I received an email this morning that contained the following, which is posted with the author’s permission:
At the SGM church in San Diego tonight we received a surprise: we are getting a new senior pastor. Mark Lauterbach, the current senior pastor will remain on staff at the church as an associate pastor, while our current associate pastor Eric Turbedsky will take the position as the new senior pastor. Mark Lauterbach is in his fifties and has only been with SGM about 5 years. Unlike many SGM pastors, he has been to seminary and has decades of experience pastoring in churches outside SGM. As far as I know, the new much younger senior pastor Eric Turbedsky has only been to SGM pastors college and has only been associate pastor at our SGM church.
This was announced at a members meeting tonight separate from the usual Sunday meeting. Many members walked into the building and noticed that SGM apostolic team member Steve Shank was there. He was involved in the changes at the Aurora, Colorado SGM Church. Seeing Shank was a total surprise to most of us because Shank lives in Phoenix and had not been in the morning meeting. We all knew something unusual was happening.
Lauterbach started by announcing the leadership change and then informing us that the church budget had a $60K deficit. There will be a “Mission Fund” offering taken to help offset this. Shank then took the microphone and joked that people were saying, “Uh-oh, Steve Shank is here.” Shank then said that he was actually bringing “good tidings”. He announced that an “evaluation process” had taken place over the last year and a half, where he flew into San Diego for weekday meetings that “99% of you were not aware of”. Shank said that the local pastors had the primary role in this evaluation, and his role was secondary. He said that this evaluation process revealed that Lauterbach had a more appropriate “gifting” for the associate pastor role while Turbedsky had a “gifting” suited for senior pastor. Shank commended Lauterbach on his humility and announced that Lauterbach would be training Turbedsky in preaching. Shank stated that Charles Spurgeon was a hero to him, but unfortunately Spurgeon’s church only lasted one generation. Shank said that actions like this “transition” at our church would help SGM last beyond the original generation.
After Turbedsky and another associate pastor spoke, Lauterbach said there would be no public questions taken after the meeting, but that members could bring their questions to pastors privately. He said that another meeting may be scheduled next month for more public questions. Since all this took place in a members meeting, if a recording exists I suspect it will not be posted on the church web site.
I can’t help but think this sounds like the Keith Jacob scenario all over again. What is going on within the Sovereign Grace organization? Does anyone else think it’s bizarre that such major moves are being sprung on churches like this? I don’t care how lowly and beneath them the SGM “apostles” believe the average church member to be – it’s just beyond odd that a congregation can be so completely kept in the dark and so totally unaware that their senior pastor’s “gifting” is being called into question and his job is on the line.
I'm verwy verwy sad, RT. We can start our own crew, how bout it? 
(and I can be stone cold...hehehe) 
December 13th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Juli:
Steve Shank does still oversee churches even though he is no longer on the senior leadership team. He is now one of several regional overseers which sounds a lot like a bishopric to me. Maybe SGM’s leadership structure is more Episcopalian than presbyterian/reformed.
December 13th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
What’s it al about:
I believe that SGM churches do in fact give 10% of their respective incomes to the national organization but its supposed to be voluntary. I wonder if it really is?
December 14th, 2008 at 11:46 am
The initial email sent to Kris says:
“After Turbedsky and another associate pastor spoke, Lauterbach said there would be no public questions taken after the meeting, but that members could bring their questions to pastors privately.”
Why won’t Steve Shank field questions?
If he’s the leader of the Western US and other churches and this thing was initiated by him and the final say was his, why isn’t he going to stand by the people of that church?
What is his job? Go to his home church in the morning, fly out in the afternoon, fire a guy and fly back home?
How cold, calculating and heartless is this? I’ve always had that sense about him.
December 14th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
What’s it all about…
I don’t know Steve Shank, although I think I may have heard him speak a time or two (maybe at a Celebration?), but it’s not difficult to come to the same conclusion you did in your #103 post. The arrogance that is manifested in all of SGM leadership, from CJ all the way down to pastors and even cg leaders, all the while crying, “we are humble” and “we are accountable” is clearly seen during situations such as this.
Unbelievable.
December 14th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
What’s it all about wrote:
How cold, calculating and heartless is this? I’ve always had that sense about him.
Me: I can attest that your sense is correct
December 14th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
This whole “humility thing” is about to get on my last nerve!!! :mad:
Why can’t people see through it? Whatever happened to “actions speak louder than words”?!?
The controlling and emotionally abusive husbands I know pull this same crap…”I’m the worst of all sinners; my wife’s a saint to put up with me.” It’s the PERFECT set-up for these guys – they never have to change and the little wife has to keep on smiling and putting up with it!
Give me ACTIONS, not empty words!!!
December 14th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Sheep…start holding your leaders accountable!
And, wives…start holding your husbands accountable! (It’s okay to do this ladies!)
ACTIONS, folks…ACTIONS!!!
Talk is cheap.
December 14th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
FormerSGMer–
I know this has been endlessly debated on here and Refuge, but SGM is not only “maybe” not prebyterian….but wholeheartedly and totally the opposite of the presbyterian model, which consists of a group of congregationally chosen men, in two groups, (deacons and elders), who run the church and come up for reelection every 2-5 years.
SGM is a dictatorship.
Now, if a dictatorship is to your liking, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with it. We inately loved them, since we are designed to live under a benevolent dictatorship in eternity–it will be marvelous to have our Abba Father as our political King.
My beef is that they won’t ADMIT they are a dictatorship.
Just say it, for heaven’s sake. Why not, if it is the best system?
December 14th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Kindred,
Re your comment about “wives hold your husbands accountable.”
Amazing. Specifically, at the engagement meetings or some premarital meetings, I know, at least within the last 3 or so years, they had a pastor wife come in to address the ladies.
So, a group of young, “innocent” (i say innocent in quotes because they’re innocent perhaps where marriage is concerned) girls sit in a meeting and get told the following by a pastor’s wife:
“Girls, when you’re married, don’t worry about your husbands and lust. They’ve got good men around them for accountability. Let them handle this area with their accountability partners. It’s not yours to worry about.”
And I know for a fact that men are encouraged: “get some guys around you to help you with sexual purity” and NOT confess longstanding patterns of sexual sin to their wife. It seems perfectly logical to me that the wife is the one they’re sinning against. How is the Lord going to bless their “desire” to not be in that bondage anymore if they’re not coming clean with the one they’re sinning against? Even if they stop, they’re still living in total darkness from the one God is expecting them to be ‘one’ with.
Nonetheless, this whole system of “wives, your husband’s body is another guy’s business and not yours” and “husbands, forget about confessing sin to the one you’re sinning against” seems to me to be pretty wacked.
I would love to hear others’ thoughts on how this is supposed to be biblical and how it’s supposed to ‘work’ in the long run?
(note: i am not condoning a husband running to his wife and tattling every time he sees a pretty girl. i’m talking about the longstanding patterns that over 50% of the poor men in this country are struggling with)
December 14th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
“And I know for a fact that men are encouraged: “get some guys around you to help you with sexual purity” and NOT confess longstanding patterns of sexual sin to their wife. It seems perfectly logical to me that the wife is the one they’re sinning against. How is the Lord going to bless their “desire” to not be in that bondage anymore if they’re not coming clean with the one they’re sinning against? Even if they stop, they’re still living in total darkness from the one God is expecting them to be ‘one’ with.
Nonetheless, this whole system of “wives, your husband’s body is another guy’s business and not yours” and “husbands, forget about confessing sin to the one you’re sinning against” seems to me to be pretty wacked.”
Good topic for discussion, “What’s it all about”!
To my knowledge, I don’t think we’ve ever discussed this before. You’re absolutely right. I’ve always had a problem with the DEGREE of the emphasis put on the accountability thing, husbands to other men and wives to other women, rather than the husband and wife being accountable to one another.
Those “for better or for worse” vows were spoken between my husband and I, not him and his buddies. They’ve served us well all these years. Buddies are nice to bounce things off of occasionally, but we battle EVERYTHING together as a couple.
As a matter of fact, I’m seeing TOO MUCH of a dependency on buddies in many young marriages today, and it’s causing ALOT of trouble. That “leave and cleave” stuff applies to buddies, as well.
December 14th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
You don’t hear couples saying, “my husband/wife is my best friend” as frequently as you did in the past, and that’s VERY SAD!
I’m not saying don’t have same sex friends, of course you should. But pay special attention to the “place” you give them in your life.
December 14th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
ReformedTeacher,
It drives me nuts to hear people earnestly discussing (like on that message board Kindred linked to earlier) how “Reformed” SGM is and how they govern through a “plurality of elders.” This is utter nonsense, and a misconception SGM should openly correct. They should specificy that if they use the phrase “plurality of elders,” they really do not mean what people assume that to mean, a presbyterian-style church government.
Like you say – if it’s “God’s way,” the “best way,” then what are they ashamed of? Just admit that it is what it is. If we had the old smileys available, I’d choose the one where the smiley is butting his head against the wall. Or beating a dead horse.
“What’s it” -
Are you saying that SGM wives are told, before they’re ever married, that they are to trust their husbands’ “accountability partners” more than they trust their husbands themselves? How whacked is that?
Carole -
I LOVED your post entitled, “Uh-oh, Steve Shank is Here.” That was so excellent. I was in the midst of posting a comment when my computer lost its internet connection, so I never put it up, but it was a great essay!
December 14th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Reformed:
I listened to a message by John Piper a few years ago where he made the statement the neither the Pastor/Elder(which I think is the SGM model), Congregational or Presbyterian model could be definatively supported by scripture. Rather, his point was that all all three could be defended on as legitimate models for church government and this leads me to your point above which is why cannot SGM simply state something similar to Piper’s view but instead they try to behind the “we want to apply Biblical categories” rubric. I think they are afraid to admit they cannot fully defend all that they do scripturally which is why Protestant Knight’s deconstruction of the Polity booklet on Refuge was helpful.
At my old SGM church, they made an attempt to define caregroup leaders as “deacons” using the “biblical categories” Eventually the attempt was abandoned but as usual it was abandoned silently because I think they realized that a caregroup is not defined as role anywhere in the new testament and if you look at the roles assigned to deacons in acts, caregroup leaders are not performing these roles. This why I have come to believe that churches which have defined deacon roles such as presbyterian and baptist churches as well as non-vocational elders have a more legitimate biblical view of church polity.
Finally, I was at a conference where Mark Dever made an aside in which he stated that he thought the Puritans who adopted congregational forms of goverment were the ones who actually got it right. There were some other SGM people at this conference and I was wondering if they were paying attention to this comment because surely if they were they would have fallen over to hear one of the “SGM Favorites” basically disclaim the correctness of SGM’s polity.
December 14th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Kris, you said:
““What’s it” -
Are you saying that SGM wives are told, before they’re ever married, that they are to trust their husbands’ “accountability partners” more than they trust their husbands themselves? How whacked is that?”
I think it’s actually more like this: “wives, your husband’s friends are more appropriate to walk out this part of his life with him than you are.” “trust the guys’ ability to help him better than your own.”
Kindred, It’s so very sad, isn’t it?
December 14th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
“What’s it” -
I get what you’re saying. But it’s really an odd message. Where would they get the Scriptural backing for that? Where in the Bible would we see it taught that men must be helped first by other men with respect to their lust?
And…what if women have issues with shopping too much and spending too much money? Are they then told that they should be held accountable by other WOMEN, who “better understand” shopping issues?
December 14th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Formersgmer said: “Rather, his point was that all all three could be defended on as legitimate models for church government and this leads me to your point above which is why cannot SGM simply state something similar to Piper’s view but instead they try to behind the “we want to apply Biblical categories” rubric.”
Well one thing I see that Scripture seems to mandate is plurality of leaders. Everywhere in the NT where is says to submit to leadership the plural term is used, e.g. “leaders.” SGM in their early years used to push this including saying their should be no one person in a senior position but has now moved away from this. They now have multiple places where there is one person in charge or making the decision vs. a group of leaders.
Thus I would question their leadership model.
December 14th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
WOOHOO!!! Let me be accountable to my friends for the $$$ I want to spend! They will help me.
That’s a great comparison, Kris.
December 14th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Steve,
I agree with you – it would seem that throughout the New Testament, a true “plurality of elders” was sort of the “default” way that the church governed itself. Nowhere in Scripture do we see one guy at the top of the church pyramid, large and ultimately in charge.
December 15th, 2008 at 12:18 am
On the whole subject of marriage and Men’s “lust” problems – here’s the thing that gets me – does SGM naturally assume all every single male in the world want to “know in the biblical sense” every woman they see?
Guess what – not all men are like that – granted their are some males like that but I am willing to bet that isn’t the only issue those males have.
The other thing that gets me, and I am pulling this from my experience with SGM, is that they tend to think that it’s always a woman’s fault. This just continues to show how sgm treats women as second class citizens.
Do they think that just because a woman is attractive that means that they want to “know in the biblical sense” that male? It sure does seem that way. Are all the sgm men so suave that can seduce every woman they meet?
And since they think that way, why are they letting the sgm males hold the other sgm males accountable? That’s like letting a vampire guard the blood bank or a drug addict guard the pharmacy.
I can just see that meeting (wait, i’ve heard it before) – “wow, I just saw this really hot girl this week and all I wanted to do was ……” next person “wow, I know what you mean, I had the same issue, thanks for sharing” And we also know, thanks to Skeptical admiting it (and the former sgm pastors and cgr’s) that the meeting will be written up and sent to the pastors for review.
I didn’t get married until after I left sgm and I would not want my wife to have to go through what sgm puts through wives at sgm. I am also glad that I do not attend as a married man – I could not handle being told I was some scum bag who needed accountability just because I am a male so that means I will want to (blank) every woman I meet!
You know, there is a difference between having dinner with a business associate on a busines strip who happens to be a member of the opposite sex and going back to her hotel room for a night cap. If you end up back for that night cap, you have issues other than just being “male”.
As a male, I find this offensive. Don’t tell me that if I see a woman and think or say to a friend “wow, she’s hot” that I am lusting over her. There is a difference between thinking – “wow she’s hot” and thinking “wow, I wonder what she would be like if I biblically knew her”
It is just another example of how sgm tries to exert control over it’s members. It also shows that more control is exerted when you don’t trust someone – sgm does not trust it’s members to do the right thing.
And when their members do a mistake (no matter how little) they try to beat them into submission emotionally.
December 15th, 2008 at 10:00 am
I think SGM is almost right in assuming that most of the males struggle with lust. Of course, I think they actually have created the problem with their doctrine of indwelling sin and law. Romans says that the law actually provokes us to sin more. And when you take away the real gospel, true grace, and put people under law, you take away their only hope of ever being set free from sin to live to God.
My husband will tell you he never struggled more with lust than during his years at SGM. He is my hero for confessing everything to me one day during our SGM time, against all teaching and advice, because he felt God told him to. Our marriage took a major turn for the better that day, amazing what honesty, trust, love, and forgiveness can do for a relationship!
Now that we’ve been out for a while and are learning about freedom in Christ, he’s a different man. I wouldn’t say he doesn’t ever face temptation, we all still live in a world that offers temptation, but he is no longer controlled and dominated by lust (or sin in general). When you remove the guilt, shame, and condemnation of sin by the perfect eternal blood of Jesus, you remove the power of sin. SGM tried to manage sin through shame, guilt, rules and regulations, and fear, which we can testify made the power of sin in our live stronger.
I still remember the first time I think we both really ‘got it’. We had been learning so much about the true gospel and it was finally starting to sink in. I was gone away and he confessed over the phone to me that he had been struggling with some stuff and my immediate response was “Don’t you dare give in to condemnation for one second! ” I started reminding him of his perfect standing in Jesus, and this is the truth we need when we do sin!
When we realize we are the righteousness of God in Jesus, not based at all on our performance, then we start to boldly go to the throne of grace in our time of need because we are so sure of his love and are not afraid. This is when true transformation starts to happen.
Sorry for the long comment, this was an area that really bugged me about our time in SGM. Also, the teaching to women about this really bothered me (as well as their ‘counsel’ to couples struggling in this area, I believe the leadership is responsible for many break-ups and affairs). We were basically taught that if we were doing our job right in the bedroom our husbands wouldn’t struggle with lust. That’s crazy and puts an enormous burden on women making them feel responsible for their husbands’ sin. The truth is the pastors and leaders of SGM are largely responsible for teaching doctrine that feeds and encourges an atmosphere where sin thrives and is completely anticipated.
December 15th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Very good post, Freedom.
As a wife, I hear what you are saying … when you throw something at a man, assuming he struggles with it 24/7, you do not allow him to grow up and take on a mantle of maturity and victory.
At one point, we lived in a town where we had to drive past an Adult Bookstore. Every time we past that bookstore, my dh would comment on it. “Oh, disgusting.” “That’s terrible.” Things like that. Our young children were in the car with us. It got to the point where I told my dh to cease all comments because all he was doing was piling up curiosity in their little minds.
If feel it is the same with the lust issue: if you keep talking about it – it builds. Just cease, talk about Godly, pure, righteous things instead! Plant holiness and holiness will grow. Keep up with the sin, and sin will be prevalent. (IMHO)
December 15th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Typos from my last post aside, there’s something else bothering me. It is hard to pinpoint it (all this is a bit like trying to nail jello, isn’t it?).
So many issues:
-The accountability issues.
-The church structure issues.
-The lack of privacy issues.
-The domineering issues: men over women, leaders over laypersons.
-The twisting of truth (history issues, congregational “announcements”).
-The emotional swaying of a whole group of people to believe one thing this year, something different next year. (Why sway people emotionally instead of intellectually?)
-The “indwelling sin” issues. THIS issue bothers me so much! It completely steals a person’s identity and position as a Believer. It keeps one down instead of allowing the child of God to soar!
When I first accepted the Lord as a young Jewish woman, I FELT the blessing of walking in the Kingdom of Light instead of the Kingdom of Darkness. I was walking in a NEW WAY! I had a new understanding. A new life. A new EVERYTHING!
Even to this day (3 decades later) I strongly feel, and daily understand that I am walking in the Kingdom of Life and not the one of Darkness and Death. I have to say that I RARELY dwell on my sin. My sin is so great and so pathetically much, that if I were to spend time dwelling on my sin, I’d be a basket case. I would have no hope!
Instead, I awake each morning, knowing the Grace of God. Knowing that the Lord has tasks for me to accomplish this day. And I set my heart and my mind to doing them.
I allow the Lord Himself to lead me. I blindly trust Him to speak to me of a sin that needs corrected. (Did I sin against someone? The Holy Spirit convicts me and I, hopefully, obey His leading to correct the situation.) I do not need to spend MY life examining my own heart for sin – my life is no longer mine, but His.
I am to bear fruit! And I cannot bear that fruit of my own accord. It is the Lord which waters and grows and tends to me. It is up to Him to mold me into His likeness. I have done my part: I have given Him my willing heart. I have submitted to Him, and I continue to submit to his lovingkindness daily.
My God is not a stern father, hovering over me, ready to dole out gleeful discipline at my every infraction.
No. He is loving and kind and patient and enduring.
Here is a little list of the things I possess in Messiah. I post it here to bless those who may have spent years entrenched in SGM’s teachings of harshness. I pray it will cause you to pause, and be blessed by the WONDERFUL things the Lord has done for us, His beloved children. (I don’t know how the formatting will translate into this post, so it may need tweaked).
IN CHRIST I AM NOW:
Rom 3:24 Justified and Redeemed
Rom 6:7 Free from sin’s power over me
Rom 8:1 Not condemned (God does not reject me)
Rom 15:7 Accepted. I am finally accepted by Him.
1Cor 1:2 Sanctified (holy)
1 Cor 1:30 Have wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, redemption
1 Cor 15:22 Alive (formerly dead)
2Cor 2:14 Always lead in His triumph (whether it appears so or not)
2 Cor 3:14 My hardened mind is removed (mind transplant)
2 Cor 5:17 A new creation (not an old garment with a new patch)
2 Cor 5:21 The righteousness of God (can’t get more righteous)
Gal 2:4 Have liberty
Gal 3:28 All are one (no inferiority)
Gal 4:7 A son and heir
Col 2:10 Complete (you can’t improve a perfect identity)
Col 3:1 Raised up with Him
Col 3:3 My life is hidden with Christ in God (see this by faith)
Eph 1:3 Blessed with every spiritual blessing
Eph 1:4 Chosen, holy, blameless before God
Eph 1:6 Accepted
Eph 1:7 Redeemed, forgiven
Eph 1:10-11 Have an inheritance in heaven
Eph 1:13 Sealed with the Spirit
Eph 2:6 Seated in heaven
Eph 2:10 Created for good performance (which He can do through me)
Eph 2:13 Brought near to God
Eph 3:6 A partaker of the promise
Eph 3:12 Have boldness and confident access to God
Eph 5:30 A member of His body (not inferior)
Phil 4:7 His peace guards my heart and mind (not a peaceful feeling, but a knowledge)
Phil 4:19 Have all my needs (not greeds) supplied
December 15th, 2008 at 10:53 am
Julie: Sorry for the long comment, this was an area that really bugged me about our time in SGM. Also, the teaching to women about this really bothered me (as well as their ‘counsel’ to couples struggling in this area, I believe the leadership is responsible for many break-ups and affairs). We were basically taught that if we were doing our job right in the bedroom our husbands wouldn’t struggle with lust. That’s crazy and puts an enormous burden on women making them feel responsible for their husbands’ sin. The truth is the pastors and leaders of SGM are largely responsible for teaching doctrine that feeds and encourges an atmosphere where sin thrives and is completely anticipated.
Me:
Great post – sgm really does focus so much on the “sin” (I put sin in quotes, because I wonder how much sgm tags as sin that really isn’t) that they cause problems. I would agree that some of the affairs and breakups are caused by sgm.
If a man cheats, it is not the wife’s fault because she didn’t “service” him every 48 hours to keep him from straying. And “teaching” the married women of the church that if “do their jobs in the bedroom” their husbands won’t lust – my question is what kind of true intimacy does that really create? I would imagine that it leaves the wife feeling bad and unfulfilled.
December 15th, 2008 at 11:02 am
Freedom Said:
My question is what kind of true intimacy does that really create? I would imagine that it leaves the wife feeling bad and unfulfilled.
Me:
Ah. The crux. Does she really count? Obviously not.
It is immaterial how she feels.
She simply needs to get over her pride!
Submit!
Service him!
Service the church!
December 15th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Remnant:
Re: 122.
THANK YOU! Balm in Gilead, my dear sister.
December 15th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Great post, Julie!! It’s so hard for me to get my head around these concepts because of all the “weeds” that have grown up in the “garden” of my mind.
Remnant – thanks for your post, too!!
December 16th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Remnant, you wacked the nail on the head whenyou said that indwelling sin focus robs us of our identity in Christ and our freedom – that was so true for me. I remember whenthe Lord first bean speaking to me about not knowing WHO I was IN CHRIST. It was the beginning of being set free and healed. Thank you sister, for that reminder again.
So many who have been hurt or are confused need to be reminded of what Christ’s life, death and resurrection wrought for us who believe. The simplicity of it (while so complex at the same time!) is where SGM misses it. All the intellectualism and over-analyzing and talking and talking and talking but never DOING or BEING drove me crazy, and I certainly am a thinker myself. I longed for the simplicity and purity I once had as a new believer – and found it again by simply remembering that I can’t camp out at the Cross – I have a journey.
And while I remember the effect of the Cross, I don’t beat myself up over my sin anymore or focus on why Jesus went there in the first place (in the context of my SIN)- I am focusing on HIM and why he went there in the first place – that He came to set the captives free, it is for freedom’s sake that Christ has set us free, because if the Son has set us free, we are free indeed! AMEN! My focus is on the EFFECT of the Cross, not the CAUSE of it. And It has made all the difference in my faith and my joy.
December 16th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
some time ago I came across this blog of a former SGM pastor – here is the link: http://theologicalbeans.blogspot.com/2008/05/sovereign-grace-ministries-and-me.html
Kris, it is more of the same – this brother’s story is sad. I posted a comment which he graciously allowed and didn’t remove, encouraging him to follow the Lord, and not submit to SGM leadership…it makes me want to cry what these leaders are doing to men who desire to pastor, only to be stifled with authoritarianism and control…we need to remember these brothers and lift them in prayer..
December 16th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Juli,
Wow…I just read that pastor’s post. My heart goes out to him – he sounds so sincere and so completely like he’s bought every last bit of what SGM is selling. I hope he’ll be OK.
December 16th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Juli,
That post broke my heart. I too have posted a synopsis of my story, on that post. I hope he reads it, and considers what he has done for the sake of an organization. I’ve been were he is, and understand the draw. But having my eyes opened, I am able to see where he is blinded.
December 16th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Poor guy.
Can’t you hear what he is really saying: I left my ministry in SBC, because SGM is waaayyyyyy cooler and totally right, that’s what they tell me.
So even though they won’t let me be a pastor right now, they are still totally cool and I am cool and my position in quasi-wait-to-be-a-pastor is cool, because otherwise, how can I explain this to myself or my family who seems to be wigging out?
Seems like a really good guy, though, don’t you think?
December 16th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Wow – poor guy. There are many stories of folks who did the same time thing, since one thing SGM teaches is “be faithful with a little and He will give you alot”, but for SGM it’s “serve us in a little (which will really be nothing but sacrifice on your part) and if the SGM leadership’s perception is that you are being a faithful, obediant, slave to the cause they MAY decided to “promote’ you to CGR and then, maybe, if you are in CJ’s grace, be selected to attended PC. And if you ask to go to PC, then you are not being humble, so don’t ask. Just trust in SGM”
December 16th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Freedom, do you really think all the men who go to PC don’t ask to go? I mean, how do the leaders know who God is calling if the man doesn’t tell them He has called them to pastor?
So if the leadership determines the call, and not God….I see a problem with this. Is this actually how it is done? Does ANYONE choose to go to PC apart from permission and being sent out from a local church?? What baloney.
My former care group leader once said that spiritual gifts were “confirmed” in the Body. This was the same guy who said I had the gift of mercy – to which I laughed hysterically. I asked a close sister in the Lord if SHE thought I had the gift of mercy, and SHE laughed! He looked confused (and a bit irritated) I asked him why he would think that and he said he’d watched me do such and such, and I thought – “well, whaddya know, someone WAS watching…only thing was, I was doing it to please man, and it was NOT an overflow of the Spirit in me…”
So if this is true, the gifts must be confirmed in the Body, then I suppose the calling does as well? Is that Biblical??? ReformedTeacher, maybe you can help me on this one…
December 17th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Re: 128
Does anyone know what happened to the “Sovereign Grace Community Church” (Baptist) that he was the pastor of? It doesn’t seem to exist under that name anymore.
December 17th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Juli wrote: Freedom, do you really think all the men who go to PC don’t ask to go? I mean, how do the leaders know who God is calling if the man doesn’t tell them He has called them to pastor?
So if the leadership determines the call, and not God….I see a problem with this. Is this actually how it is done? Does ANYONE choose to go to PC apart from permission and being sent out from a local church?? What baloney.
Me: Of course they don’t go unless sent out from the local church! That’s how SGM works.
December 18th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
The PC is by invitation only. You can’t just pay the dues and go. It costs about $50k to go. That’s living expenses and tuition. I know, because our little church has sent 3 people to go at different times during it’s brief 8 year history. One of them is at another church as a pastor, one isn’t a pastor anymore at all, and one is still at the PC, coming back in June.
December 18th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
This is the verse that God often brought to my mind during my latter years at SGM. “Those who look to him are radiant; their faces are never covered with shame.” Psalm 34:5
Those who look to HIM. HIM! Not to myself. Not to my sin. Not to anything else but… HIM. How glorious! How utterly glorious! Is there anything more wonderful to hear? He wants us to look to HIM!
December 20th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I THINK my old church is splitting the cost of the PC for the guy going from another church with his church – which makes no sense to me at all. But it is not really my business what they do with their money – I stopped tithing there long ago. And it is all God’s money anyway that they have to give an account for someday.
But I have to say – What a waste of money! For 50,000 I could have paid for TWO years tuition at graduate school at a REAL University! (in fact, I did spend that much – it was 18,000 a yr ten years ago…plus living expenses. So for the same 50K I lived for two years in Denver AND walked away with my master’s) Somehow ten months of training at an “unaccredited” school that will pigeon-hole the graduate into ministry only at certain churches seems like an unwise move, academically and practically speaking. Spiritually speaking, it gives SGM too much control, which really IS the issue. You trap yourself and get put in bondage to SGM if you go to PC.
I did some research about recent graduates from PC colleges and many of them go back to churches and are pastors but not “the” pastor – only one “pastor in training” which is what the guy going there now will be at my old church. Reminds me of the Catholic church in many ways. The powers that be determine everything.
Someone once said it was a franchise, and it certainly is. You know, if the Holy Spirit was in control of the churches and Jesus was actually the HEAD of the Church they WOULD all look alike – but like HIM – and would manifest distinctively but have the same character. Right now, most churches including SGM don’t reflect Christ and manifest MAN, not the Spirit.
Lord raise up preachers and teachers after your own heart. Have mercy on us.
December 20th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
sorta reminds me of a mastercard commercial:
9 months education
50K
having a 50K education that is worthless anywhere outside of SGM
priceless
December 21st, 2008 at 11:33 am
SGM Florida said: “It costs about $50k to go. That’s living expenses and tuition. I know, because our little church has sent 3 people to go at different times during it’s brief 8 year history.”
This was referring to the cost of sending a person to the pastor’s college.
That certainly sounds like a high figure. I would certainly like to see how SGM comes up with that cost to charge local SGM churches for candidates going to their school. This high cost IMO imposes another large cost on associated churches by Sovereign Grace Ministries.
As others have said, the yearly cost of graduate school is usually less than this.
December 21st, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Steve – I understand most of those attending pc live in the same neighborhood a pc/clc neighborhood
December 21st, 2008 at 1:14 pm
SGM bought a bunch of houses/townhomes to rent out to pc students. What a great writeoff! You buy in a market ‘boom’ and then you rent below market and you get a huge loss writeoff. Amazing business they have there!
The cost of living in Montgomery County is very high. Anyone on this blog who lives there can attest to that. Also, they bring their entire family, lose their salary from their previous job and many of them don’t sell the home they’re moving out of for those 10 months.
Median income in 2006 for Gaithersburg was $68,000. So, though tuition might be way more that what it gives you in the end, I don’t think it’s all that high (in the early 2000s, it was $5000 according to the PC family we housed.) But, to live on $50,000 a year minus tuition, would be a big stretch for any family. Plus, the fact that they usually maintain their prior home.
Not that I’m trying to defend SGM. I think paying anything for their own “college” that pigeon-holes people into SGM and only SGM is silly to say the least. But, I think we can waste a whole lot of time on this thing that really doesn’t matter.
Maybe some of those guys should spend that 50k getting a bachelors degree so that when they get fired at the whim of Steve Shank, they can find a job.
December 21st, 2008 at 2:47 pm
What’s it all about? wrote: “Maybe some of those guys should spend that 50k getting a bachelors degree so that when they get fired at the whim of Steve Shank, they can find a job.”
I would certainly be concerned if most of the pastoral candidates don’t have at least a bachelor’s degree (and the experience and maturity that brings) before attending what they call “pastor’s college.” After all what they call “college” would be more suited for providing specialized training to someone who already has a college degree vs. being a college that offers more depth of learning.
One person I know claims that maybe the students were once younger but are now older in age.
The living costs of the area where the college is in might explain the high cost and if they still had to make payments on their existing home where they come from. Also, it might be one drawback to having more mature men go to PC; they typically have families they have to support vs. younger men are more likely to be single. If the students are single men you could house a number of them in one of those townhouses you indicate they purchased vs. one per student (and the student’s family).
Thus this $50K cost for a PC student probably includes SGM Fees, living expenses, per diem, and even a salary.
Being the group is non profit and thus tax exempt, I doubt they need the tax break you mention or that would do them any good. I would imagine SGM is exempt from having to pay property taxes on these residences.
December 21st, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Ok, I was going to say in my post that I didn’t know how tax exempt corporations work or if they pay tax at all.
So, now I know. Forget what I said about the houses being rented at a loss.
December 21st, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Steve240 wrote:I would certainly be concerned if most of the pastoral candidates don’t have at least a bachelor’s degree (and the experience and maturity that brings) before attending what they call “pastor’s college.” After all what they call “college” would be more suited for providing specialized training to someone who already has a college degree vs. being a college that offers more depth of learning.
It’s really more like any big company’s internal training division – i.e. GE has Six Sigma school (but, unlike PC, those skills can be used elsewhere) or a fast food chain’s “management training program”
December 21st, 2008 at 3:09 pm
I guess that would depend on the ages of the pastors of the churches that they are taking over…opps, I mean, “planting”. Or if they have upcoming SGM princes that need their own space. Years ago, the ones I knew that went to PC were all out of their 20s and married and didn’t have all little kids.
December 21st, 2008 at 6:38 pm
50K? Are you fracking kidding me?
I’ll have about 30K at the end of four years (I’ll take an extra semester or two,) And will get through some grad school before I hit the 50K level.
And I’ll have an actual BS in Biology and perhaps even a MS by that time.
And marketable skills with which I can pay off my Stafford loans.
December 25th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
“He announced that an “evaluation process” had taken place over the last year and a half, where he flew into San Diego for weekday meetings that “99% of you were not aware of”. Shank said that the local pastors had the primary role in this evaluation, and his role was secondary. He said that this evaluation process revealed that Lauterbach had a more appropriate “gifting” for the associate pastor role while Turbedsky had a “gifting” suited for senior pastor. Shank commended Lauterbach on his humility and announced that Lauterbach would be training Turbedsky in preaching. Shank stated that Charles Spurgeon was a hero to him, but unfortunately Spurgeon’s church only lasted one generation. Shank said that actions like this “transition” at our church would help SGM last beyond the original generation.”
I would RUN away from a church like this. It is incredible to me that some distant hierarchy can choose who your teachers/preachers, etc are. Are they now Catholic?