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.
ExCLCer’sMom #48: “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!…I want to know for a fact that children are protected above and beyond the molester.”
THAT is a beautiful post. “There is still pain, but it does not cripple me-I am strong enough to be a voice now.” Thank you for being an example of a strong woman of God. I have much respect for you.
I would add…for children to be protected from ANY molester in SGM.
Thank you, SGMNOT.
I think that if SGM were to put together some corporation-wide policy for handling child abuse – a policy that would get very specific about mandatory reporting, as well as about how churches will respond to victims and how they will protect kids and their parents from underage pedophiles – that would be a huge step for a lot of people here.
I’m also guessing that those who have suffered through abuse and then were further victimized by their SGM pastors would appreciate very specific and definite acknowledgements of just how the pastors minimized the victims’ pain while they seemed to protect the perpetrators.
I have a hunch – and yes, this is speculation, but considering how CJ ran his potential coercion/blackmail by PDI’s attorneys, and considering how the pastors in Noel’s story were on the phone with attorneys BEFORE they even notified her about what they’d learned, I think it’s a very good hunch – that the convoluted and namby-pamby apologies and acknowledgements of wrongdoing coming out of SGM pastors now feel so cheesy and watered-down because they’ve been run past attorneys.
You know, I want to add that even if SGF agreed to sit with us and open the files, let us read them through and through. Even if they corrected their records to reflect the legal record, we wouldn’t stop posting here. The reason we put our story up here was not to get the pastors to bend over backward to meet our demands. At the time I wrote our story I didn’t really think any pastors would ever read the blog. Our story went up for the protection of others and was very healing in the process. Griz and I would say that our story is not about the sexual abuse which could have occurred anywhere. It is about spiritual abuse! We aren’t here to bring SGM down or for retribution. I’m not really in favor of picketing or news stories although I understand why others are. Although if those things happen I would hope that SGM would respond humbly. Other stories here make me furious, just furious. ExCLCer’s and Happymoms are inconceivable but ALL the stories….ALL the stories of SPIRITUAL ABUSE validate this blog. Thank God that we don’t have to rely on one person nailing a paper to the church door. Thank God we can help each other, and support one another here! And I believe this is VERY God honoring….even in all it’s messiness! Ok, off my soapbox now.
Just remember, that as heinous as these child abuse cases are, in how they were handled (or not handled) by SGM, there are multitudes of other (spiritual) abuse stories in the archives here…
The worst of the worst are the ones we have been discussing lately, but they are not the only ones – and not to ever try and minimize them, they are horrendous, and reason enough for SGM to be held to account…
but there are so many stories here, that if you only believed one tenth of them, they point to a serious systemic problem w/ sgm polity, doctrine, pride, incompetence… all of that…
I struggle here… i hear about love and forgiveness, and that we are all sinners, etc…
But something needs to change at SGM…
I hope some of this does get written up in the post
Yellow is a Happy Color said to me:
@Current CLC Member—I think may have read what you wrote on the CLC members blog. While you did mention that you read the blogs, did you mention that you believed them, or that you were now questioning the pastor’s roles in ExCLCer and Sgmnot’s families?
I am not denying that there are many ‘happy’ people at CLC. I can see that there are. Honestly, I haven’t met anyone in my circle who has read the blogs, or who really sees the need. They truly are just ‘happy’ with how things are going, and happy with whatever crumbs of facts that Josh and Friends tells them. CJ? He’s just a sinner like all of us. Sex abuse? Those are just bitter people slandering the church. Elders? We already have them. For many at CLC, I wonder if happy = blinded.
These ‘happy’ people feel quite free to judge me for being on the blogs. And they also feel that last week’s members meeting went really well…
I’d rather be an unhappy but critical thinker (Berean, as someone said recently) than happy and misinformed.
@yellow I don’t have any reason to not believe the stories of exCLCer and Sgmnot here on the blogs. And, honestly I did have a hard time with the sexual abuse part of the member’s meeting. I did not like the way that GR and JL were defended so adamantly. I believe that John himself even admitted that there were deficiencies in his care. So, I do have some questions I’d like to ask, but I’m trying to be patient to see what happens next. I realize that this may offend some people here because this is such a serious issue, but I’ve been saying a lot to the pastors about a lot of things and I don’t want to talk so much that they stop listening. This has been going on for a long time and they are processing all of this too at lightning speed. I am thankful for the new openness and transparency. I am not surprised if it isn’t complete yet. This is all new to everyone and it’s going to take some time.
I am aware of many people like you mention above. Like I said before, they are not used to this new openness and transparency. When I encounter people who just want to wait and see what the pastors tell us to do, I try to encourage them that the pastors have asked us to help them by being informed and asking questions. For me, in order to ask intelligent questions I feel I need to be hearing both sides of the story. I hope that you will stick around and be part of the process of asking those hard questions. If the people who are reading the blogs all get mad and leave then what? I believe there are two sides to every story and hopefully as we ask hard questions it will help the pastors to see more clearly the root issues that we have as a movement.
With respect…from one who is trying to stop drinking the kool-aid. :koolaid
Current #56: “So, I do have some questions I’d like to ask, but I’m trying to be patient to see what happens next. I realize that this may offend some people here because this is such a serious issue, but I’ve been saying a lot to the pastors about a lot of things and I don’t want to talk so much that they stop listening.”
Thank you for being so honest on how you feel, being a CLC member in the midst of a whirling vortex. :wink:
I think that it is good to be prudent, so leaders will “hear” you and not discount what you have to say…however, in the midst of this whole crisis(CJ/BrentDocs/Blogs/SexAbuse)
I think that it should give any member pause to think that they are actually needing to be REALLY careful how they approach their pastors, if done too much or not in the right attitude or not using the proper language, that you may find yourself “on the outs” and in league with the misfits and disparaged! I appreciate that you desire to be faithful in the midst…but when does a person stop trying to reform? (Just a rhetorical Q.)
Genesis chapter 34 tells an interesting story. Dinah one of Jacob’s daughters was raped by a prince of the Hivites. She’s probably crying and going through all kinds of changes. Jacob has a bunch of sons but that’s about it. He’s a stranger in the land. He’s trying to keep the peace but her brothers ain’t havin’ it. Then the guy that raped her had the NERVE to say he wants her to be his wife. Can you imagine this girl? And Dad is actually considering it. But her brothers… forget it. They lie and decide to do a “peace” treaty but the condition is circumcision for all of the Hivites. After they’ve been cut the boys come in and KILL the entire tribe. Dad Jacob is ticked but they look at him like he’s crazy and ask “Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?” Read the story, its not preached on often.
I told that story to say this… I started going to TAG in 75 and was a member at CLC from 84 to 93 but I grew up in SE DC. THERE IS NO FLIPPING WAY this kid would have gotten away with doing that to my daughter. Church or no church. He would have met one or two of her cousins that was his same age and justice would have been done. Just like the beginning story in The Godfather. He would have been able to repent from a hospital bed. My family would not have stood for it.
And yes I know scripture says “Vengence is mine said the Lord. I will repay.” But I’m not talking about revenge. To me it would have been justice. And he would have NEVER in his life thought about touching another child. PERIOD!!! The price would have been too high.
Noel, I truly grieve for the changes they put you and your family through. My the Lord speed up you healing and that of your daughter so that she can have a full life in Him.
@sgmnot#57 – Thank you for your kind and patient attitude toward me as I am in the midst of a :spin :spin whirling vortex! :spin :spin I do appreciate that. As we all know, life continues to fly by as we are spinning around in this hurricane of confusion. I am so thankful for the solid teaching from God’s Word that Josh continues to bring us week after week. I truly feel that Jesus is with us and He is doing something that we can’t really even begin to understand yet. He is my hope…not these pastors. They are fallible and weak. Their only hope is Jesus, too, and it is truly refreshing to hear Josh reiterating that over and over. I’m trying to remember that he is at the center of the whirling vortex. So, it’s not really that I’m afraid to share my concerns or I’m afraid that I will be rejected if I do. It’s just that I’m trying to be sensitive and wise in my timing. I feel at this time that the Lord has me in a place of patience rather than urgency like I’ve been in the past.
Regarding your rhetorical question…I guess the Lord will make that clear if and when the time comes. At this juncture He has us right where He wants us. Until He says otherwise, this is where we’ll be fighting for His glory among our CLC family members.
@Wallace and HappyMom, thoughtful and helpful. Good post, thanks. Will ponder it further.
@Kris, excellent post in the last thread although this scribe did not develop observations. I have my own views and they are not flattering of Mr. Harris. Methinks his responses are still “sophormoric.” The wider historic arc implicates the poor man–poor Josh–for years and years back to 2004, as a youngster, including observations about Mr. Mahaney’s pride, unintreatability and retreatism from analysis. Poor Josh concurred. Poor Mahaney must disagree.
@All, not profoundly impressed by Mr. Harris’s effort, a play to several constituencies. But, the reading, deliberation and meditation continues. As it must. A 5th re-read of Mr. Detwiler. I “busted” a few more inkjets. The cultic, legal, and historic elements continues. As to Mr. Harris’s forlorn gaggle of staffers impugned inadvisedly, as he suggests, I didn’t see it. An over-reach by the young, 30-somethingish protege of CJ. What was on offer by Mr. Detwiler was not staffers, but a handful, a few, very few, the elite, the inner circle, of SGM employees at the top…several…involved in inner shenanigans. There was no wide swath of employees or staffers as Mr. Harris implied, to wit, those “without defense,” but a handful in the inner circle under review, including Mr. Harris, Mr. Harvey, Mr. Shank, Mr. Kauflin, and a few others. Mr. Harris will appeal to those not reading the documents. This has the smell of a “wash” of the laundry.
Curent CLC Member, I hope along with you that changes do indeed happen at CLC.
Sadly, it seems that last week’s member meeting was a turning point away from “this new openess and transparency” you mentioned.
Thank you for sharing your responses to the ‘apology’.
If it was a real apology, they would have directed it towards *you*
Kris, terrific analogies today, I really liked the restaurant one.
Sometimes, when you hear or read what SGM leadership has to say, it’s like watching a movie where you’re waiting for the protagonist to come to some startling realization and finally “get it”. Sorry, but the one that comes to mind first is in the Sixth Sense when Bruce Willis finally realizes he’s dead…
I so want these SGM pastors and “apostles” to realize what they’re doing when they take that eyes down, tears falling, “Woe is me, I’m just a deficient sinner” generic approach to conflict and repentance. And further, when they try to inject that same attitude into those who they have done damage to.
It seems to be a recurring theme in SGM, that if we all generically condemn ourselves and each other enough for generic sins like pride and gossip and slander and “sinfully craving” and “unentreatability” and so on, God is going to bestow some kind of humility merit badge on us.
I guess I’ll have to admit that in my life, I’ve been guilty of a lot more than generic sins. I’ve been guilty of some name brand sins. Like lying. And stealing. And being extremely jealous of other people who had more than I did. And getting divorced for what could very arguably be considered non-biblically justifiable reasons. And lots more but it’s late. All of those sins have been confessed to God. Many of them have been confessed to people I trust. Some of them have been through a process of confession, repentance and reconciliation (not formal or supervised) with other people, inasmuch as possible. Some I just don’t have the guts, or the words, or the accurate memory to pursue… maybe some day.
All that to say that I hope and pray that at least as these pastors approach God in heaven regarding their own sins, they realize that Jesus’ blood is not like generic bleach… he bled and died for each specific individual sin that we have committed, and rose again so that we can be assured of his power to forgive every single specific offense.
When we make sin and repentance such a generic thing, whether it’s in counselling or in care groups or in music, it’s no wonder that many feel that SGM’s gospel stops at the Cross. If we’re so busy wallowing in our own sinfulness all the time, how are we going to hear the cry of Jesus ringing out through the dark sky over Golgotha, and echoing down through the ages, “It is Finished!!!” Time to stop beating yourselves up over your sin (generic) and time to celebrate the power of Jesus Christ to forgive, and restore, and heal the damage from every single specific sin we’ve ever committed.
I apologize if this sounds insensitive to anyone who is still hurting, that’s not my intent at all. I also realize that has not been the experience of everyone in SGM, but it is a common testimony. If anyone is offended by what I said, can I claim the earthquake rattled my brain?
Kris, #52….
In the last CLC family meeting, Josh said of the gossiping, slandering parents of sexually molested children from ClC who put their stories on blogs (as well as everyone on blogs who support them) thus:
“I wish they knew that 2 tears ago, John Loftness made a document laying out our policy for handling these sorts of situations.” He went on to say that they include legal insight, counseling training and many new policies to help the pastors care for (sorry…I had to say it) the victims properly. Then he said “I wish they could see this 19 page document John wrote.”
Hallelujah!!!! There is a policy!!!!
Too bad nobody knew and too bad the apology is missing.
Sid
Oops! Dang tired eyes.
“2 tears ago” should read “2 years ago”
@Sidney, regarding the document, I wonder what is preventing the victims from seeing the 19 page document? What is preventing ANYONE from seeing this 19 page document? Why not post the document for all to see?
Just more spin without substance.
It’s like they think that if they can fool members, they are fooling the Lord.
Sidney #65 or Remnant #66: Did they specify any details from this policy? And did they say that CLC members can request to see it? :scratch
Fried Fish,
Your #63 – :word
Unless this purported 19-page document had been freely and openly announced and discussed, to where every CLC member was aware of it and had the opportunity to share their thoughts about it, then it’s pretty much meaningless.
And what I find interesting is the underlying assumption Josh seems to be making – that somehow, if the victims had only known that John Loftness was off in his hidey hole, writing this secret document, they would have been less likely to share their stories publicly.
What’s up with that?
Kris: Once again, you hit the nail on the head and you totally crack me up! Thanks for being so insightful and direct! :D
Breeezy # 58 I would expect the same out of my family of men relatives too and it would not be revenge but justice as you say.
HE says to DO justice, to love mercy and to walk humbly with HIM.
After Breezey’s comments about justice I remembered a word I read recently that I thought was interesting and probably valuable for the future as society continues to evolve into a cesspool.
Rise up you champions of God.
http://brothomasblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/calling-all-men-buck-up.html
Re my #64:
It was Greg S, not Josh, who talked about John writing that document. And it might have been 17 and not 19 pages.
I can’t go back to it, but would someone else please do that?
Here are some quotes from above:
“justice would have been done. Just like the beginning story in The Godfather. He would have been able to repent from a hospital bed.”
“it would not be revenge but justice as you say.”
Please do not advocate vigilante violence in the name of justice. I understand the seriousness of these crimes of abuse, but two wrongs do not make a right. Our criminal justice system has its flaws, but there are already serious criminal penalties for the perps who commit horrible sexual abuse like these victims suffered. The kind of vigilante violence advocated here is criminal in itself. If practiced on a wider scale vigilante violence would result in an anarchy where no one would feel safe!
Breezy & Old timer,
I can certainly understand the sentiment behind the reaction. We wanted to treat the perp in the same way that someone would treat one of our own kids if they were in that position. (not revealing their identity, keeping details to a minimum) Micah 6:8 was actually one of the scriptures that we meditated on throughout this. The perps were young, they were minors, we believe mercy was appropriate.
The justice part for us was exposing how the leaders handled it.
Last night when I wrote post #58 I was p—ed. After reading Noel’s story for the first time Dinah’s story which I had just read a few days ago came back to me. I could not even begin to imagine how she felt having been not only raped but my own father was considering giving me to the man who raped me as his wife. My brothers, who heard me crying, understood and were willing to pay the cost, whatever it took, to give me justice. And anyone who reads this and says: “Yeah, but that was 4,000 years ago and we have courts for that now.” doesn’t get it.
We are made in the image and likeness of God. Ingrained in that image is justice and mercy. And God is perfect in both. We however, are not. There is a cost to mercy and forgiveness. God saving us cost Him His Son. It cost Jesus His life. God could fellowship with Abraham, David, and Moses in the OT because of the blood sacrifices that covered their sin. That fellowship cost other living beings their lives. The pastor who said: “Today you are going to have an opportunity to forgive.” must have forgotten that scripture that says “Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.” The principal that runs all through scripture is that there is a cost involved in forgiveness. Those pastors didn’t want that kid or his family to pay any cost. And every time they say something that hides the truth it violates the victim and her family all over again. And that violation grieves God and is a stench in His nostrils. And sometimes a 15 year old beating the snot out of another 15 year old is enough justice to allow forgiveness with a clean conscience knowing that justice has been done. And a broken arm or leg verses years of counseling is a small price to pay but it is not easy or cheap grace which is what Fairfax and CLC seem to want to extend in these cases.
Forgiveness is a choice. And sometimes it is ok to withhold forgiveness until justice is done. God wanted fellowship with us but He could not until justice was dealt with. For the pastors to come to you and say forgive with no recourse for justice was wrong. Every single time they deal with this issue they deal with it unjustly because they have the concepts of grace and mercy and justice screwed up. So they keep violating justice and then they hide the truth or outright lie about it because of their own lack of understanding or desire to keep the peace. “Move on.” they say. That can only be done when the requirements for justice are met. Only then can you forgive with a clear conscience knowing that the wrongs were admitted, made right, and justice has been served.
It doesn’t matter whether justice comes in the form of a court ruling or a one-on-one fight. The pastors further victimized the victim which created further injustices which are almost just as bad as the original violation. Believe me, a child molester or rapist in jail learns very quickly the consequence of that violation. Every other guy in there has a mother or sister or daughter and it could have been theirs.
I’m just saying the initial violation was never dealt with justly. That caused all of the others. The lying, the hiding, and the verbal and psychological bullying were all outgrowths of the initial offense. Deal with the initial offense openly, quickly, and justly and the others don’t follow.
Fried Fish, Good post. (By the way, I like your name. It conjures up lovely memories of being with my family, catching fish, and cooking the fish up, fried of course, that same day).
I have wondered often about all the sin talk. How is it there can be so much sin talk and so little revelation of actual sin that leads to godly sorrow that leads to repentance that leads to change? It’s all so nebulous. Even years ago, when I was trying to understand the supposed sin that required my family be dismembered, it was like grasping onto smoke. I wonder that this nebulousness (not sure that’s a word) is not another control tactic. It reminds me of a chapter in The Silver Chair by CS Lewis where the evil queen (not saying they’re evil or queens) uses a potion of smoke to dishearten and immobilize the Narnians. In SGM it might sound something like this: You’re a sinner. You will always be a sinner. Anything good that happens to you is more than you deserve. You must keep a view of the cross and why the cross was necessary always in the forefront of your mind. Sin is crouching at your door even now. It will eat you alive and you won’t even know it. You need us to keep you safe from sin. Oh yes, we are sinners too, but our position, this high and holy calling and anointing of God trumps our sin nature. We are standing in the stead of God on your behalf. With our super vision and knowledge, we will build fences and walls to guard you and your family. Don’t cross them or you will get too close to sin and surely you will fall. We will be vigilant to swiftly remove from our midst any who do foolishly cross our fences and walls to keep those who are faithful to our organization safe. Be eternally grateful to us for keeping watch over your wayward souls.
Okay, maybe a touch of drama in my description :wink: , but don’t you wonder if that’s what some of them TRULY believe? Can you see how this would dishearten and immobilize the folks?
It makes what has happened to Esther, Happymom/Wallace, Noel/Grizzly, SGMnot, the exCLCer family even more crazy! Where was the protection for them?! For their children?! Then comes the terrible thought: what if what they are trying to protect isn’t the people; it’s the organization itself. The name brand and its reputation. These are harsh criticisms, I know, but the behavior does make you wonder.
Breeezey….
I told my husband a while back about the statement that Mr A’s daughter “tempted him”. I don’t remember who even made the statement, just that it was made. You have no idea how much we would have liked to add a few eunuchs to the world :D As bad or worse than a perp, is a grown up who uses the vocabulary that a daughter tempted a father.
God in his everlasting justice will take care of it though……
too bad their policy did not include how to deal with people they had already damaged. Or maybe the policy did address it and it simply said, “Gossip about them, mislead people about them and dismiss their real concerns.”?
I have so much more I want to say about this vein of blogs here, but I do not have the time right now. I do, however, want to clarify one thing: As much as I hate to come to defense at all of the pastors, or Mr. A, in all fairness, I have to point out, 5Years, that “somewhere in the translation” of events, something may have been misunderstood. GR said to me that he thought Mr.A was not a pedophile, that he thought Mr.A was “more attracted to the woman she was becoming rather than the child that she was”. I do not believe it was his intention then, or any other time to imply that my daughter “tempted him”, or even implied any “wrong doing” on her part. No one ever implied it was her fault at all, in any way. I just want to make that clear. If they had even came close to suggesting such a notion, I would have been gone from that church was sooner than I was!
Stunned wrote: too bad their policy did not include how to deal with people they had already damaged. Or maybe the policy did address it and it simply said, “Gossip about them, mislead people about them and dismiss their real concerns.”?
Me: No, no, no, in PC they are taught that if someone was damaged it is because of their sin and sgm has to figure out what sin it was….. then they are given a list of sgm-created sins like fear of man and sinfully craving answers
Wallace I didn’t mean to imply to go after someone physically (but it’s possible at times I believe) but to pursue justice in the way that you(or whomever) was lead by God.
And you did that and are still doing it– which is doing justice for yourselves, the children involved and the pastors who botched things up.
ExCLCer’s Mom #81: It is gracious of you to be clear and careful with your words and the impressions that others have about your and your daughter’s case, however with that said….I want to be on record publicly with saying that it is, fill in the word–whack?, bordering on criminal?, insane?, disgusting? or sinful!–to say that these (multiple incidents over @ 4 yrs. with an 11 to 15 year old) were NOT pedophilia. This is just ONE of the details that NEEDS to be repented of from these pastors. And yeah, I am angry, and I should be. Any decent, moral, common-sense person should be!
Two wrongs don’t make a right? Sorry, Josh (from his last Fam. Mtg. and someone above) This statement is literally a puerile view of morality. There IS a TIME to stand up against injustice even if someone’s “feelings” get hurt. (not advocating violence here, just real consequences.) This very public blog is one of those consequences.
I totally agree, SGMNOT! I just do not want to leave anyone room to “throw the baby out with the bathwater”, and try justify in any way the horrible ways they DID respond due to an inaccuracy stated here. It is so typical of an SGM elder to try to find one iota misunderstood, and claim everything to be all falsehoods-I did not want to leave any room on that one.
ex- thank you for clarifying.
That term was used long ago in some thead about this. I’d have to say with sgmnot that your clarification (nobody ever accused your daughter, just tried to describe the rapist in terms of more normal adult male lust,as opposed to the perversion it truly was) while very gracious on your part, still leaves me wanting to practice some castration techniques after I :barf:
5years said,
I actually think that this is one of the most troubling bits from “exCLCer’s” story – that any pastor would even think along these lines! How utterly crazy and uninformed does a guy have to be, that he would say such a thing…that he would attempt to “normalize” a disgusting perversion like that???? Seriously?????
If CLC is going to apologize for anything, they should apologize for this. And repent of whatever faulty underlying assumptions and beliefs led this guy to say such a thing in the first place. Why was the pastor advocating for “Mr. A”? Why would the pastor not grasp that a grown man messing with a young girl who is his adopted daughter has nothing to do with ordinary lust?
This is one of the scariest things about SGM – that these uninformed pastors, with these highly inappropriate and twisted ideas, would have been unleashed to “speak into” people’s lives. And to provide authoritative counsel to them.
Up until just recently, CJ Mahaney was still trolling the country, preaching his Happiest Place On Earth sermon about how it is the member’s responsibility to make his pastor’s job a “joy.” (Interestingly enough, the Knoxville church removed the sound file of the July 2009 version I transcribed.) It is the member’s job to “be a joy to pastor.” It is the member’s job to submit to and obey his pastor.
Yes, all pastors sin and all pastors miss the mark sometimes. But in “normal” churches, people are not commanded to obey and submit to fallible men as they have been taught in SGM churches.
Until SGM acknowledges how wrong this kind of teaching is, and turns from it, and expressly “un-teaches” it, I’d say they’re not genuinely addressing the real problems.
Leo, true dat.
Jonathan Edwards was kicked out of his own church. Sam Wesley, John Wesley’s father had his house set on fire, twice, by his own parishioners. John Wesley couldn’t even preach in his father’s church. I guess those people hadn’t heard the scriptural principal of the congregation making a pastor’s life a joy. Uhhhh, lessee, what scripture is that?? I can’t seem to find it.
Kris, #69
Hidey hole – lolololol!!!
I know that I am bringing this up late, but here is my comment on people being upset that the molester in ExClcer’s family is being identified due to what ExCLCer and other’s have posted including what ExClcer’s Mom has posted. If I understand this correctly Adams (the perpetrator) did the following:
– Repeatedly molested his young child (wasn’t a one time thing). This inflicted a lot of emotional trauma on this one child not to mention problems for the other children and wife.
– Despite being a molester fought ExCLCer’s Mom for custody of their children.
– Didn’t provide any support to ExClcer’s Mom or children until court mandated.
– Actions caused the children to be placed in the County’s foster child program for a period of time.
– Hasn’t sought forgiveness/reconciled with either the children in his family (some his own and others step children) nor with ExClcer’s Mom? (not fully sure on this one)
Thus despite this list of actions we have a group of people more concerned with what affect this past sin being brought up has had on the perpetrator and not on the molested child and rest of the victims including the other children and ExClcer’s Mom. It sure doesn’t look the like perpetrator cared about anyone but himself. It sure makes you wonder why so many are only concerned about forgiveness toward the perpetrator.
ExClcer’s Mom please correct me if I have some of this wrong.
@Steve240, Yes, you are correct in all of it. He did continue to pay the mortgage and bills before he went to prison (about a year). That was the reason used why I should ask the judge to keep him from going to prison.
Yes, their focus was off the whole time, and I even would confront them on it often. I never was submissive enough for any of them.
Breeezey (and everyone), with regard to (hypothetically) beating up a molester–
I can relate to your feelings of anger and outrage. I have daughters. (I’ve been a young girl!) But beating someone up will not deal with the inner issues, the root cause of the desire to molest. Eventually the bruises and the fear would fade. It won’t bring about real change.
HowDee YaAll,
I likez dis one:
“Picture someone running you over with a truck and then apologizing to an audience of bystanders…as you lay there in a ditch…”
-Well, I’ll be… them there clergy elite types in SGM perpetrating deze nefarious shenanigans might wanna watch out fer dat proverbial loose brick, n’est-ce pas?
Hahahahahahahahaha
Sopy 8)
Brick after Brick
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY2s6zT1zRE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Glad to see you again, Sopy!
ExClcer’s Mom
Thanks for the clarification. It is good that he at least did pay the mortgage and bills before going to prison.
It is really sad that you indicated your ex husband hasn’t sought reconciliation including asking forgiveness and trying to make some type of restitution for what he did and the affect of his sin. Those people trying to defend Adams should make note of this. Had there been an attempt at reconciliation by Adams then people might have a point about not bringing up what Adams did in the past.
How can CLC let this person be a member when he hasn’t sought forgiveness and reconciliation for his past sins? Of course there are a lot of leaders that are in this same position so it shouldn’t be surprising.
That reminds me, how during my marriage and years at CLC, “the process” was always, “If someone offends you, and asks for forgiveness, you must forgive them, then it is “justified = just as if I’d never sinned”. If you bring it up, or try to discuss why it happened, or how to avoid it happening again, or even to express how it affected you, well that meant you were the one in sin and full of bitterness-the one who can’t let the past go. My ex-husband was big on that-I guess we can all understand why. Sounds like that it the same stuff they still teach.
Seems to me that the professional SGMers should have been more than willing to step up to the plate on Mom’s bills rather than push to have scum like that avoid prison. Afterall, that would be the biblical way to do it. In the Book of Acts (wonder if the professionals have ever read that one)the curch fund was used to take care of those in need. What an inovative idea! Actually using the church fund for real needs instead of feeding the monster (another name for the insatiable institution). Oops, I can already see why that would be considered not feasible.
:scratch
Ex. #97: Isn’t it true that Mr. A. did have a meeting with your daughter and the pastors to apologize? Was she a minor at the time? And was she forced by them or “guilted” into going by (the pastors/Mr. A)?
Apparently, you consider this NOT an acceptable reconciliation? Did you think it was just some faked formality to look good? Just wanted to clarify….
Ellie,
ditto!
i’ze gotz ma new wings, all a shiny, and in full trim…
And clear skyz…
where’s Red!?!
a, rat, tat, tat, tat, tat…
Zoooooooooom! (grin)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isropADndMc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
(dag gum? Where’s ma compass? ah, dare it tizzz…now if I can juzzz hold it steady…one moe second…)
Hahahahahahahaha
Sopy 8)
p.s. Youz prayers… gave contort in time O’ need, thanx! :wink: