resist!
October 3rd, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Please excuse my depraved sin nature that is showing itself in # 206. I haven’t thought about the cross long enough today. Or, it could be that my leadership is just not doing a good enough job saving me lately..
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:10 pm
About the parentheses thing -
I don’t mean to make something out of nothing. I realize that with respect to a church directory, it’s possible that non-member names were put in parentheses just to indicate the fact that they aren’t members, and not to make any sort of statement about these non-members’ salvation status.
Just to clarify.
But I do believe that our “Concerned Brother” would be stunned to find out just how he is viewed by his wife’s fellow members. Because of what SGM teaches about husbands and their duty to “lead” their wives, I am absolutely convinced that “Concerned Brother” is looked down upon as someone who is not obeying God and is shirking his husbandly duties by not making participation in his “local” church a priority.
CJ and Co have made quite a few statements about how Christianity cannot be separated from our activities in the “local” church. So it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to connect the dots and see why SGMers wouldn’t view “Concerned Brother” as much of a “brother” (in Christ) at all.
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Cardinal…are you SERIOUS?!?
Were the “parentheses people” okay with this? How did they list them? If there was a family and the mother was the only one they deemed “saved”, would it look somewhat like this:
(Mr. Joe Smith)
Mrs. Joe Smith
(Suzie Joe Smith)
(Billy Joe Smith)
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Kris – all joking aside you are correct. I would be that he is looked down on. It is the SGM way unless you are fully on board with their methods. This would be one of those situations for sure. And, they will keep that from him until ready to reveal their cards…that is also their way.
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:29 pm
I have a confession to make… I actually like when people make objecting comments on this site because it means i get to read a whole lot of awesome responses to said person. I’m sitting here in my pajama pants (jk) laughing, clapping and saying amen to many of the responses. One of the things that I love about this site is that you always hit the nail on the head Kris. I have never been a very eloquent speaking person so it is nice to have someone who I mostly agree with be able to voice what I have been thinking but not able to put into words.
The comments from Concerened brother sounded a lot like SGM speak for someone who was not a member, he said “Repent”, that one made me laugh. I’m just sorry that he hasn’t responded again, you know that uncomfortable part of an argument where you realize that you are wrong?…
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Not Fit….that whole thing from concerned about being personally attacked and not posting anymore reminded me of my very into SGM husband. When we were discussing anything, if I disagreed he would declare the conversation to be over and I was no longer allowed to speak. “This discussion is closed”…..didn’t bring much resolution though…
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:41 pm
For those who are concerned about what the RBDs are making, I would like to share what I know about Piper’s lifestyle. Last I heard, he lived in a pretty tough area of Minneapolis. A gang shooting happened right in front of his house. When I spoke with someone who visited his church they said it was very “simple”. When I saw him at a conference a few years ago he wore the same outfit all weekend.
He has a book out about “Not wasting Your Life” and not pursuing the American dream. Yes, he probably makes $ with his books and materials. But I would be more surprised to hear that he kept the profits than to hear that he had donated it missions.
I heard Rick Warren say all the profits from “the purpose driven life” went right back into ministry. He could have bought his own island with the profits from that book and didn’t keep any of it. ( i know Warren and Piper are in different camps)
Just saying -although the profit margin may look huge we don’t know where they are “reinvesting” it.
Thank you Kris for the wonderful analysis of this sermon. I wish I been sitting next to you when I first heard it. I probably would not have ended up wasting 6 1/2 years of my spiritual & physical life there. You are my Glenn Beck of the SGM analysis world.
(I mean that in a very nice way.)
October 3rd, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Singing Cook, None of us really know where all the money goes. I used to be part of a church where the pastor was selling alot of books. He lied and told the congregation that he was not living off any of the proceeds or off of a salary from the church but that he was trusting God for his expenses. In the meantime he lived in a huge mansion and drove an expensive car. But his congregation was sucked into his speeches so much that some gave all they had to the ministry. I am just saying even if they appear to live by humble means none of us truly know. It is interesting to hear that about Piper though. But, who is to say how much money is tucked away in bank accounts. I have just become less trusting after seeing the church I described above (to clarify that was a non-SGM church).
October 3rd, 2009 at 8:29 pm
I know I’m not explaining this very well, but when I talk about “money” or “streams or revenue” (as LM Malone mentioned), I really do NOT mean to imply in ANY way that the Reformed Big Dogs like Piper are in ministry for what they can get out of it.
In fact, some of ‘em – Piper in particular, actually – really do seem like they couldn’t care less about material goods.
But…
The reason that I still feel that “streams of revenue” is a valid topic for conversation here is because it could provide a piece of the puzzle as to why a lot of these guys won’t rock the boat. I know a lot of people have attempted to alert the RBDs about SGM’s issues. And it’s been so puzzling to me why they’d want to keep up their very public associations with (and apparent endorsements of) a ministry (SGM) that is still so riddled with problems like the very obvious “shepherding” overtones in CJ’s Happiest Place message.
Maybe instead of mentioning the “M” word (money), a better way to put it would be “self-preservation” or self-interest. Or “ministry-preservation.” Or even “message-preservation.”
See, I think that money comes into play only so far as it is necessary to these guys to maintain their influence and advance their views. Again, so many of them do not strike me as being motivated out of a desire to live well on the backs of their people.
But money is part of the overall picture nonetheless, not so much for the luxury living aspect, but because it is a vital componant of keeping their cause in the forefront.
And frankly, I think that it’s actually a lot more flattering to the RBDs – and would speak far more highly of them – to see their lack of concern about SGM’s ills as being the result of a drive to keep their (Reformdom’s) influence, rather than to believe that they don’t do anything about SGM because they just don’t care about the people whom SGM has hurt.
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:03 pm
not fit for membership–I liked your #211. That’s just how I feel sometimes…
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Rick Warren reverse tithes, I think, 90% of his income. To get a perspective on this, a few years back PDL was in some financial trouble and Rick loaned them 3 million out of his pocket. Not Saddlebacks but HIS pocket.
But again, Money is not a motivator for some of these guys. But even Piper is not hurting a bit. These guys have no debt and most of their expenses are paid for. And many employ their kids and even in some cases their wives in the business. (And it is a business)
To give you an example back when Swindoll was preaching, he made his nice income from the church. Then his 501c3 employed both his wife and daughter whose salaries totaled about 400,000 including his.
If they have a 501c3 in addition to their pastorate, you can find it on Navigator. Many are not doing that anymore because tax laws require 501c3′s to report officials salaries and now that it is accessible by the internet it is getting a bit uncomfortable for some. Churches are not required to do this so some, like John Haggee, run their millions through the church.
To give you another example I am quite familiar with a mega church pastor employed at 250,000 per year. His wife employed at 80,000 and his son at 100,000. He has a customized home office paid for by the church complete with the lastest of everything technical that is constantly updated and he can keep as personal. The books he wrote and his speaking engagements money on church time are his to keep. He is given a 3 month paid sabbatical every year. Cars are leased for him and his wife
paid for the by the church. He was guaranteed a retiremnt income of 200,000 per year starting at age 60.
However, he lives in a humble home and drives a toyota. Very few at the church know his portfolio or the perks or even about the royalites and speaking engagement amounts. Let us just say that he has no worries but he is very careful not to show any wealthy lifestyle.
This is CEO world, folks. So as the economy turns and they have to start taking cuts, don’t be impressed when they take a 10% cut. If they do.
At SBTS,(Mohler is prez) they laid off 35 people last Jan. I know several of them who are fathers and the sole wage earner of the family as SBTS teaches men to be. So, now these men have mortgages, kids, no health insur,etc. Their wives do not work and jobs are scarce in that city as even the big corps are laying off. Yet, these men have lots of education. Several of them ended up losing their homes.
YET…SBTS went ahead and spent 9 million on a campus face lift for their 150th Anniversary celebrations. They made the excuse that the face lift millions had already been budgeted for that purpose.
This is how ‘Christians’ think?
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:40 pm
“Not fit” and “wings” -
You know what’s weird? Last night, right before I went to sleep, I was thinking about the site and sort of half-praying – nothing in particular, but my thoughts were skimming along, flitting from one thing to another. You know.
And then I was hit by this thought that forgiveness and a lack of bitterness do NOT imply that a person must “shut up” about something. You can forgive someone…and not have anything against them personally…and yet still be concerned enough about what they’ve done to want to alert others to their behavioral trends, the ways they’ve acted in the past.
I was lying there last night thinking, “Gee, we haven’t had any real detractors for awhile, but if someone comes along again and says something about how we all just need to quit talking about this (so as to ‘forgive’), I should try to explain this idea to them.”
And then lo and behold, when I checked the site this morning, there was “Concerned Brother’s” comment.
It’s so funny how that seems to work out.
So…all of this is to say, I take no credit for my Glen Beck-ishness. (And…um…not sure I want to take on that mantle anyway…heh! Some people seem to think he’s almost like a Nazi!)
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:56 pm
“And then I was hit by this thought that forgiveness and a lack of bitterness do NOT imply that a person must “shut up” about something. You can forgive someone…and not have anything against them personally…and yet still be concerned enough about what they’ve done to want to alert others to their behavioral trends, the ways they’ve acted in the past.”
Just to clarify about the parentheses thing, Kris, I’m sure you are right that it was possibly an indication of who the actual members were. It still seemed odd to us at the time. Also, it was not CLC.
October 3rd, 2009 at 11:21 pm
Kris and FOX News…
Hmmm…now that’s an idea!
October 4th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
“it could provide a piece of the puzzle”
Yes, it possibly could, but then again it possibly could not. This is where you lose me, Kris. This is where the reasoned analysis that is so beneficial to all concerned stops, and the idle speculation begins.
How do you know that neo-Reformed leaders haven’t approached Mahaney? How do you know they’re not speaking out?
For example, at a conference not too long ago, John Piper made a point of publicly talking about what he saw to be the biggest problem in womens’ ministries at his church. He has a generation of young women who desperately want to be deeply grounded in the Word, but a shortage of older women qualified to train them.
Contrast that with Carolyn Mahaney’s teaching that women are to focus on teaching other women how to be housewives, because teaching theology isn’t on the Titus 2 list. Personally, I took John Piper’s strong statement to contain an implicit rebuke of teachings like the Mahaneys’.
We just don’t know what neo-Reformed leaders are or are not saying behind closed doors, Kris. I think you harm your cause when you speculate.
October 4th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Seeker,
You’re entitled to your opinion, of course. That’s cool.
I don’t think it’s speculation when we can point to several continued associations among CJ and the Reformed Big Dogs. These guys all continue to share the stage at conferences. They continue to speak at each other’s churches. There is a strongly implied endorsement of someone’s ministry – a strongly implied stamp of approval – when an RBD brings a visiting minister in to preach in the pulpit he himself usually fills.
You’re right in that we can’t know what goes on behind closed doors. But does it really matter if they’re correcting and rebuking behind closed doors, as long as little within SGM changes and CJ continues to receive seemingly glowing endorsements from these RBDs?
How is it “speculation” to say that by all outward appearances, the RBDs continue to endorse SGM? I mean, they DO endorse SGM every time they present a unified front with CJ on a conference stage. People’s opinions of CJ and SGM continue to be influenced positively by these associations.
See, I feel kinda passionate about this – and am puzzled by the RBDs’ apparent lack of concern about SGM’s issues – because one of the main reasons Guy and I were attracted to SGM and bothered to visit our own SGM church was the reflected credibility CJ had due to his hobnobbing with the likes of MacArthur and Piper.
I guess I’m naive, as I just figured – like so many others have – that if THOSE guys liked SGM and approved, then it couldn’t have so much weirdness and so many issues. THOSE guys couldn’t be wrong.
It bothers me, and I’d dearly love to know why they publicly have done nothing. (And that’s not speculation, that’s the truth, as none of them have ever come out publicly and said or done ANYTHING to indicate they were concerned about SGM’s victims, despite being approached by numerous concerned people who asked them to do so.)
October 4th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Seeker…
You say “I think you harm your cause when you speculate” Well I know you are talking about Reformed Big Dogs, but
Kris
On line, over the internet, personally behind the scenes has heard me out more than my PASTOR that I served under for over 20 years. How can this be?
You said…her cause.?? I wonder if you consider my fragile walk with the LORD, made clear, defined, encouraged here…her cause????
In my lower case opinion she is not hurting “her cause” she is caring for it…But you are entitled to your opinion.
Seeker, keek seeking.
October 4th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
One thing we have to realize about “Concerned Brother” is that he is operating from the premise that SGM Leaders are sincere when they say they are open to correction etc. when one goes to them in private. That is he really believes that when a member comes to an SGM Leader about an issue or something that was done to the member,the SGM Leaders will honestly consider it and the leader admit their faults when they have done wrong.
Sadly, so many people posting on this blog and other blogs have shown where this isn’t the case. SGM Leaders are quick to point out problems with regular members including members bringing observations about what a leader has done but slow to admit when they have sinned. If anything the leaders blame a members bad attitude, sin, pride etc. if they try and confront a leader as many have reported.
Thus Concerned brother is operating as they say under a false premise.
October 4th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
“It bothers me, and I’d dearly love to know why they publicly – and that’s not speculation, that’s the truth, as none of them have ever come out publicly and said or done anything to indicate they were concerned about SGM’s victims – have done nothing.”
To get a feel for how this happens you can follow the relationship of Piper and Driscoll over the last years. Piper only spoke out when the heat became too hot. So then he says Mark repented and had him speaking at his conferences. But Mark gets worse and Piper maintains that Mark repented so all is well. But then Mark gets worse…even saying on the Desiring God conference stage that every word out of his mouth when he preaches is from the Holy Spirit. (vulgarity and all) Still Piper supports him. Why? We do they all support him (Except McArthur)? Because Mark is the hot property in Reformed. His church plants are growing. They are looking to the future and willing to overlook quite a bit. Everyone apologizes for Mark and keeps defending him except McArthur.
October 4th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Hi All,
I just want to say that Ezekiel 34 is some good reading if you get a chance
October 4th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Any Christian should protest the lack of response by SGM to those on this site. Really, SGM has such a mentality of let the masses humbly approach us with their heads down and their tails tucked; you little people must come to the great ones and repent….but that is not biblical….”..if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.” It is their “biblical” responsibility to address this site and to seek us out…but sadly reconcilation at SGM means you do as we say and admit you are the ones that are wrong or no reconciliation can take place at all and that is the only reason they ignore those here. It is not because they think we are making it up. They know it is true. They know what they are doing and have done. Any Christian that is aware of this site and others like it should at least consider “Has SGM met the biblical mandate to leave your gift at the altar and first go to your brother – by ignoring this site?” — nope…is there a wrong attitude at SGM about the power, authority, and methods of leadership —- yep….
October 4th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
Concerned Brother,
Your SGM Care Group leader (how’d you get a “pass” on that rule?) should care for your soul. Your wife should care for your soul. Your wife’s pastor at her SGM church should care for your soul and your wife’s soul.
They should best “serve” you and your wife by telling you to FIND ANOTHER CHURCH!!!!!!!
If my husband could not attend church ever and couldn’t even be a member of a church because of his work schedule, we’d be finding ANOTHER church that has services on Saturday evening or Sunday evening or something.
If they cared for your soul or your wife’s soul, they would acknowledge that there are tons of great churches in this country…and even some of them have christians in them.
I don’t understand this.
I was EXPECTED and respected to disobey and dishonor my husband by FORCING us to stay in SGM when he desperately wanted to leave. WHY? My lack of submission and downright disobedience to God’s Word commanding me to respect and submit to my husband was encouraged by my SGM church.
Sounds like your wife is in the same boat, Concerned Brother. Really…what you outta do…is just find another church. Cuz you know what? You know what the SGM people are saying about you?
Yes, you’d be in (()) if you were on the roster.
Sorry. I’ve been around that block long enough to know that. Oh, if you ask, they won’t tell you. Cuz they’re also really good at lying to “save face.” Anything to preserve their image.
Sidney
October 5th, 2009 at 5:33 am
Question,
Sorry if off topic does anyone have any thoughts on Doug Wilsons teaching?
October 5th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Doug Wilson is a quasi-Theonomist and preaches the doctrine of Federal Headship of Adam. (These semantics will make one go barking mad). He is the Pasha of Moscow, Idaho patriarchy. He calls his kingdom the ‘Kirk’. A take off of his love for everything presbyterian and Scottish as in John Knox. (The Presbyterian preacher who collaborated on killing Queen Mary but ended up killing her husband and court favorite)
There used to be a blog devoted to his cult teachings from a former protege who cut loose yet still lived on the same street as Wilson. He wrote about Wilson’s bizarre cult that he got caught up in for many years but then moved away and moved on. He fashioned it as a take off of Winnie the Pooh and his Kirk.
And when Sproul, Jr. got kicked out of his church for fraud with tax numbers and for heavy handed shunning people who quesioned him, Doug Wilson took him into his denomination he started, CREC. Confederation of REformed something something. (They are a form of Presbyterian and love to drink and baptize babies)
Metzler went there in the early days and describes it here:
http://www.poohsthink.com/the-kirk/
Since then Wilson has become quite popular in the fringe reformed movement. I believe he is the leader of a cult.
October 5th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Doug Wilson:
Doug Wilson has good material out for the most part on kids and marriage and home school help. The current controversy about him in Reformed circles has to do with the Federal Vision error/heresy. Wilson allegedly does not fall into the entire error, just partly.
This is the PCA General Assembly Committee Study on the Federal Vision Movement.
http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/07-fvreport.pdf
If that PDF link does not load scroll down here to Federal Vision:
http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/index.html
This is an EXCELLENT!! paper and well worth the time to read.
Federal Vision has various angles. One is that you recieve the HS at conversion ( yes) and are infused with the righteousness of God ( yes) and will do good works as the fruit of abiding in Christ ( yes). But they then go into a Roman Catholic error that the good works earn you merit before God, and your righteousness before God at the judgement is in part from that infused righteousness. NO! ONLY the passive (cross) and active (33 years of holy sinless living) obedience earn you any merit at all with God. It is ALL the work of Jesus.
Wilson is sort of into that but maybe not, it is controversial, but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. But the FV like him and he speaks at their conferences.
What Wilsom is into is the FV error about paedo baptism conferring infused righteousness. It gets real tricky. The Reformed position is that there is an invisible church( truly elect, truly converted/born again) and a visible one ( the sunday gatherings with sacraments, preaching, etc) that may have unsaved people in it.
FV teaches that baptism makes you part of the invisible church. They don’t necessarily use the words baptismal regeneration, but that is what they mean. Adam is the federal head of the race, and a father is the federal (representative) head of the home, and when the parents baptize the baby, it is in the covenant of grace because of the parents faith, and therefore part of the covenant people. Baptism is the seal of belonging not just to the visible church but to the invisible elect true church.
This is basically rehashed Rome. There is plenty out there if you google the key words. For myself, I don’t see any need to hand out DW materials, there is better CCEF stuff on relationships, better Reformed stuff on Covenant theology, and he is off into heresy on the sacrament of baptism.
October 5th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Here is a very detailed article about Doug Wilson, R C Sproul, FV etc. What a mess!
http://ministrywatchman.com/?p=113
October 5th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
“Doug Wilson has good material out for the most part on kids and marriage and home school help”
Tee hee. Some call them stepford wives in their frilly ruffled frocks and lawn parties. Can’t have them too smart, you know.
Actually Doug Wilson is known for demanding the name of your pastor and his phone number if you DARE disagree with him on this “blog and mablog”. You WILL be disciplined. He, and YOUR pastor will see to it. And if your pastor refuses, then he is not a REAL pastor.
October 5th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Unreal.
It’s *rich*…how some will just do whatever they want…whenever they want.
True colors always show through, I guess. :/
October 5th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Doug Wilson?!?!?!?
Here are the titles of a few of his books…
“Her Hand in Marriage: Biblical Courtship in the Modern World”
“Federal Husband”
“The Fruit of Her Hands”
“Fidelity”
“Future Men”
“Standing on the Promises”
“Reforming Marriage”
“Praise Her in the Gates”
Go to Amazon.com and “look inside” at the table of contents or read some of the sample pages.
We’ve discussed Doug Wilson on this site before. Do a search on “Doug Wilson” on the sgmsurvivors.com site only.
Thanks for the additional info…Malone, 5years, Rich, and Liz.
October 5th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
I looked at the links, and I must admit I am out of touch! My hub liked Reforming Marriage back in the mid 90s and I had no idea DW had gone into such legalism. What he liked about RM is the focus on male headship and sacrifical love, instead of blaming unsubmissive women for problems. Well, sorry to see DW’s materials may not be so good.
That ministry watchman link was very sobering. Thanks.
October 5th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Wow, Malone!
I would have loved to have had an opportunity to read Metzler’s original blog on Wilson from 2005-2008.
It’s a shame someone hacked into it and destroyed it. (Some of Wilson’s “defenders”, I’m sure.
)
I read where Metzler has access to his old blog posts from those years. I wonder if he will ever post them again and if he has the comments on those posts, as well.
Doug Wilson is one “sly” individual. “Brains” like his scare me. I’m especially concerned that he’s steadily infiltrating “Reformdom.” His rhetoric skills are amazing and serve him well.
October 5th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
I find it fascinating that so many of these guys are deeply rooted within the homeschool movement, and Christian schooling, as well.
Education is their means of “social engineering.”
It’s really alarming, and it’s been right under our noses for a couple of decades now. Christians were so desperate for an alternative to our failing public school system that they allowed these guys right in.
October 5th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I know Doug Wilson’s books were still being promoted in SGM two years ago. I don’t know about now.
October 6th, 2009 at 9:21 am
Kris writes:
“How is it ‘speculation’ to say that by all outward appearances, the RBDs continue to endorse SGM? I mean, they DO endorse SGM every time they present a unified front with CJ on a conference stage. People’s opinions of CJ and SGM continue to be influenced positively by these associations.”
Yes, there is an association among these men. That association would not be there without a common core of belief – a commitment to neo-Reformed theology. But, I think it’s an overstatement to argue that the association implies an endorsement by each, of every aspect of the others’ ministries.
So, in the statement I quoted, I think you went too far.
But, where you really lose me, is where you then speculate that because the association of these men with each other advances each of their individual ministries, these neo-Reformed leaders have an incentive to overlook problems at SGM. Further, you claim that not only does the incentive exist, but they are responding to the incentive by, in fact, overlooking problems at SGM. That’s where the evidence is missing, Kris.
Regardless, this is my last comment on this topic! I’m repeating myself, which usually leads to a “more heat than light” discussion!
October 6th, 2009 at 9:37 am
Seeker,
I think association does give endorsement when that association is leadership. See just two quotes from T4G below:
“Together for the Gospel has a vision for local church pastors establishing informal networks of friendship and support with other likeminded pastors in their area.” …it states likeminded without stating just what they are likeminded about.
The four long-time friends, Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, C. J. Mahaney, and Albert Mohler, also asked their friends Thabiti Anyabwile, John MacArthur, John Piper, and R. C. Sproul to join them for these conferences, since each of these men has been contributing so valuably to the church today. (..it states that these men are contributing “valuably” to the church…I dont think CJs contribution in my life has been valuable.
Also, Kris was only offering her opinion. If you go back and read her post you will see words such as could and maybe. I didn’t see anywhere where Kris said association implies endorsement of every aspect of other’s ministries. But, this website and others like it are a public part of the impact SGM has had on the church-remember we are the church, that is the Body of Christ is the Church. When you say that someone has contributed valuably to the church knowing these websites are out there you are stating that inspite of what happened here their contribution is valuable.
October 6th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
“But, I think it’s an overstatement to argue that the association implies an endorsement by each, of every aspect of the others’ ministries.”
But lets look at it deeper. Each one of these reformed leaders have ‘followers’ who pretty much hang on their every word. If you invite another reformed speaker to speak, you are saying, I affirm this mans and his teaching. If they sell another reformers book at a conference, they are affirming him and his teaching.
I can remember some of the elders in my former mega lamenting in a private meeting about something Rob Bell said they disagreed with. So I asked why his book was selling in the church bookstore. They said they had no choice. (Actually, they would have to empty out the bookstore and forgo profits) So folks AT church saw the book in the CHURCH bookstore and it would be folly for us to think they did not stop to think that their leadership did NOT affirm Rob Bell. After all, if they thought Rob Bell taught some wrong doctrine, as overseers, they would GUARD them from such things, right? They would NOT allow the Body to profit from wrong teaching, would they? See what I mean?
This all goes back to one single serious problem in Western Christedom: Our need for celebrities. Because we elevate mere men and THEIR interpretation of scripture, we have these problems.
We should stop looking to man to interpret for us and seek the Holy Spirit to illuminate truth to us through the Word. Every human given authority, followed admired by many is in danger. It is a sin trap. Let’s stop this celebrity focus in Christendom. And we will save money on books! The HOLY SPIRIT WILL TEACH YOU! You should be testing everythign you are taught anyway.
October 6th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
I thought that Doug Wilson decided that homeschooling is not a good thing, particularly for adolescent boys (all day long, home with mommy and sisters) and was more a proponent of classical education these days… Could have him mixed up with someone else.
Also, there has been a lot of criticism of him over some point of doctrine that is over my head. God help us all.
October 6th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Thanks, LMM! I originally posted the following over at the Refuge and just saw your post where you are saying the same thing that I posted over there.
“It is worse for a liar to tell the truth than for a lover of truth to tell a lie.”
(Dietrich Bonhoeffer)
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/12/hillary_bonhoeffer_and_the_mea.html
It’s an insightful article, concentrating on a certain PERSON in politics. I felt that it was applicable to this discussion because in one’s pursuit of the TRUTH, an awareness of the motives of those giving out “wisdom” should be considered. Just because something looks and sounds like it “truth” doesn’t mean it is, and those who would mislead will present *some truth* so as to make others think that all that they espouse is truth.
If a PERSON has a tendency to want their own way no matter what and in the course of time is continually deceptive on who they are, wisdom dictates to have nothing to do with them. People who pretend to be someone else to get what they want are manipulative and are usually found out sooner or later. And those who have believed them will feel duped.
Another quote from the article:
Develop your own relationship with the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit will lead us into ALL truth. We don’t have to have years of scholarship and be able to read Greek and Hebrew to know God’s Truth. ***I am not saying that scholarship and proficiency in Greek and Hebrew are not worthy to pursue.*** However, we must be able to discern the Voice of the HOLY SPIRIT among all the others.
He will speak to our hearts, He will not lead us astray if we diligently seek Him. His still small voice has been speaking to since our first inklings that something was wrong in pdi/sgm. He won’t stop now. He loves His own.
October 6th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Seeker,
I know, I know, you are gone for good. When you boil it all down, I am the evidence you are looking for in Kris. I tried to tell you that. Seeker, it is in disallusioned saints, broken marriages, children who drink and cut themselves to desparately find love from their Christian religious parents, cant you see the hurt from self righteous, elite pastors in Sovereign Grace ministries that turn their back on abuse, lies and tithes misused? They stand behind twisted scriptures, with the authority of Moses or the pope while closing their ears to the cries in their own body of believers. Seeker, you to, be quiet, try to silence Kris, make her prove what I have wept over and the devistation I still continue to see.
Seeker, keep seeking.
October 7th, 2009 at 2:14 am
Thanks Ellie. Bonhoeffer introduced me to concept of Cheap Grace which is modis operendi in seeker churches.
I love this:
It is worse for a liar to tell the truth than for a lover of truth to tell a lie.”
(Dietrich Bonhoeffer)
October 7th, 2009 at 9:04 am
My church is seeker friendly but does not preach cheap grace.They speak the truth in love, pray, encourage, and admonish when needed but always with love,never in anger, and trusting the Holy Spirit.They will say the harder things that people might not want to hear but never controlling like SGM.
October 9th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
“My church is seeker friendly but does not preach cheap grace.They speak the truth in love, pray, encourage, and admonish when needed but always with love,never in anger, and trusting the Holy Spirit.They will say the harder things that people might not want to hear but never controlling like SGM.”
That is good. Are they focused on church growth and use the tactics of the church growth movement? Is the salary of the senior staff a state secret?
October 9th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
LMMalone: They put alot of work into media and we have a rock band style worship. The messages are sure to be understandable to a new comer. At the same time there is a great core of very mature believers so I am actually learning alot at my church. If you were a member of my church and not growing closer to the Lord it would be your own fault. They do everything to serve and equip. I have never been under better leadership anywhere in my life (not church, family, work); yet, at the same time I am not dependant on them and have no fear of man like at SGM. I am free there. If the church folded tomorrow it would be a loss but I would still be intact and be perfectly fine. I have never been more confident or this strong. It is a servant leadership and I honestly feel like they are serving me and I am glad to have their leadership. I am seriously blessed. The salary of the pastor is at poverty level for the area I live. We have only about 100 members and he is not paid any where near enough. All money the pastor receives (even if he buys books with church money, or meals for meetings) is fully disclosed. The elders are non paid staff. They have teams involved in everything. The pastor leads instead of controls. He encourages open dialog, asks for feedback, leaves alot of room for ideas from others. It is a church that a “seeker” could walk into and be fine..and a church where someone that has been saved for 20 years can learn deeper things….it is the real deal.
October 10th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Hi, I’m new here. I’ve been a memeber in an SGC for many years. While I’ve heard similar stories, I’ve never read this many. I’m very troubled and don’t quite know what to think. Since the first time I walked into an SGC I believed that God told me that this is where He was planting me.
Now I’m quite torn, since the leaders of SGM are abusive to dissenters, unreasonable & won’t listen to correction, use thier positions to maintain control/power, I can no longer in good concience be a member of this group of churches.
I live in the Cooa/Titusvile, FL area, where can I find a good local church that is reformed & charasmatic?
Sorry for the dump but this really bothers me.
October 11th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Hello Merlin and welcome.
I know how you feel, one of the things that SGM does is make you think that there are no other churches like them out there and you have no other options. This is ludicrous. My husband and I have been away from our SGC for about 6 months now and still have not found a church we want to fully commit too but have visited some very nice churches heard some very uplifting sermons and met lots of nice people. It’s been a wonderful time of trying to process what we went through at SGM and reconnecting with each other. I feel like we just need to take a break for a while and not put any pressure on ourselves. We trust God with so many important things in our lives and I just know He has the perfect church out there for us. Good luck in your search, but realize that you can leave without knowing where you are going.
October 11th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
I join “Not Fit” in welcoming Merlin to the discussion. Thanks for joining us.
“Not Fit” said some very wise stuff. I so agree with her that if a person leaves SGM, he should release himself from feeling pressure to immediately throw himself into a new church…for LOTS of reasons.
One of those reasons is that for at least some ex-SGMers, a significant part of the drive to quickly find a new church home is peer pressure. (Or, to put it in SGMese, “the fear of man.”) Seriously. I’ve exchanged emails with more than a few folks who have flung themselves full-throttle into the first church they visited after leaving SGM, just because they desperately wanted an answer to give to their SGM friends who expressed concern over their spiritual well-being. Sometimes this works out fine for them, where they are able to transition seamlessly from their SGM church to a healthier place.
But generally speaking, it’s a lot wiser to take some time and avoid a “church rebound relationship” after leaving SGM. The very fact that SGMers have been taught to measure their spiritual health by how “committed” (involved) they are in their “local” church is one of the results of SGM’s performance-based (dysfunctional!) approach to the gospel of grace. If the former SGMer is finding himself feeling pressure to find a new church home quickly just so he can reassure his SGM friends that he’s still a believer – well, that’s a sign that he hasn’t yet pieced together everything that was wrong about his SGM experience. He needs time to process it so he can avoid repeating it.
But as far as recommending churches goes…
Well, first of all, I wouldn’t be so quick to throw out my longtime commitment to SGM just because of stories on a website. Yes, what SGM has done to these people is bad. Yes, SGM needs to be honest and open about their mistakes, missteps, and – yes – sins against these former members. Yes, SGM needs to repent and change.
But if your SGM church is currently still working for you and you haven’t seen abuses firsthand, then maybe this is just a good place to start putting on your listening ears and watching eyes. Take some time to sort of sit back and observe your SGM church. Think back to the people you’ve known over the years who have seemed to disappear or drift away. See if you can reconnect with any friends who left, and find out WHY they left. Ask hard questions. See if your particular SGM church is as performance-based as others.
Talk these things over with your pastor, and PERSIST if you find him putting you off with platitudes, or if you realize that even though he’s telling you what you want to hear, you’re not actually seeing it in action later on. If you don’t get the resolution you’re looking for, then it may be time to consider leaving your SGM church.
But…
In the same way that I think people need to take some time to find a new church, I also believe that people should take their time LEAVING a church.
There’s no need to be rash and jump ship if you’ve TRULY been happy where you are and TRULY still believe that you are where God has called you to be.
As to where you can find another church that is “Reformed and Charismatic” – well, the truth is that you can’t. But never fear. Your SGM church isn’t even TRULY “Reformed and Charismatic.” They’ve just redefined what “Reformed” means, and what “Charismatic” means. (“Reformed” is WAY more than obsessing over our sinfulness and looking ever-more-inwardly to “root out” sins. It’s WAY more than throwing words like “gospel” and “cross” into every teaching. And “Charismatic” is more than just paying lip service to a continuationist stance on the dramatic gifts of the Spirit. It’s WAY more than merely flinging one’s arms up as one sings, or maybe shouting out “Yes, Lord!” dramatically while one worships.)
October 11th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Hey,
For me it took along time to get over the SGM insanity. It has taken years but I see the light at the end of the tunnel and it is beautiful! Their crap really gets in your head and when you have family that are really sucked into SGM hook line and sinker; and every moment of relationship interaction is like a SGM leaders handbook; it takes awhile. You couldn’t pay me to go to church there now. I went several years without a church. I will never again allow any foundation of my life to be built on any man. All men sin and fall short of God’s glory. All men will disappoint you. I prefer my foundations be built on the Rock. I have great respect for the leaders in my non-SGM church but my life is not built on them. My husband is Christ and every other relationship (including the church) comes second….or later.
October 11th, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Kris said, “In the same way that I think people need to take some time to find a new church, I also believe that people should take their time LEAVING a church.”
But I think there are probably lots of people that could “survive” in sgm, we were not those people though.
I was actually meaning to say the same thing. when my husband and I finally decided to leave our SGC it was after much prayer and dicussion and there were many things we had observed and experienced that didn’t “sit well” with us. I stumbled onto this website probably around the same time that we came to that decision and it really helped cement that in our minds and helped us know that we were’nt crazy after all
October 11th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Merlin
I would also like to welcome you to this blog.
One thing I would suggest for you and others considering leaving SGM is that you start to build some friendships and relationships outside of your group, if possible, before you leave SGM. Typically most SGM members are so involved with SGM that they don’t have any friendships or really even a life outside of SGM. This makes it quite hard when you leave SGM. Having at least some friendships and a life outside of SGM before you leave can IMO make the leaving easier and you will be less likely to question your leaving.
This link is a reprint of someone’s advice for leaving SGM that was posted a while ago on sgmrefuge.com:
http://sguncensored.blogspot.com/2009/01/advice-for-one-leaving-sovereign-grace.html
This might help you also.
Steve
October 11th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
Merlin,
I will join the others…We go to a Lutheran church now that is MORE charismatic than SGM! Praise God for that! I spent the last 15 years, along with John Loffftness, making fun of the Lutheran church. (It’s part of the Missouri Synod, the conservative one too, believe it or not. Oh, and I’d say everyone I have met there is actually saved. Contrary to popular SGM belief.)
God will lead. SGM does NOT have the corner on the market. They just make you believe they do. Sadly, most of us “committed sgmers” believe that lie too. Along with all the others.
Sidney
October 12th, 2009 at 9:32 am
It is sad to see how much time is wasted on this site, instead of pursuing the glory of Christ.
October 12th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Chris,
Was Martin Luther not pursuing the glory of Christ in his efforts to show the Roman Catholic church the error of their ways?
October 12th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Chris,
You are greatly mistaken. No time is being wasted whatsoever. This site IS glorifying Christ, and doing it quite wonderfully!! Jesus came to set the captives free, and that is what this site is doing in accordance with the will of God. SGM has put many people in deep bondage, and this site is liberating them by sharing the truth of God’s grace. SGM has “Grace” in the title of their denomination, but it is rarely practiced. My family was in bondage to that controlling group for many years. NEVER AGAIN! I thank God for this site that has revealed the truth and is setting many free!
October 12th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Chris Fuhrman,
What’s sad is to see a comment like yours.
If you were walking down the street and happen to overhear a group of folks trying to console an individual who had been grossly abused, would you barge into their discussion as a complete stranger and ask them why they were wasting their time on such? Would you stick your little self-righteous
nose up in the air and tell them that to do such was not bringing glory to Christ?
Chris, YOU (and SGM folks just like you) are the reason blogs like this exist.
October 12th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Kris,
Thank you for your kind words and advise. After some time to reason and consider, as opposed to my highly emotional response, I’m likely to stay where I am. My eyes are a litle more open, not that they weren’t before. In some way I wish I had not found my way here but since I have I’ll just have to deal with it.
October 12th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Chris,
LOL. So, now the concern is our time management.
“It is sad to see how much time is wasted on this site, instead of pursuing the glory of Christ.”
Wow. Legalism displayed. Again, another post proving our point….
So SGM gets to decide what is a waste of time; what we do that does not pursue the glory of Christ;….and of course everything you do, every waking moment is pursuing the glory of Christ….I hope Christ is glorified while you are brushing your teeth in the morning…
unless of course that is a waste of time…time that you could be pursuing the glory of Christ.
October 12th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Merlin,
I truly hope things work out for you. It is hard to leave a church and not a decision to be taken lightly. I would only suggest you to do what every Christian should be doing which is test what you hear from your leaders against the Word. Really, look at it. Don’t be afraid to think about areas that you disagree with. You are not called by God to agree with everything that comes out of any leaders mouth. Don’t just assume that everything they say or intrepret is without error. I think alot of churches lead people into thinking they are trustworthy to the point that they are never wrong in what they say but there is only one that is without error and that holds all wisdom and IS Truth…and that is Christ. I do wish you the best.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Oh… good job Kris. gotta love it. you are so very good at getting to the heart of the matter.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Butterfly,
Thanks for your kind words.
I have not in my time as a believer had the misfortune of having any of the church leaders God has called me to submit to represent themselves as inerrant or infallible. I have heard many times from the pulpit to act as one the noble Bereans who searched the scriptures to examine if the preaching is consistant with God’s word. I have seen poor decisions made and carried out, resulting in harm to some, confusion to others. Since God has placed me here I will do all I can to glorify Him in the building of His church until He clearly moves me on.
I am definitely challenged by the things I’ve read on this site to examine more closely my beliefs and be sure that they line up with the Word. I may not post here much due to time constraints, but I look forward to returning.
God bless all.
October 27th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
I am reading all this with interest. Wow. Just to say…I am not the “Rich” who has been commenting. This is my first comment and I’m trying to stay out of all this. I had some involvement with SGM and CJ long, long ago and I’d like to keep it that way!
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:47 pm
As a former member of Cornerstone, this news saddens me:
Cornerstone is currently in the midst of putting a rule in place that requires all members – longtime, short-term, new, doesn’t matter – to sign a new document, a membership covenant, and some folks there have significant questions and concerns about the version that they are being asked to sign. It is a rather negative document, focusing solely on matters of church discipline, with a clause all about how a member who does come under discipline cannot then rescind his membership but must endure the discipline process. There’s even a provision where members must acknowledge that they are aware that the Knoxville church may elect to track down the pastors at whatever church they attempt to move on to after leaving SGM, and tell their new pastors all about why they’re under church discipline at Knoxville.
I will pray for them.
December 14th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
If I missed this earlier in the discussion, I apologize, but I just went to Cornerstone’s website, and the message is not there…anyone have another link to this message? I was particularly interested in this version. I know the message has been given many times, but I wanted to hear it from this particular event, as I know words, phrases, etc. will be added and changed a bit from one delivery to the next. Thanks!
December 14th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Sola,
I’m unable to help you out here, beyond offering up the transcript, which is as accurate as I could make it after listening to the message several times and then carefully typing it out from a recording made on a Dictaphone.
I never did download Cornerstone’s file to my computer.
Maybe someone else reading this will happen to have a recording of that particular message.
December 14th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
Kris,
Thanks anyway!