Wallace And Happymom’s Response To Fairfax’s July 24 Family Meeting
August 23, 2011 in Sovereign Grace Ministries
On July 24, 2011, the Fairfax Sovereign Grace church had a family meeting to address concerns relating to Sovereign Grace Ministries’ present issues, as well as concerns the church membership had over stories of mishandled child abuse cases shared here. One such case was Noel’s Story. Another was Wallace’s Story.
Many members of the Fairfax church reported that the meeting had been a very touching experience. Pastors got up in front of the congregation and wept as they admitted that they’d made mistakes and were sorry for them. The overall feeling from those who had attended that family meeting seemed to be that it was a huge step in the right direction…and that the pastors were doing a good job of taking responsibility for the situations in question.
Wallace and his wife Happymom, as well as Noel and her husband, were not so impressed, however. They were dismayed by all the inaccuracies and untruths contained in what the pastors had said in the meeting.
Because of their concern for the truth, Wallace and Happymom have taken the time to identify and respond to the many false and/or misleading statements the pastors of the Fairfax Sovereign Grace Church made at the July 24 family meeting. If you weren’t there, and if you’re interested in hearing for yourself what was said, you can access a sound file of the meeting by clicking here.
What follows is from Wallace.
——————————–
If there’s anyone who would attribute charges made by us and other voices on the internet to gossip and slander… then you’ve only heard half the story.
Words that are indented (“blockquoted”) are direct quotes from the meeting.
Mark Mullery
“Some time ago, we made a decision to stop having family meetings because they weren’t being particularly well-attended. And so, I think we’ve discovered the secret: just a little controversy, crisis…great family meeting opportunity.
Speaking for Happymom, Noel and Grizzly, we were outraged by Mark’s choice of words. Considering the severity of two child molestations and the rape of a third child Mr. Mullery, we did not find your opening statement amusing.
It appears that Mark is referencing the controversy inside his church. However, apologetic pastors who elicit public sympathy whereby key elements of the truth are obscured is the greater controversy.
Mark said:
“Sadly – and it breaks my heart to tell you this – sadly, in seeking to care for them, we became part of their trial.”
Mark paints a deceptive picture here. They never cared for us at any time during our confrontation with them. From October 2007 to February 2009 we didn’t hear from anyone from the Fairfax staff until our son contacted CJ Mahaney. During the following months, their efforts were directed towards convincing us that their assessments were the correct ones.
“We lost sight of the victim. These are complicated moments. In the swirl of all the other things to think about, we lost sight of the simple fact that an innocent victim had been grievously sinned against and was in need of constant care.
Mark and his fellow pastors also lost sight of Noel’s daughter and my son. In fact, their sights were never set on the victims. But in the swirl of all the things to think about they remembered to call their attorneys. Also, constant care was not what we expected from you and your staff Mr. Mullery. All we wanted was honest answers to our questions.
“We should have followed up more and over a longer period of time.”
Mark’s statement seems to suggest that some type of pro-active benevolent follow-up was taking place. This simply isn’t true.
“We weren’t trying to cover anything up, but we did want to protect the identity of the victim.”
Protecting the identity of a victim would suggest care and concern. Their actions don’t line up with their words. Fairfax protected the identity of the perpetrators in both our children’s cases because of the family’s status… they were not prepared to deal with a potential scandal in 1998 and then again in 2007. In 1998 our son’s case was given to a pastor primarily concerned with protecting the reputation of the perpetrator’s father. The 2007 incident would have been a significantly bigger issue had it been exposed.
“We’ve been accused of not getting it. Guilty as charged. We didn’t get it. I’m so sorry.”
You still don’t get it Mr. Mullery. This is not about you and your staff putting on an emotional show to convince your congregation how sorry you are for the way we had been treated. Picture someone running you over with a truck and then apologizing to an audience of bystanders…as you lay there in a ditch.
Much of what Happymom and I had to say during the year and a half we labored to be heard was ignored and invalidated during the process. Therefore, we consider any public apologies from you and your staff to be self-serving and lacking any real substance.
“I deeply regret my impatience, self-righteousness, pride, hard heartedness. These things compounded their suffering instead of easing it.”
Mark forgot to include, ignoring many of our emails, ignoring our hard questions, and protecting a deceptive pastor.
“We reached out to Noel and to Wallace and their spouses and families. It pains me to say, that our attempts to be reconciled to them have not proven successful so far. Please pray that this might happen.”
With reference to our family, this is an outright lie. There were no attempts to be reconciled, only legally advised defense measures to protect the reputation of the church. Mark and his crew were more concerned with protecting themselves and had no choice but to deal with us after CJ Mahaney became involved.
“We can’t agree with everything that’s written about us on the blogs, but we’ve tried to go to school on what we can agree with.”
Mark Mullery presumes to act as Judge and Jury by choosing what to accept and what not to accept from the blogs. Tell us Mark, what has been written about you and your staff that isn’t accurate?
“We’ve tried to learn from our mistakes. We’ve tried to learn from these experiences and to make substantive changes in response.”
Do these mistakes include allowing members of your staff to twist facts and omit key information to protect the church’s image?
Vince Hinders
“We failed in our care for these victims.”
Although Fairfax made this the dominant issue, lack of pastoral care in no way adequately describes our experience with them. We had forgiven the pastors numerous times for lack of care, poor leadership, etc. We forgave them for what they had apologized for. Their non-descriptive apologies however, became a smokescreen that obscured tougher issues. They used this approach in the family meeting to extract sympathy from the congregation and we found this offensive.
Vince goes on to speak about 32 years of sex-abuse free leadership, and sex-abuse Free Church property. The issue that no one wants to talk about is sex-abuse committed by minors away from church property.
He further states:
“As Mark mentioned, in the Noel story, the two families involved were family friends. They were neighbors. They were in the same care group. But there was no cover-up of these crimes. The boy’s crime was reported to the police and Social Services by the victim’s parents within 24 hours of disclosure at the urging of one of our pastors. And, over time and not soon enough, people from three different care groups in the area where these people lived were involved and knew about the situation.”
If the boy’s crime had not been reported to the police would you have reported it Vince? His last sentence is vague and misleading. Does Vince mean care group leaders, or was everyone in the three groups given this information? Which begs the question, was the identity of the perpetrator made known to people at risk…close friends of the family who interact on a social level?
Vince failed to mention that Fairfax disagreed with parts of Noel’s story. This was never resolved. Mark Mullery told Noel and her husband they had inconsistencies in their story. Mark uses the word “inconsistency” as a substitute for “lie.” Do any of you on staff in Fairfax have the guts to say Noel was lying if this is what you believed? Noel asked what the inconsistencies were but no answer was given. Is this one of the mistakes Mark Mullery learned from? Will he now go back and get this right with Noel and her family or does he still think its ok to not answer questions he doesn’t like?
In reference to our son’s case in 1998, Vince said: “This situation was never reported by the parents to the police.” It’s not clear why Vince included this bit of information. Was this statement meant to make us look bad in some way Vince? However, we regrettably failed to report the crime because we thought the church would handle the situation scripturally. Instead, we were instructed by a Fairfax pastor on how great the father of the perpetrator was and Steve Shank blasted us for our sin.
Our daughter’s case:
“And also, we just want to clarify one thing, that two days before the trial, two pastors on our staff (Dave Hinders and Steve Whitacre) were served with subpoenas. Both pastors appeared in court at the appointed date and time and were ready to testify if needed. They had never been asked by anybody to participate in that part of the process directly. However, it should also be noted that the perpetrator pled guilty, so they were never called to testify.”
Vince neglected to mention that I asked them to participate…The subpoenas were hand-delivered one day before the trial. Vince Hinders was well aware of the fact but also failed to mention that two days before the trial I was on the phone with Dave Hinders pleading with him to come to the courthouse with Steve Whitacre.
What prompted my phone call to Dave was a prior phone conversation with the detective assigned to the case. She told me it would be a “good idea” for the pastors who heard the confession to be there ready to testify if necessary. However, Dave made it clear to me they weren’t coming. During our long heated discussion Dave told me, “I have my church’s reputation to consider.” I then called our detective and asked her to issue the subpoenas.
In a future meeting Steve Whitacre said he would have personally escorted the perpetrator to the police station if he had declined turning himself in. We did not have this information at the time and we forgave Steve for not telling us. In the same meeting Dave said he didn’t remember saying these things to me during our phone conversation and we forgave him for this.
“In both stories, as appropriate, we fully cooperated with the police and the Social Services.”
Concerning our case, either the Fairfax County Police Department lied to us or Vince Hinders twisted the truth a little. Our detective expressed frustration with the Fairfax pastors and told us they were “uncooperative.”
“But the big question that people have is…Are our children safe? Is it okay to have our children here?”
Vince then goes into an impressive litany of how well protected children are in the church with the new programs in place. But the big question people should have is, “Are our children safe outside the church?” Unless the leadership discloses the identity of sexually predatory minors in the church the issue of safety remains unresolved. People at risk need to be informed particularly when it involves minors. If not, young sex-offenders in social settings outside the church, away from church property will be undetected.
During the initial stages of our ordeal with Fairfax, we revealed the identity of the perpetrator to a family with young children in the church. The family was very close to the perpetrators family and was completely unaware of the circumstances. The young man was a twice-convicted sex-felon.
Happymom presented this question to Mark Mullery concerning minors: “Why don’t you inform people at risk of a known sex- offender in the church?” His response: “That perpetrator could grow up and sue us for defamation of character.”
Clarification:
“One resource that we have found is a book by Diane Langberg. It’s called On the Threshold of Hope.”
Vince neglected to mention for some reason that Happymom was the one who recommended the book to the pastoral staff. She received emails from Dave and Mark thanking her for the recommendation.
Vince Hinders speaking for Lou Gallo
“Lou and Lisa have attempted to resolve these relational conflicts with their relatives in a humble and biblical way, most recently through an independent, professional Christian conciliator here in Fairfax. Sadly, the situation hasn’t improved over time and has, in fact, deteriorated. The other family withdrew from the mediation process, contacted the pastoral team, and made a charge against Lou that he has engaged in a pattern of deception which is still current and could possibly disqualify him from being an elder.”
We did not create this relational conflict. It remains unresolved because Lou lied to us on multiple occasions and refused to answer our questions face to face. He has a long history of turning things back on us when confronted.
We spent a year and a half trying to address this but Fairfax protected Lou by consistently invalidating our claims. Contrary to Vince’s statement, the lying issue did not suddenly emerge after the mediation process but, in fact, had been something we labored to communicate to the pastoral staff from the beginning. And we did not withdraw from the mediation process as Vince also stated. We were there for both meetings totaling 9 hours.
As a follow-up to the mediation process, Fairfax set up a meeting to give us their final conclusions based on the mediator’s assessment. We asked Vince if we could ask Lou our questions in this meeting and he said no. Given this, there was no point in going so we declined the invitation.
The mediator’s conclusion was…
“There was nothing apparent in Lou’s responses or conduct during the mediation that, in what we observed, reflected a current attempt to avoid accountability or clear himself of any wrongdoing. Rather, there was clearly apparent conviction and heartfelt grief.”
During the meetings Lou avoided our hard questions and was deceptive in some of his responses to us and the mediator as well. He was extremely relieved when I asked the mediator this question after 5 hours of frustration: “Why do we desire to have our questions answered?” His reply was, “because you are sinfully craving answers according to James 4.” With this announcement Lou began to weep. The mediator had confused heartfelt grief with extreme relief…Lou was now off the hook. At this point, we told Lou and Lisa that we had forgiven them.
“We have spoken at length with Lou and Lisa, and we believe that they have provided reasonable, humble, and honest answers and responses to the questions that they’ve been asked by their relatives.”
Vince’s statement is deceptive. Lou may have answered our list of questions but we weren’t given the opportunity to hear his responses. In fact, Fairfax blocked every attempt we made to ask Lou our questions face to face with a Fairfax pastor present. They claimed Lou had answered our questions (behind closed doors) but refused to tell us what his responses were. And the one question we did ask him in private was answered with an outright lie.
“When this conflict emerged, Lou and Lisa offered to meet with the other family’s pastor to get help with mediation because Lou and Lisa knew that they distrusted Sovereign Grace Church and Sovereign Grace Ministries. So, they said, hey, we’ll go to your pastor. We’ll go to your place. Sadly, the other family declined.”
Either Vince is truly ignorant of the facts or he purposely created a deceptive picture. Yes, we declined going to our pastor; however, it was our strong desire to meet with Lou and one of his fellow Sovereign Grace pastors. (Vince was aware of this) When I suggested this to Lou, he said, “that ain’t happening.” And Fairfax backed him up on this.
We made two separate appeals to Vince Hinders and Kenneth Maresco for their participation in a meeting with Lou and they both declined. We were never given a reason why as they both ignored the question when we asked.
“…he has repeatedly reached out and gone to these family members in person. He has written letters and e-mails of apology…”
After not hearing from Lou for 10 months he appeared at our front door 2 days before a scheduled meeting with CJ Mahaney to apologize to our daughter. When asked, he could not tell us exactly what he wanted to apologize for and would not answer a few other questions we had. I told him it would not be in my daughter’s best interest at this time.
The second time Lou came to our house was after the mediation process. He apologized to our children for “not being there” and told them I was a wise man for asking that question in the mediator’s office – the question that was answered with James 4.
Lou’s two apology letters were filled with deceptive statements however; he did apologize in both letters for not being there. We tried bringing the deceptive apology issue to the pastor’s attention numerous times and they ignored us each time.
“In late 2010, the pastoral team sent a letter to the family who made the charge against Lou, and told them of our decision. Sadly, they told us, “The church will hear the truth, regardless of any conclusions you come up with on your own.”
Yes Vince, the church is now getting the opportunity to hear the truth.
“And at one point, we invited one of the bloggers from the Refuge blog – the one who manages that site – to actually come here to the church and sit in on our mediation meetings with them. We didn’t have anything to hide. We want to be reconciled to them.”
This is entirely false. Jim from the Refuge blog came to Virginia on my invitation. He came as a friend. When I informed Fairfax that he would be there for the meeting, I was questioned on what his role would be. The fact is they didn’t want him to be there. And Jim was at one meeting only, not multiple meetings as Vince seems to be indicating in his statement.
Lou Gallo
“As it was similar to other breaks in our relationship that have occurred over the past 18 years, I wanted very much to understand my contribution as to why this kept happening. Over the course of the next months and years, I made several attempts to own my sin and to ask for their forgiveness.”
The breaks in our relationship were the result of Lou’s dishonesty and failure to acknowledge specific sins beyond not caring for us. His attempts at owning his sin were selective: “I confessed to them that I was proud and selfish.”
“As I began to understand the things they were bringing to me, I confessed to them my deficiencies in caring for them and that I did not love them like Hebrews 13:3 states.”
“Deficiencies in caring for them” can more accurately be described as “family abandonment.”
“At two significant times in this family’s life, I allowed my fear of health issues Lisa faced to cloud my judgment…”
During the time leading up to my daughter’s court case, Lou made a deliberate and calculated decision to back away from our family. He was instructed by SGM lawyers to tell his wife not to discuss details of our daughter’s case with Happymom.
Lisa was not covered under the clergy-privilege statute and therefore could have been called as a witness to testify on our daughter’s behalf had she been given knowledge of any details. Lou endeavored to avoid this possibility and then lied about it when we confronted him. We had given him our daughter’s court-date months in advance, and a few days before the trial Lou told me they couldn’t be there because he had a scheduled meeting with Vince and Lisa had a doctor’s appointment.
I pleaded with him to come for our daughter’s sake. He came for a few minutes before the trial and then left. Lou’s explanation of this to the Fairfax church on 7/24 was that he allowed his fear of health issues Lisa faced to cloud his judgment.
The other issue Lou is referring to occurred in 1993 and it involved circumstances surrounding the funeral of our baby and a church split. Lou protested the funeral because we sided with the portion of the church that opposed him. He said to Happymom at the time, “This church split is sick and you don’t see it. You’re the enemy’s trophy and they’re going to shine you up and put you on their mantle and we’re not coming to your baby’s funeral.”
For 16 years Lou maintained that Lisa’s health issues were the reasons for not coming to the funeral. In his 2010 apology letter he said, anger and hard heartedness were the reasons. (He never admitted the reasons why he was angry) But Lou currently states that his fear of health issues Lisa faced clouded his judgment. Which is it Lou?
While Happymom was recovering in the hospital a day after giving birth to a dead baby, Lou called and yelled at her over the church split.
This particular issue was somewhat addressed in a 2003 meeting with Vince but never completely resolved. Lou did not own up to these things. In this meeting he said, “I don’t remember saying those things, but given the frame of mind I was in at the time, I could have said those things, and if I did, I’m sorry.” Happymom had forgiven Lou for this mostly out of a desire to end the break in the relationship with her family.
“Sadly, I stand here tonight, and we have not been reconciled. We have had a short time of reconciliation after meeting, as Vince mentioned, with the third party impartial mediator that both of our families agreed to. Forgiveness was extended, and that very night Lisa and I went to their home and asked their children’s forgiveness, and of our niece in particular. We enjoyed a wonderful and tearful reunion as families.”
“The pastoral team and a representative from Sovereign Grace Ministry received an e-mail from this family sharing the news that they had forgiven us and our relationship had been restored. After three weeks of relating again as families, the relationship suddenly deteriorated and, sadly, we find ourselves here tonight.”
Yes, this is true; we did forgive them for the things they had apologized for. But Lou forgot to mention that we had discussed getting together to work out the unresolved issues face to face. Happymom and I were eager to do this as the thought of getting all this stuff behind us was very much in our hearts.
As mentioned above, the problem occurred when I expressed the need and desire to meet with a Sovereign Grace Pastor. We believed it was important to have one of Lou’s fellow pastors witness his answers to our questions so that he might be held accountable …but Lou said, “That aint happening.…” And again, Fairfax backed him up on this.
In an environment where the accountability standard is top priority, and if godly reconciliation was truly Lou’s goal, why would meeting with a SG pastor present a major problem?
Our questions still remain unanswered.
Ending thoughts:
If there’s been a 32 year history of no molestations occurring on church property then the issue of safety on church property has never been the real problem. People at risk need to know the identity of underage sex-offenders in the church so that children will be safe in social settings away from church property. It is the pastors’ responsibility to inform people at risk.
Fairfax leadership relinquished their responsibility in dealing with a pastor who had lied to us. They relied on the testimony of a complete stranger who knew nothing of our family history and ultimately turned it all back on us. Fairfax protected Lou from having to answer our questions directly and minimized the situation by calling it a “family disagreement.” They also referred to the issue as a “difference in interpretation of the facts.”
Will they publicly confess to the charges made in this response? Will anyone step down from public ministry for integrity’s sake? And will there be restitution made to the families involved?
No amount of tears can make something right that is clearly and undeniably wrong.
“But if we walk in the light as He Himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.”
1 John 1:7
© 2011, Kris. All rights reserved.
The Biblical principle involved, LCF, is that we are to have the same law for the foreigner as for the native born, and no one is above the law. CJ and RN might believe, “If the President does it, it’s not illegal,” but they believe a lie.
Happymom, Wallace, Noel, and Griz:
I stand with you. What you experienced and continue to experience is a blight on the Fairfax church, its leadership, and SGM. Your stories have grieved me since I learned of them here. Thank you all for your courage in speaking out.
Your brother in the battle,
Former SG Pastor
If you don’t understand sociopathy, you will never understand SGM.
http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/076791581X
They are always right, and they must always win.
I was posting this in the previous thread just as the comments were closed-
Dave Joyce was just following the formula he has been taught. Know your role, and follow the rules on how to fulfill that role. Results are guaranteed.
Dave said: “Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church, they should be willing to die for them, to serve them, to give themselves up for them, even when their wife sins against them. That’s what Christ did for us and Christ is who husbands are called to model.”
Then he told Kerrin what to do.
But I think this scripture is misunderstood. Yes, it says for husbands to love their wives like Christ loved the church, then it goes on to describe how Jesus did that. What people forget is that Jesus was a unique man who accomplished a unique work. The passage is descriptive, not prescriptive.
Here’s how I think it should be applied.
Tom knows he should love Jane like Christ loved the church. Tom ponders this, prays about it, and asks the Holy Spirit to help him figure out what that looks like in his marriage. Tom is a unique person, Jane is a unique person, and their marriage itself is unique. He can’t just copy everything Bob Bestseller is doing, because it won’t work for him! He can see if there is any value in what others are doing, and discern if he should do something similar, but he must blaze his own trail. What an adventure!
We have tremendous freedom in Christ to be godly men and women in ways that are both unique and “biblical”.
Most men I know go through life feeling like failures because they cannot live up to what they have been told this passage requires.
The first thing we should be telling Kerrin is to seek the Lord and follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and not open the “Godly husband rule box” and tell him to jump in.
Oh man. Wallace and Happymom, I cannot comprehend what you have gone through and witnessed: the shock and horror of the abuse itself, the abandonment and disillusionment during what surely was your worst family crisis, the posturing and protecting of an organization above a child. While it’s true that I can’t know the hearts of these men (and women), their actions and responses through your ordeal give them away, IMO. Protect SGM at all costs. It is sickening. Plus I simply cannot digest how someone could scold you during the midst of your grief upon losing a child. I am so sorry. (I lost a child too and had to deliver my dead baby.) And on top of everything else, you also had to deal with your own FAMILY members treating you this way… unthinkable.
For all the incessant talk of sin, repentance, humility. etc in SGM, I wonder if these guys really have any idea what REAL repentance looks like.
Wow! There are so many inconsistencies and deception in these pastors statements and choice of words, that it boggles the mind! My heart is grieving over all you have been through as a family!! One thing that deeply moves me is, Wallace and Happymom, that you are still walking with Jesus in and through ALL this terrible, multifaceted trial. Your willingness to forgive these men for the things they HAVE specifically repented of is beyond admirable! Many people would not have been willing to go that far. And thank you for being firm in your resolve to stick to the truth!
Also, my heart weeps, Happymom, in particular as a mom too, that you have walked through that dark pain of having to bury a child. What a beautiful thing that you have chosen your “nickname” here at Survivors to be–Happymom! I am not a woman who cries much, but this brings me to tears!
I feel like I am rereading Brent’s documents, only the people and situations are different and it is shorter.
But the essence is the same…
Wallace, Happymom, Noel and Grizz-I am so sorry!
Based on all the public teachings on conflict resolution, humility, logs and specks that came from the pulpit, one would expect the opposite of what has occurred.
That these problems have gone on for years is deplorable.
Something about the way many SGM pastors have spoken of their past mistakes has been nagging at my thoughts for awhile, only I haven’t quite been able to articulate what that is. Now, reading these quotes from Fairfax’s family meeting has helped me identify what’s been bugging me. I’m still not quite sure I can explain precisely why it bugs me, but I will try…
I’ve been noticing that a common response from SGM pastors, when confronted with stories of the spiritual abuse they’ve meted out, has been to express regret for “not caring for” the victims better. “Care for” is the phrase that is almost always used.
And “care” is a sort of buzzword in SGM. “Care” could actually said to be loaded language, because it doesn’t mean merely what the outside world understands “care” to be. From dictionary.com, here are the standard (non-SGM) definitions of “care” (when used as a verb):
In SGM, “care” means something way more than just “having concern for,” or “making provision or looking out for.” In SGM, “care” connotes intimate personal involvement on the part of pastors, where one’s pastor knows all the details and then weighs in with spiritually authoritative insight and/or advice. “Care” also has spiritual connotations. In SGM, there is no “care” that is strictly for the sake of the individual involved. “Care” is considered a “members only” privilege and the main goal is almost never about selflessly helping another individual for the individual’s good alone. Rather, the main goal of “care” almost always connects back to ensuring that the individual remains (or becomes, or gets back to being) a contributing member of his or her SGM church.
Almost always, “care” will also at some point involve “bringing ‘the gospel’ into the situation,” which in SGM usually ends up meaning that the pastor will direct the member to focus on the magnitude of his own sinfulness and to examine his own heart for any contributions he might be making to his present unhappiness.
So “care” in SGM has a lot of SGM-related baggage and is typically connected to furthering SGM’s own purposes. This is why (until recently, at least) it has been unusual to find an SGM church that does any outreach at all that is not – ultimately – about bringing more members in to the SGM church. SGM churches as a rule have not done much in the way of helping their communities. There aren’t a lot of homeless outreaches or outreaches to feed the hungry or to support women who choose to carry their unplanned pregnancies to term, or minister to prison inmates…or any of the things that happen in “normal” Bible-based Christian churches.
In SGM, “care” has an agenda that is primarily about SGM. If Jesus enters the picture, it is in the context of the SGM Jesus. There is no “care” without some sort of hope for a reciprocal response that will ultimately benefit the SGM church.
But – because people who come to SGM do still retain their pre-SGM understanding of words, and because SGMers still do function out in the real world – “care” continues to have the other layer of meaning, the normal meaning, the agenda-less meaning, the selfless meaning.
And I think this is why there’s something troubling about when SGM pastors apologize for their “lack of care” for their victims, their “failing to care” for their victims.
After all, since “care” is ostensibly a humble and selfless act, an act of servanthood, an act of selfless giving, what does it say about the SGM member, when SGM pastors insinuate or actually believe that the member is complaining about the care he received?
If a member’s complaint is about the selfless care given to him, and if a pastor’s main fault is that he “failed to care properly” for the member, the pastor ends up looking like a poor pathetic soul who was just trying to do something generous and selfless but somehow missed the mark. In contrast, the member looks like a demanding and ungracious recipient of this selfless act.
After all, everyone knows that it’s ungrateful and mean to complain about a gift someone gives you. That’s where the cliché “Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth” comes from. If someone selflessly and graciously gives you a gift, your only response is supposed to be gratitude. You are selfish and thoughtless and tacky if you proceed to criticize or find fault with the gift in any way.
So it bugs me when pastors apologize for “not properly caring for” their people. First of all, I think that apology ends up putting the onus of fault back on the recipients of these pastors’ care. And secondly, by doing that, I think this sort of apology also serves to take the focus off of the real problem, which is that SGM teaches its pastors some basic faulty assumptions about their own authority and about their responsibility to protect SGM’s reputation above all.
The problem in all of SGM’s instances of spiritual abuse is NOT actually a “failure to properly care for” members. That’s just a symptom – an outcome – of SGM’s bad beliefs about the role of the pastor.
Here’s an analogy:
Let’s say you go to a restaurant where unsanitary conditions rule in the kitchen. Sure, a number of patrons manage to eat at this restaurant and not get food poisoning. But because of the restaurant’s faulty food safety practices behind the scenes, a number of people regularly and consistently fall ill from from a couple of dishes.
So these people vow never to go back to the restaurant. Decades after the first case of food poisoning, hundreds of sickened customers review the restaurant online. They discuss their dining experiences and subsequent illnesses. Eventually, even some waiters and a couple of former chefs from the restaurant post and describe the bad conditions in the kitchen. They talk about the poor standards for refrigerating certain foods. They discuss the chefs’ frequent failures at hand-washing.
Finally, the restaurant chain is forced to acknowledge that although many people continue to eat at their restaurants, the head chef is being called out for his failures by the assistant chef, who has posted the health department’s reports and his own commentary online. Additionally, the corporate offices are now finding themselves in the hot seat as current patrons are asking questions about how the food poisoning cases were handled.
Now, imagine if the waiters began apologizing for their poor table service? And for how they failed to properly care for the patrons? Imagine the waiters apologizing and putting the focus on their lack of spreading napkins on their patrons’ laps, and for failing to bring water quickly enough?
I think the food poisoning victims would be very frustrated by that sort of thing.
You see, the SGM members who have been abused by their pastors are NOT complaining about the “failures of pastoral care.” Sure, they’re not happy with their pastors’ responses to them. But the issues are so much larger.
And focusing this attention back around to the ungrateful customer is not appropriate. At best, it’s a huge distraction from the bigger issues. At worst, it’s a way for pastors to simultaneously absolve themselves from acknowledging the real problems, the real failures, and instead place yet more blame on the members for not being grateful recipients of the “selfless care” they were given.
Wallace, Happymom, Noel and Grizzly,
I know you have said the answer to my 2 questions already, but I did not see it in this post. My questions are simple…
1. Were you notified by the pastors that your situations would be discussed at length during this meeting?
2. Were you invited to this meeting?
Thank you.
Sidney
SGMNOT, post #6 :amen
To Kris, What a perfect analogy! :clap
@Kris #8 :goodpost
“We failed in our care for these victims” – I agree with you Kris. Knowing these guys though I can say that the Fairfax pastors are genuinely saddended and sorry about not fulfilling their pastoral roles in people’s lives. The genuinely want to be “good” pastors. However as you say definitions get in the way. What’s a good pastor? What is good or adequate care? Ah that is the rub. And unfortunately the place where SGM spin enters easily.
When I hear a pastor say “I failed in my care for you” I start to sit at the edge of my seat waiting for specifics that will help me understand the extent and gravity of the sin (if failing to care is a sin!?!). If my spouse says to me “I haven’t loved you as I should” I would say “I haven’t either really” and we would have said little or nothing. As they say “the devil is in the details”.
Sidney,
No, we were not told anything about the meeting and we were not invited.
Thx Wallace. I hope someone picks up on the hypocrisy.
Josh is up in G’burg sitting on CJ’s old throne going on and on about gossip and slander while the guys at Fairfax are doing exactly what you’ve been accused of.
Does it make anyone else really angry??? Or did I just wake up on the wrong side of the bed??
Wallace #12: That is completely WHACK (as my teenager would say)! As Rom828 says: “the devil is in the details”…if these pastors REALLY had wanted to do everything in their ability to reconcile with you all, why didn’t they inform you about or ask you to the meeting?
Kris #8: Excellent analogy! :clap
sgmnot, they weren’t invited because the applecart would have been upset.
It is one thing to read about what has happened but to actually see that the victims are real live people brings another dimension to the story. That would bring it too close home for some of the members.
Wallace or Happymom: I am a little confused on one thing. Did you say anywhere in this response or your earlier story what the questions are that LG does not want to answer? Or are those still not made public?
Oldtimer–So true. For members to see that these people are not foaming-at-the-mouth crazy, but genuine Christians who have been legitimately wronged!
Wallace, Happymom, Noel and Grizzly – I stand with all of you in support!!!!! Thank you for taking the time to respond with the truth from the lies of narcissistic people. The truth will be shouted from the rooftops – those things said in private are now public. Their lies are once again exposed.
The respond from the sgm goons stuck out to me – “because you are sinfully craving answers according to James 4″
So typically of sgm – using a made up sin to try and put people in their place and CONTROL them. SGM does not want the TRUTH out.
Heck, they probably have told the lies to themselves so many times they probably believe their own BS.
Rom828,
I totally agree that most of these guys genuinely want to be good pastors. Or, at the very least, they want to be perceived as being good pastors…they want the SGM organization to be perceived as good, as demonstrated by their pastoral care.
I also think you’re on to something with the definition of what “care” looks like. “Care” in SGM has many additional layers of meaning than it does in the ordinary world.
And this –
– well, you’ve just touched on one more point about how misleading it is when pastors apologize for their “failure to care” for someone. You’ve asked the million-dollar question, which is,
The reality is, not exactly. “Failure to care” implies an acknowledgement of shortcomings, but because by its very definition (the normal definition, at least), “care” is a selfless, giving act, expressing regret for “failing to care adequately” is pretty much the same as expressing regret for not giving a good enough gift.
If I go to a wedding and bring a trashy little gift, I can later apologize for my trashy little gift. But there’s still an underlying implication that the bridal couple are ingrates…and that the fault for the “failure” lies at least somewhat with them, because after all, giving a “gift” is exactly that – a gift. A voluntary, selfless, and non-mandatory act.
Here’s another analogy:
Most of us here are probably familiar with the concept of medical missionaries – doctors and dentists and nurses and other medical professionals who donate their time to go to places where people ordinarily have a difficult time getting health care.
These medical professionals are engaging in an act of selfless giving. The people receiving this care are being served, being cared for, free of charge. The people don’t have to receive this care, and the medical professionals don’t have to give it. But they choose to, because it’s a gift, a way of giving back.
Now, what if some of the recipients of this care start to point out its inadequacies? Or the mistakes of the doctors? Or the fact that one of the nurses mistakenly gave them the wrong (free) medication?
When the doctors learn of these complaints, their response is, “We’re sorry we failed to care for you better.”
Yes, we might feel sorry for the patient whose medication got bungled. But at the same time, the whole “failure to care” thing leaves us with the sense that the patient is ungrateful. And that the poor doctors and nurses were just trying to do their best. It feels almost wrong to find fault with their efforts.
You know, I have decided that I really intensely dislike this bit of SGMese.
I don’t mean to beat this analysis of the phrase “care for” into a pulp, but I had one additional thought.
How would we react to an abusive parent whose apology was along those lines?
Let’s say that there is a mom out there who abuses some of her children. She might be providing them with food and a roof over their heads, and some of her other children have no complaints. But ultimately, she gets called on the carpet for repeatedly beating a couple of her kids. Social services gets involved, she gets arrested. She goes to court. The evidence is all there – there are photos of the welts and bruises. The kids are on record, describing the beatings.
The mom is found guilty of child abuse. Now, at her sentencing, her response is,
Does this sort of apology adequately address this mother’s failings, this mother’s wrongdoing?
I would say no. It’s a start, but it’s a very faint start.
We all know on some level that the mother should not apologize merely for the what she did NOT do – “provide appropriate care.” Rather, we know that she should apologize also for the wrong that she actively did – the beatings.
Without an acknowledgment from this mom that she beat her kids, and that this beating was wrong, we would say that she has not really dealt with the problem. We would say that she has not faced her responsibility.
Noel, Grizz, Wallace & HappyMom, I am so grieved you have to continue to walk through this pain on so many different levels. I am so, so ….SAD. Yours is an account you read through and wish for days and days there was something you could do to help.
I want to thank you for your thoughtful response to the Fairfax meeting. It was almost a month ago. Which communicates to me that this is not a reactionary, angry rebuttal. You have carefully assessed what they said and addressed clearly where the truth breaks down. I am learning from you how to chose timimg and words carefully. Thank you, thank you for choosing the harder road of pursuing and revealing truth. I hope you someday know the # of people you have blessed, protected and helped set free by your courage.
Kris – #20 – I think to me and to my thinking THIS is what nails the sad lacking shallowness in the apology of Mullery et al.
I also think you are right about the term “care” being loaded language. The way I saw the phrase “care for” used might be synonymous with “control” See if you can exchange those words and get a better sense of their meaning? Just wondering.
@Singing Cook – Wallace & Happymom not only took time to clearly bring truth but they prayerfully considered all they wanted to say and solicited prayers from others. I believe they want to bring truth, not spin to their experience and how FCC/SGM has handled it.
@Kris…
Yes, preceived as good pastors… stopping at perception real change falters and comes to a stop for us all, doesn’t it?
@Happy Mom… Your question below is spot on… especially sandwiched by the two vague confessions.
1) “We can’t agree with everything that’s written about us on the blogs, but we’ve tried to go to school on what we can agree with.”
Tell us Mark, what has been written about you and your staff that isn’t accurate?
2) “We’ve tried to learn from our mistakes. We’ve tried to learn from these experiences and to make substantive changes in response.”
Hopefully others at Fairfax will ask for specifics of repentance and change… The applause must calm down first… because actually confessing anything publically and acknowledging truth in the blogs is pretty historic. But to stand in awe and clap at this point is to miss the next step which is vital for that church to embrace the transforming work of the Holy Spirit. The Fairfax “sheep” must rise up and require more answers if true change is to come. Sleeping or sedated sheep must awake.
I was curious about the charge of “sinfully craving” according to James 4.
I think it’s ironic and instructive to see James 4:1-11 in context so I hope you all don’t mind if I bring it here:
James4
1 What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you? 2 You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight. You do not have because you do not ask God. 3 When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.
4 You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. 5 Or do you think Scripture says without reason that he jealously longs for the spirit he has caused to dwell in us? 6 But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says:
“God opposes the proud
but shows favor to the humble.”
7 Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. 8 Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. 9 Grieve, mourn and wail. Change your laughter to mourning and your joy to gloom. 10 Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.
11 Brothers and sisters, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against a brother or sister[d] or judges them speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m reading this and wondering who is slandering? Who is causing conflicts and speaking against a brother or sister? Who is seeking to spin and protect a reputation in the world? Wallace and Happymom have been consistent in what they have wanted and what they have asked for.
These are the questions that come to mind in the light of this Scripture passage.
Defended #25: Thanks for posting James 4. What is SINFULLY CRAVING about wanting to have specific questions answered by someone who has wronged you?!
“What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you? 2 You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight….” James 4
How does this even apply? It appears to be another catch-all/fail-safe “sin” to pull out when the pastors are trying to absolve themselves of any guilt or wrongdoing. This applies more to a quarrel between equally wrong parties, not a victim of wrongs vs. a wrong-doer. I know, I know, the speck vs. log thing…but for once can SOMEONE at SGM work on the LOGS they have over there and not keep harping on the “little peoples'” specks?
HappyMom and Wallace – I am praying for y’all. I am so sorry all of this “crap” happened and I am sorry that so many people were hurt through it. I am praying hard. **hugs**
Sidney I feel like I’ve been waking up on the wrong since this whole thing exploded. Sometimes it seems unbearable that I gave so much of my heart and trust to this system.
Kris I can’t tell you how much your brilliant exposition of SGM’s use of ‘care’ hit me in the gut. So much of SGM teaching revolves around this concept of being the perfect waiter/server (humble, teachable, Christ-like, etc.) that I am sure to hear an apology from Pastors who are the head waiters saying they didn’t care well for the members is not only immediately forgiveable but also endearing because they try so hard.
The only problem is that the pastors are not just Christ-like waiters. The are also overseers and shepards of the dumb patrons/ dumb sheep. I will go even further to say that in reality thy are not even serving at all but rather strongly suggestion their own preferences and interpretation of the menu. What confuses the members then is that they have been drawn into this illusion that they are these guys who look and talk like ‘servers’ and they are placed into a privileged place of being served. They have thereby created this fluidity between being able to abuse and get off the hook by not ‘caring’ or loving well.
That is why I think it really got my goat when even in that initial meeting the specific language used to describe ‘sins’ committed by Brent vs those of the current pastors was benign ‘psycho-babble.’.
@Defended #25 – James 4:1-11 is a great section scripture…it’s good to look at it.
If you are a pastor and you want to warn people about falling into the sins mentioned here you would probably say… since we are all susceptible to sinful and covetous desires we should guard our hearts. We should daily submit ourselves to God and resist the devil.
I hate it when a scripture is used to manipulate people… Aren’t the pastors intimating that all SGM members who would consider reading the docs or blogs secretly have sinful cravings in their hearts. Beware those secret cravings that you may not even know you have!! But we the pastors are not saying don’t read the docs or blogs… just have discernment that anyone who reads them must have sinful cravings in their hearts! :spin
Kris – I have the same thoughts with the word “serve” that I read from so many in SGM (numerous instances in Brent D’s documents). In fact, I think sometimes the words “serve” and “care” can be used interchangeably and with the same agenda. I also notice with both of those words that there is an “appearance” of humility when saying it – which also matches up with all the humility brainwashing from CJ.
Oh Wallace and Happymom, I am so sad to know what you lived through. Many hugs to each of your and each of your kids.
I hope all the East Coasters are OK after the quake!!!!!!
Ah, the loaded language! I would love to compile a SGMese dictionary. One of my favorites has always been the phrase “Guard Your Heart.” What does that even mean? It sounds poetic to newcomers who aren’t used to hearing it constantly, but I don’t think I’ve heard anyone use it who actually understands it. And I’ve heard it a lot! Also, have you ever noticed that nobody ever uses the words “person” or “people?” Almost every single time, the word “individual” or “individuals” is used. I don’t think it means anything weird w/in SGM, but it’s almost if the person is saying, “The content of this sentence is completely useless, so I will use this big word to make you feel like I am saying something really life-changing.” There are so many more of these words that come to mind. An entire blog could be written about the loaded language, alone.
Philly safe, Leo. Thanks for asking.
Leo,
D.C. area ok, just a bit shook up. :)
Silver Spring area ok but I’m wondering about CLC in Gaithersburg. I’m curious about what the mothership was doing that God had to send a quake to get their attention. :Wink:
Clearly, “going to school” for Mr. Mullery and friends is more like finger painting and macaroni sculptures, and less like rigours study and examines.
For preschool participation: S
For higher-education: F
I hate the grading system, but it seems appropriate in this context. :wink:
Been thinking. What really is our goal here? It appears- to help SGM see their wrongs and correct them. Is that really it? If so, is it possible for the most offended, ie… Wallace and Noel, ExClcer, and others to be very specific on what actions SGM or CLC or SGF could take to satisfy the inner turmoil. I am aware that no matter what actions are taken by those offended or those who offend will fix the past hurt but if clear action is possible and taken will it be enough for all to move on? Again, as I shared before, I know the effects of sexual abuse as a specific sin, but only Jesus has been able to allow us to move on. Genuinely move on. Can you wonderful people who have honestly walked through hell on earth communicate clearly what would it take on behalf of SGM to make it right so as to move on? I am afraid if it can not be articulated clearly, SGM will move on in whatever way they decide with or without addressing those things that the blog is seeking to address. So, how do the offended move on? I am afraid to think that no matter what course is taken by SGM it will not be enough and many will never be satisfied. Too much power has been given to SGM and churches and not enough focus has been on our Lord. Has He brought peace to those who have been crushed? Has He met you? Has He assured you that He will be the judge first in these matters? Do we believe that He is able to settle these accounts with or without the blogs? Do we trust that He knows the hearts of all that is involved? Is Jesus really enough? I believe that we are making enemies with each other and growing in hate of one another. Is this really the heart of Jesus? Of course we know it is not. Let’s continue to be patient and believe the best in all those that belong to Him without seeking to pass judgement and determine for ourselves who the Lord loves. May all involved here have a chance to forgive and be forgiven. Please pass your hearts desire for reconciliation, concerns and your hopes along to the appropriate offenders in SGM and trust that the Lord will move. He already is as seen to the world on the blogs. Send it to them in a letter or email away from the blog. If they refuse to seek reconciliation then they must accept the Lords discipline. If we refuse then how can we be sure that the Lord is supporting us? He wants SGM cleaned up. He wants all of us to be free. The cross was messy. Serving God is messy. Serving ourselves is messy. Serving others is messy. Lord please strengthen us to follow you no matter how messy it is. Help us to love. May we know your love and extend it truly. Help us to remember what we are to spend time here on the blogs for. May the Lord continue to bring comfort to you all.
Wallace & Happymom- thanks for sharing your response to this meeting. I certainly hope that #1- they will truly repent for the horrific sins against your family. #2- that people would open their eyes!!! If you read any of Brent’s documents, you will see that the same tatics of avoidance used by CJ were used in Fairfax. THE PROBLEMS ARE SYSTEMIC AND MOVEMENT WIDE! WAKE UP!!!!
Kris,
Your last analogy was the one that, for me, really hits the nail on the head (abusive mother apologizes for not caring for child properly).
That’s what these pastors always do – the apologize for what they didn’t do well (care) which provides them w/ an escape from culpability, and at the same time makes them seem humble..
They need to apologize for the wrongs that they DID do…
Good illustration..
As a much grieved observer who at one time was close to becoming a member of CLC (at the time it was called the “Gathering of Believers”), and whose daughter has been a member for years, I would humbly direct the leaders of SCM and CLC to the writings of St. Dorotheus of Gaza, an early Church father. One of his sayings goes like this: “I know of no fall that happened to a (leader) that did not come from trusting in his own judgement.” And this: “Nothing is more grievous than to be one’s own spiritual director.” We all hope and pray to be “led by the Spirit”. God’s ability to lead is perfect, but our ability to listen and comprehend is far from. Ergo: over 30,000 Protestant denominations, each one believing that they have the correct revelation, based on Scripture and led by the Holy Spirit. If you’ve been damaged by what’s happened here, (or if you are one of those who have damaged others) I’d encourage you to read any or all of the following books: “Dancing Alone” by Frank Scheaffer (Francis Scheaffer’s son); “Thirsting for God in a Land of Shallow Wells” by Matthew Gallatin, “Becoming Orthodox” by Peter Gillquist and “The Way” by Clark Carlton. They all tell the stories of Protestants who begin a quest for the Truth and find it in the ancient Christian Church. God bless you!
Loved that restaurant analogy, Kris.
Breezy wrote: Silver Spring area ok but I’m wondering about CLC in Gaithersburg. I’m curious about what the mothership was doing that God had to send a quake to get their attention.
Me: Well, after everything calmed down and I knew what was happened, I wondered if clc got swallowed deep into the earth….. I guess not since there is already a post the reeks of sgm speak…..
“Looking to Jesus” said,
That’s an excellent question. And I appreciate the sentiments in your entire comment.
Since I’m not someone who has been mistreated by SGM, I can’t presume to answer for anyone else definitively. However, my overall sense is that most of those whom SGM has hurt don’t actually “want” anything from SGM on any sort of personal level, beyond, perhaps, SGM’s taking full and complete and very specific ownership of the wrongs done, as well as of the root causes of those wrongs.
If SGM would expressly acknowledge and own its wrongdoings…expressly acknowledge and own and expressly RECANT the faulty beliefs and faulty teachings that brought about those wrongdoings…then I think we’d shut up here. We’d shut up and shut down.
It seemed for a brief while there like Josh Harris was actually going to do this. He gave a couple of speeches that were remarkably honest and transparent. For a brief while, he seemed to relinquish the SGM-generated unhealthy sense of his own authority. For a brief while, he seemed to relinquish SGM’s dysfunctional control.
But then things seemed to shift. There was all that double-speak in the meeting last week – “I was wrong to tell you to read the blogs and Brent’s documents without giving you guidelines for discernment,” “The blogs contain gossip and slander,” “Read, but only if you can without sinning…use discernment.” What loyal CLCer, sitting through those mixed messages, would feel comfortable attempting to navigate Brent’s documents after that? Josh has cleverly planted the idea that the documents are about personal conflicts and should never have been made public…and therefore constitute “gossip” and “slander.” Likewise the blogs.
It really doesn’t matter if Josh then turned around and said – out of the other side of his mouth – “I am not trying to shut down the transparency, I am not trying to stifle the communications.” Putting such an emphasis on the potential for “gossip” and “slander” is pretty much all it took to put the kibosh on a lot of people’s sense of freedom to read and think for themselves.
So it looks like the doublespeak continues. And that’s just at CLC.
Then there’s this Fairfax business. I think we can see from Wallace’s and Happymom’s response that the July 25 family meeting contained a whole lot of spin. Yes, the pastors cried. Yes, they expressed regret. But they were not wholly truthful in the end.
And here’s the thing. We could give these guys the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe the inaccuracies and the misleading statements were honest mistakes. Maybe.
But how likely is it that nearly every single one of the inaccuracies would serve to make the pastors look better, rather than worse? What are the chances that not just 50%, or 60%, or 85% of the inaccuracies, but close to 100% of the inaccuracies served to portray the pastors more sympathetically rather than less?
Maybe I’m wrong, but the odds of that happening accidentally seem outrageously slim. So I can’t help but think that the pastors at Fairfax are still trying to protect their own images, their own reputations, and their organization’s image. Nothing else really makes sense or is logical.
And if these guys at Fairfax are still trying to spin things so that their wrongdoing looks better, less serious, less grievous – well, that pretty much shows that things aren’t changing the way they need to. Yes, there were tears and admissions of wrong, but there’s still not the ownership and the detailed and explicit explanations and confessions that there need to be.
As far as “moving on” goes – well, I think it’s a false dilemma, to act like it’s impossible to “move on” unless one totally quits thinking and talking about an issue. “Moving on” and discussing an issue are NOT mutually exclusive activities. Yes, for some people, leaving this site represents a necessary step in recovering from spiritual abuse. But that’s not true for everyone.
It’s especially not true for those of us who haven’t actually been hurt by SGM. I find this stuff endlessly fascinating and will never stop being intrigued by how these guys load the language and shade the truth…all the while maintaining a core of loyal followers who honestly don’t seem to care that this stuff is happening at a place that requires them to totally trust their pastors, with ZERO formal accountability from the pastors to the people.
Back a few years ago (mid 1500’s I think) an obscure cleric by the name of Luther (they didn’t have apostolic teams then) began to notice some actions among the higher pastoral team that just didnt’ seem right. HE thought “well gee, all I have to do is document all the sinful stuff that’s going on and submit it to the pastors and they will repent and everything will be fine. So he typed it all down and posted it on the internet (the internet then was the local church door). He made a minor miscalculation. The leadership did NOT receive his constructive criticism with all readiness of heart. Neither did they confess their collective and individual sins in all humility. On the contrary, they immediately went for his juggular and demaded he retract all his d**nable lies and repent himself. For a wonder, young pastor Luther stuck to his guns and became an instant fugutive. You see, the incumbent leadership wanted his head (literally). With some support he managed to escape the rack and the rest is history. Oh, did the established ecclesiatical authority ever wake up to their wrond and repent? Nope. You see, once the establishment is established, they they simply stay, well, established. The same occurred about 100 years later in England. A group of devout believers began to chafe agsinst wrongs in the “mother church” and, like Mr. Luther, hoped to convince the heirarchy to mend it’s ways. The heirarchy in response began holding “Puritan Barbeques”. The dissident Putitan splinter group read the handwriting on the wall and moved out, resulting in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The story goes on and on with only the names and places changing. The establishment is never willing to own up to sins and wrongs against the “masses”. They are, after all, the establishment and they have the “Sword of the Lord” with which to beat the unruly masses back into submission. Eventually the oppressed come to a point where they have to make a decision whether to “knuckle under” or move on to a fairer land. God does not endorse or give a blank check to an opppressive ecclesiastical leadership. (Read Jeremiah 23:1-4 for starters)
Interesting post, B.R., but we can still hope….
Afraid i agree w/ ya, though…
It seems like I am always “catching up” and never quite “caught up”.
Kris thank you once again for bringing clarity to such a murky issue.
Sydney #9. No we were not invited or notified about the meeting and yes it was gossip if they are going to play by their own rules.
Singing Cook #21 Wallace and Happymom did all the grievous work on the response to Fairfax. They were gracious enough to include us and allowed us to review it before they posted it but this is a reflection of their heart and their effort. The part of the family meeting that truly upset me was how Lou and Vince handled Wallace and Happymom’s story.
Looking to Jesus #38. That is an excellent question and we have told them specifically what we expected from them. They stubbornly refuse to cooperate. The biggest and most important thing we need is for them to sit down with us and open up every single file they have on Griz, myself and any of our children. They consistently say that there are INCONSISTENCIES but they neglect to say that THEY NEVER HEARD the confession police heard. They have no idea what we were told by the detective that handled our case. Yet they insist that our story is wrong. We just want to hear what they have in their records and what compels them TO INFER THAT WE ARE LIARS! (sorry for all the caps but cant use italics…I don’t mean to yell just to stand out ;-)
Even at the family meeting they said there were inconsistencies but they never mentioned that we are more than willing to sit with them and get the record straight. It looks much better for them to continue inferring that we are liars.
I have “moved on” in many ways, and even though I may still have “more miles to go”, I really was not thinking about CLC, or even SGM. My goal for my life, that I have spoken often of, is to find some way to “help facilitate a way for women and children who are being abused to move out of their situation”. Whether it be by just being an example, or by lobbying in Congress, or counseling, public speaking-whatever I can-I want to use how I have been victorious to encourage others and make a difference that way. A realtor recently (in the past year” came by my house, and he recognized me from CLC..we talked, he asked what happened, why my family no longer goes there (He admits he is mostly on the peripheral, and just attends on Sundays). I went through a bit of an edited version of things, and he said to me (even though I REALLY “edited” issues) how gracious he thought I was towards them. I told him I harbored no bitterness, that I have moved on. That is entirely true! (Albeit it is not necessarily true for some of my children, and I expect they may have even been hurt more deeply than I, because perhaps they trusted even more, while I, on the other hand am more “used to being disappointed by men”) It was not until my daughter showed me this site, and I read SGMNOT’s story, and saw how the very same things I “excused away” in forgiveness were still continuing, and even worse, that I realized this is where I need to start! Then, when I heard Cory’s response to the abuser in their midst, and knew that people were not being made aware as he so reassuringly stated-that was when I knew I had to speak up. I have healed-there is still pain, but it does not cripple me-I am strong enough to be a voice now. A voice to help tear down a system that will continue to allow children to be abused, and their mothers to feel there is no way out!
“LookingToJesus”, you ask what our goal are, that is mine. I want to know for a fact that children are protected above and beyond the molester. There was a previous post of how Wycliffe translators handled a situation..everyone here agreed it would be so awesome to see SGM handle it such a way. I dont think they ever will, but that will not stop me from speaking my voice, because despite what they do or dont do, I will make sure that the Mothers and children know there is a way out, and it is worth it to go that path! It would be awesome to have them join in with that, but all they seem to want to do is minimalism it, excuse it, and “forget it”..I cannot change what they do, but I will not give up.
A wonderful post, BRC.
Noel #47: That is just terrible–the fact that they haven’t given you the respect to read the police report? How can they infer or say you are lying, if they refuse to look at your written proof?! The vague claim that there are “inconsistencies” in your story, again is similar to the pastors’ loaded language of “we didn’t CARE enough”. What inconsistencies? How didn’t you care well? Major cop-out.
Looking to Jesus #38: Like Noel and Grizzly, I too asked very SPECIFIC questions in my response to Greg’s letter. And all our very APPROPRIATE requests about crises such as these have been either completely ignored or denigrated by PR BS.
What do we want in the long run? I have been thinking on these things just today. I’m not ready to comment on it all, but it is fermenting, fomenting in my mind.
What I DON’T want is a stupid-false-sobbing-fake apology like these two couples just responded to.