Questions
September 27, 2011 in Sovereign Grace Ministries
I was thinking it might be interesting for us to share the questions that we would like to ask the leaders of Sovereign Grace Ministries. To start us off, here are a few that have come up in the comments lately:
- Why have SGM leaders accused Brent Detwiler of “slander”? If Brent has shared untrue information – for instance, if C.J. Mahaney did not actually write all the emails that Brent quotes in his documents – why not just demonstrate that Brent’s info is false, thereby validating the charges of “slander”?
. - Why is C.J. Mahaney attending a non-SGM church these days? Since submission and obedience to one’s pastor is such a hallmark of the SGM way of doing church, who is C.J. Mahaney’s pastor? Is it still Josh Harris, or has C.J. moved on to Mark Dever? If C.J. now considers Mark Dever his pastor, why is that? Is there no man within the Sovereign Grace family of churches who could have filled that role for C.J. and worked with C.J. on his submission and obedience? If not, why not? Why would C.J. feel the need to seek a pastor outside of the organization he is still being paid to lead?
. - What comprises a quiet “season of reflection”? Is preaching at a prominent church on a Sunday morning part of such a season?
. - Is it true that Covenant Life Church is getting ready to make some sort of decision in the next week or two about its continuing relationship with Sovereign Grace Ministries? Are CLC’s members having any input into this process? Who gets to make this decision? If such a thing were to happen, how would all the shared facilities and assets get divvied up?
What are your questions?
© 2011, Kris. All rights reserved.
A couple of weeks ago, we learned that CJ was having some sort of conflict with Josh Harris, a conflict complicated enough that there were meetings and advisors being brought in, along with some sort of list CJ had compiled of Josh’s shortcomings.
It occurred to me, as I was looking at CJ’s 2009 version of his Happiest Place sermon again, that CJ has actually painted himself into something of a corner, if he really does have grievances against Josh Harris, who supposedly was CJ’s pastor.
In that sermon, CJ says,
A few moments later, in that same sermon, CJ repeats himself yet again. He says:
Later, he suggests that it is a church member’s duty to make sure that his or her pastor is “happy.” CJ says,
Really, in light of CJ’s Happiest Place sermon, how can he possibly have complaints about Josh Harris’ job performance? According to CJ’s own teaching, if CJ is unhappy with Josh Harris, the fault can only be CJ’s. If CJ were being a “joy to pastor,” and if CJ were responding properly to Josh’s leadership, then Josh would be “effective.” If CJ thinks Josh is ineffective, it’s got to be CJ’s fault.
Since only Brian and Mike pulled out of CLC can we assume the rest of the pastors are united with Josh?
We don’t hear from Gary on anything, presumably bc he is a SGM pastor and not CLC but his wife is CJ’s sister and he is a long time pastor of CLC so I am curious to know his position on things?
Does CLC pulling out of SGM have any effect on CLS?
Oh, and CJ, how do you spell hypocrite? :Thinking:
I still have had no answer to these questions posted in my response to Greg S.and the CLC Pastors (https://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=2773) related to the known sex abuse cases mishandled in CLC:
Instead of calling you privately, I would like to ask some pointed questions publically, that summarize what I believe are the crux of the pastoral mishandling of our cases. And I would like to encourage you, or better yet JL and GR, to post responses on this blog. I believe that this will help in the healing process of all those hurt and abused in the midst of these sex abuse cases:
1. What were the reasons that CLC pastors felt they had the authority and right to interject themselves into the legal system, as it dealt with the crime of child sex abuse, and to try to negate or minimize the appropriate sentencing for those crimes by asking victims’ parents to delay or not call the police and to ask parents’ of victims to advocate for the perpetrators by letters or statements asking for leniency? (This was, particularly egregious, in regards to exCLCer’s stepfather’s crime of child molestation of her sister of approximately 4 years!).
2. When JL counseled us “don’t call the police”, after he ALREADY had directly pastored another family in the midst of a sex abuse case and DEFINITELY knew that the law required us to do so, AND that it would be in the best interest of our daughter and other possible victims, why did he do that and has he been censored/disciplined through his employers, SRC/SGM?
3. Why did JL instruct us to tell no one, not even our Care Group, close family, and even close friends living with us? Did they consider the privacy of the perpetrator and his family as more important than the crisis that we were going through? Or was the secrecy because they were more concerned with the reputation of CLC than our emotional and psychological needs? In both cases, why wasn’t the embarrassment and shame of others knowing about these crimes part of the NATURAL CONSEQUENCES of committing such a crime?
4. Were there any direct funds or donations from SGM or CLC paid for the legal fees of either perpetrator or their family during these court cases? And if so, will you make financial restitution to the victims and their families, in particular, to the children of exCLCer’s family for any psychological counseling that they have needed from the sexual molestation or the errors in judgment by the pastors handling these cases?
5. What was the length of time between the discovery of sin, which was deemed serious enough to excommunicate a woman with 9 children and no viable source of income, whose child had recently been a victim of such a horrible, longstanding sexual molestation by a church member, and the time in which she was asked to leave? Why was there not a LONG season of longsuffering for this woman and her children? And was there any impropriety in the decision to excommunicate her, because she had dared to not agree to your counsel or so that the perp’s identity would be protected?
6. Why was the ENTIRE church of approximately 1000 members at that time, a church supposedly built upon the practicing the “One Anothers” of scripture, not allowed the opportunity to serve and care for all these children rather than having them placed in a often-flawed, secular foster system? Thus, multiplying many times over the re-victimization of these children and destroying in the process any faith or trust that some of them had in God?!
7. Why did JL and GR not answer the confrontive letters and emails that exCLCer sent them each year on the anniversary date of her family being thrown out of the church? How could they turn a deaf ear to her cries for justice, year after year, until finally this past summer when a male member of CLC inquired about her case? She has more heart and passion than many who call themselves Christians!!
8. After reading our case stories and the resulting outrage online, do you as a pastoral team understand clearly what child molestation is, so that this crime will not be minimized by calling it “teenage experimentation”, or in exCLCer’s case “attraction of the woman that she was becoming” or some other excuse. And will you create a written, zero-tolerance policy that will specifically support victims and their families with follow-up counseling, as needed, AND clearly protect other possible victims in the church family as the primary goals VS. emphasizing the care, legal advocacy, and privacy of the perpetrators?
1. From your perspective are we still “Reformed Charismatic” or just Reformed with semi contemporary worship? What is your definition of charismatic?
2. Do you guys truly not know the answers to many of the questions people ask or do you just feel it would be harmful to the reputation of SGM to answer them? Questions like – if Brent’s documents are true and this has really been going on for so long why didn’t CJ take a break before this point?
3. Why do you think that the type of man “called to ministry” in SGM is so often proud and egotistical? I used to think all “men of power” or “men in authority” just had to have that proud kind of demeanor, but I have met MANY pastors now who DONT have all the answers, who are kind and loving, who are open and honest, and who are truly humble – not “I’m a worm” humble.
4. Why did we stop having a vision to be a people of destiny (I agreed with getting rid of the name, but the vision was a good one), when did we stop seeing ourselves as a “chosen race, a royal priesthood, a people for His own posession” and instead started viewing ourselves as “better than we deserve”, “worms”, and “the worst sinner i know”??
Those are some on the forefront of MY mind…
Coming to you from out in left field…
Someone a few weeks ago posted a link for a youtube clip to point out CJ’s awkwardness when he is with the other RBDs in T4G’08. Another poster mentioned seeing CJ with some of these guys in person, and that it was painfully awkward. I decided to spend a little time seriously considering this.
Kris has said that CJ is very charismatic in his public speaking, but when you take away the visual, what he says is kind of kooky. So I decided to watch the youtube link on mute, to find out what one is left with visually if you have no idea what they are actually saying. Also, I don’t really know much about these RBDs-only knew who was who because their names came across the screen. Sorry if this is long. Feel free to skip to the next post if you are not interested.
1. Attire-Ligon and Al are in suits and ties. Mark is semi-respectable in a button-down shirt and slacks.
CJ is in jeans and a casual shirt. Right away I am wondering if CJ missed the memo on what appropriate attire was. Or is he trying to communicate that he is not stodgy, but young and hip? Something interesting-the color scheme. Both suits and casual clothes are dark-Mark stands out in pink and beige.
2. Ligon and Al use normal hand motions, mostly in their laps. CJ uses large motions at all times. Mark uses fairly large motions as well. When all laugh, CJ exaggerates his merriment in a physical way through rocking and knee/leg slapping. An interesting oddity-CJ rocks throughout the video. It looks really strange a few times when CJ starts to rock, and on the other side of the screen Mark begins a head nod (2:03/2:07, 3:07/3:11)
3. The men are positioned in a semi-circle-CJ on the left, then Ligon, then Al, and Mark is right across from CJ. CJ and Ligon spend most of the discussion leaning forward to hear what the other guys say, while the other two are leaning back in their chairs. Reminds me of students straining to hear ever word of the looked-up-to masters.
4. I found it interested that the other men rarely look at CJ when they are speaking. Ligon looks to his left, away from CJ. Mark and Al look to their right, but usually not across at CJ. Mark is the only one that does look directly at CJ when speaking. (Possibly Al does too, but it isn’t obvious due to camera angle)
5. It’s fascinating to note what happens when CJ has the floor. The first, second, and third time, the camera catches Al looking to Mark (0:58, 1:39, 2:43)
Then at 4:10, 4:29,and 5:06 CJ seems to interject into what Mark is saying. Once or twice, CJ seems to be playing the role of jester.
Final impressions-For some reason, Mark and Al remind me of Ciaphas and Annas. Ligon reminds me of a junior partner in a law firm-part of the team but not in the inner circle. Mark appears to be CJ’s handler.
Just my observations…
Where is there humility, grace, and God’s sovereignty in the exclusivity expressed in SGM “local churches” — i.e., how can you justify a culture where one’s acceptance must be earned through the adaptation of a contrived language and lifestyle, the consumption of only SGM goods (books, music, etc.), all invented by, and for the convenience and benefit of, a couple of guys who think that after millenia of Christendom their “movement” is the answer?
And, perhaps a little bit Q.E.D, but, where does scripture indicate that God has ordained a “movement” to be the Bride of Christ? The word “movement” has very strong connotations — almost universally self-serving, selfish, and humanist. A “movement” is about achievement.
How does one actually “advance the Gospel” when it carries so much extra baggage? How do you explain to someone that “the Gospel” actually includes all the cultural elements mentioned above and that any other other practices and resources are forbidden? The Gospel is a fairly certain and concise idea — how can you actually justify trying to convince someone that what Christ offers is insufficient absent all the SGM culture boxes being checked, too?
When I came to Pastor’s College graduation, why was the name of Jesus mentioned only twice and, at that, only after (I timed it) nearly 50 minutes of non-stop self-congratulation, leadership praising each other and worshiping one another, and boasting of every one’s OWN achievement? Who is this all about, who is it all for? Where was God? How do you think He felt about all of it?
Another question I’ve had, and it’s also connected to CJ’s (and, I think, that of his sons-in-law) sojourn over to Capitol Hill Baptist –
Has CJ’s view of the more dramatic gifts of the Spirit (like speaking in tongues) changed? From the SBC’s website comes this question and answer:
“A very small minority” strikes me as a pretty lukewarm endorsement of speaking in tongues. How does CJ feel about that now?
I wish I was better at putting my thoughts in words :bang
These are questions from my personal experiance of nine years in a SGM church.
– Why is the first reaction to someone leaving an SGM church that they were obviously not saved ?
– Why are there two sets of rules reguarding gossip, slander and confronting sin? One for the Pastors and one for the sheep.
– Why are SGM Pastors not formally schooled ?
#6-Kraftig said The word “movement” has very strong connotations — almost universally self-serving, selfish, and humanist. A “movement” is about achievement.
Me-When I hear the word movement, I usually think of something I need to flush.
Kris, absolutely tremendous post and question. While there have been many “keepers” here on this site, this one could be a “huge keeper.” This post could generation a few hundred questions. Maybe 500 questions? A 1000 questions. Questions of weight and merit such as the first three posters already.
Kris, you posted four good ones. SGMnot, posted eight good points. Brokenhearted raised four more questions. That’s sixteen in three posts. I hope this matures and ripens. I’d like to print a copy once the thread is done.
For the record, here’s another one.
1. What “specific grounds” does CJ have for bringing AoR into a reconciliation process with Joshua Harris? One that reportedly will take months to resolve?
2. How does one “rebut” Detwiler on this point. (1) CJ wrote glowing emails in early Aug 2004 on having “more character” and ability than himself. CJ wants him leading the team, the agenda and the meetings. CJ says of Detwiler, “Of all those around me, you are on the short list of the most trustest.” (2) 20 Aug 2004 develops and Leadership Team largely agrees there are problems with CJ on accountability, e.g. Harvey says that “CJ is not walking in the light.” (3) 90 days later, 19 Nov 2004, Detwiler gets dressed down in Charlotte airport. CJ says to Shank about Detwiler and Harvey, “I don’t thrust their motives and illustrations.” (4) 120 days later (after 20 Aug 2004), early Jan 2005, CJ says in front of team leaders, “I don’t trust you.” (5) 7 months after 20 Aug 2004, CJ writes a devastating annual eval on Detwiler (early April 2005) after Kauflin/Maresco dress down Detwiler 30 Mar 2005. What is Detwiler getting wrong here? CLC or SGM leaders, it there a factual and documentary trail or evidence that rebuts the Detwiler narrative–going from the “most trusted” to a man without much character–within 7 months? (Also, while writing “Humility” in 2004 and getting it published in 2005.)
1. What authority does SGM have over CLC and what is the Biblical basis for that authority?
2. Based upon the material in Brent’s documents, do you now believe that CJ blatantly lied or engaged in a pattern of deceit (e.g., regarding the 7 year plan)? Does CJ view this as decit?
3. Do you believe that deception, by itself, is a reason for disqualification for leadership?
4. Do you think it is appropriate for CJ to make the two confessions that he has written to Brent available for us to read?
5. Do you think that it is appropriate for CJ to either refute or acknowledge the specific allegations in Brent’s documents? How specific should confession be?
Some questions for CJ and Harvey:
1. Mr. Harvey, you wrote an email dated 27 Mar 2009 to the leadership team of Grace Community Church. Will you authenticate the email–to ensure it’s your’s and not altered–as reported in “Response Regarding Friendship,” p.106? If authenticated, in the email you reserved any and all “character questions” about Detwiler to that local team (not the SGM board), but retained the right, stated the right, and were “obligated” to address “doctrine and practices” held by Detwiler. What were those “doctrines and practices” that placed Detwiler outside SGM?
Mr. Harvey, there will be many more questions.
2. Mr. Mahaney, will you authenticate your two emails “Response Regarding Friendship,” p.116-117? These are two emails by you within two days. The first, 14 Jan 2010, 3: 17 PM: “…I know we hold disagreements over doctrine and practice that separate us from serving together. The second, 15 Jan 2010, 12:22 PM: “Well, perhaps we don’t have any differences in doctrine or practice!” Mr. Mahaney, can you explain the the difference between your two emails? Further, what were these doctrinal differences?
Mr. Mahaney, there will be more questions also.
Is CJ still the president of Covenant Life Church, inc?
Is CJ Mahaney still the President of Sovereign Grace Ministries?
What was the purpose of making CLS a separate business after 20+ years of operation as part of CLC?
What are all the following really about, theology, or property and control? I know that Larry left in 1997, but all these changes in regard to ownership and governance coincide with a lot of external heat. Kind of like a corporate circling of the wagons. As soon as the ink dries, CJ can’t be bothered with the Tomczaks. It just looks wonky to me.
Kris, #1 could be a post all by itself, really.
Your wisdom further reveals the prideful hypocrisy that I believe is the sinful root that must be exposed so that God’s people can be set free in SG.
I should clarify my last comment….I was referring to your entire #1 comment regarding CJ’s teaching on happy pastors, etc.
What is Steve Shank up to these days?
How did he get away with ‘shanking’ San Diego and other places/pastors?
Is he hanging onto to his position by virtue of his silence in the public scandal over C.J.?
At least he has the good sense to be quiet!
Personally, I think all the old guard needs to go. Maybe they started out ‘following the cloud’, but they long since set up a very well-appointed campsite in a convenient oasis with the largest, ritziest tents for themselves.
I only have one question:
Does the fact that Steve Whitacre is now transitioning out of his pastoral role at Ffx and either planting a church with SGM or going back to seminary have anything to do with the fact that his BIL’s and FIL seem to be circling the SGM wagons and backing away from their respective local churches? He adamantly says it does not… but the timing is so bad and seems so utterly curious.
A few more questions for CJ, Harvey and the current SGM board.
The blog moderator, Kris, posted this at: https://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=1134&cp=all#comments The date is 21 Sept 2009. The context is a sermon you, CJ, gave in Knoxville, entitled “Happiest Place on Earth.” The questions will follow the post.
“…Cornerstone Church of Knoxville. Cornerstone is currently in the midst of putting a rule in place that requires all members – longtime, short-term, new, doesn’t matter – to sign a new document, a membership covenant, and some folks there have significant questions and concerns about the version that they are being asked to sign. It is a rather negative document, focusing solely on matters of church discipline, with a clause all about how a member who does come under discipline cannot then rescind his membership but must endure the discipline process. There’s even a provision where members must acknowledge that they are aware that the Knoxville church may elect to track down the pastors at whatever church they attempt to move on to after leaving SGM, and tell their new pastors all about why they’re under church discipline at Knoxville.”
Mr. Mahaney:
1. Would you or Mr. Harvey post on the internet “each and every membership covenant” that exists in SGM churches. In an age of internet, this would be easy. It would serve the nation to know you better, especially since you’ve marketted yourselves, your speechs, CDs, a Pastors’ College, conferences, books and more. A directive from above–from SGM leaders–could have this on the internet within 90 days. Anything less, you may infer, justifies questions about openness and transparency.
2. We especially would like to see Knoxville’s specific statement (though not excluding the other 70-100 church statements). If the above report is true about Knoxville, about fleeing members and even fleeing pastors, why have you fled CLC?
3. SGM has made it clear that you are not “under discipline.” Also, Andy, your communications director at the SGM website indicated that you’re not under discipline at CLC. If not under discipline at SGM or CLC, why did you leave CLC?
4. Also, would you explain or comment on the “info-gathering” techniques of confessors or penitents in/within CGs which, after being sent to Pastors, has returned back to/at/upon them? Mr. Mahaney, were you, Harvey, Detwiler, Shank, Maresco, and Kauflin aware of these reports or “info-collection” efforts? If so, why? If not, why not? Furthermore, do you view unordained laymen as Pastors (CGs) covered by the clergy-penitent statutes?
THE DOCUMENTS
1. Regardless of Brent Detwiler’s motives in publishing his documents, the propriety of his sharing the documents with the broader SGM pastoral community, or the motivations he may rightly or wrongly impute in his commentary and analysis, isn’t it inherently misleading to deem them a single witness (often in conjunction with discussing 1 Tim. 5:19 considerations)? Isn’t it true that the sheer volume of primary source materials from many different authors makes the document self-authenticating as to many of the factual matters set forth therein?
2. Isn’t it true that the statements made by Josh Harris and other CLC pastors affirming the general authenticity of the primary source materials contained in the Detwiler document function to further authenticate the validity of the charges set forth therein in the sense that they cannot rightly be written off as per se slanderous, frivolous, or otherwise failing to attain the biblical level of merit for consideration by full church?
3. Don’t CJ’s public confessions, both written and oral, validate much of the content of the Detwiler documents? How can the documents be slanderous when CJ himself has confessed, albeit generically, to at least some of the sinful patterns that the documents work to identify and substantiate? Again, if CJ has acknowledged wronging Larry Tomzack, how was it slanderous to make this sin known to the SGM leadership community when CJ had gone over a decade without making public amends for his gross misrepresentation of the events surrounding Larry’s departure from the movement.
4. Most of the primary source material set forth in the Detwiler documents is was generated by the paid staff of either SGM or CLC acting in their paid ministerial capacity. Given that the issues at hand largely revolve around the appropriateness of actions taken in such official, paid ministerial capacity, why is it inappropriate for the members of SGM and CLC to review such material? Isn’t it true that to suggest that reviewing these materials is participating in gossip or entertaining slander is a functional denial of the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer and the authority of the church as a congregational whole (See especially 1 Cor. 6)?
CJ’s POST-LEAVE CONDUCT
1. If CJ cannot attend CLC due to self-identified temptations to speak divisively of the current leadership, how can he remain a member in good standing? Why isn’t church discipline for non-attendance appropriate?
2. If CJ cannot meet with CLC’s senior pastor or the CLC pastoral team without a third party mediator present, how can CLC’s leadership in good conscience continue to fund the organization that willingly continues to pay him a generous leadership salary? Isn’t it true that CLC members are effectively subsidizing CJ’s refusal to speak openly with those who are, presumably, still his pastors?
3. If CJ cannot attend CLC without saying disparaging things about Josh and/or others, how is he in anyway fit to continue as President of SGM? Isn’t it appropriate at this juncture, given his conduct, for CLC and its leaders demand that SGM either request CJ’s resignation or fire him?
4. Isn’t it true that CJ’s actions in bringing a formal complaint against Josh’s leadership at the outset of mediation further validate the allegations set forth in the Detwiler documents?
FOR CHBC
1. You often enjoy the ministry of guest speakers. Can you identify another time in your history where you invited a guest speaker to occupy your Sunday morning pulpit who, at the time of the invitation extended, was unwilling to sit down and discuss matters with his own pastor without a third-party mediator present and who had voluntarily ceased attending his home congregation?
2. Before extending the invitation to CJ to preach, did you weigh the perceived benefit of having CJ address you against the inevitable harm caused to CLC as a church body given the ongoing and public nature of the dispute between CJ and his CLC church family? Did you fail to see that the explicit endorsement of the pulpit invitation was a direct and public slap in the face to Josh Harris?
Great post Kris!
So many great questions….
We’re working on our list……..
I would like to know:
1. Who knew about the blackmailing/cocercion that Mahaney did towards Tomczak and when?
2. If other leaders knew about it earlier (than when the documents were published) why were they pushing to hide this sin?
3. Shouldn’t these others leaders also have some type of disciplinary action taken against them since they were conspiring to hide Mahaney’s sin? Shouldn’t they also be stepping down?
My question? Why I am still in a SGM church?
https://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=2877&cp=all, Taylor’s Story.
Mr. Mahaney, Harvey and the SGM Board, do you intend to turn the SGM Pastor’s involved–in the above story–over to law enforcement officials as “accessories after the fact” to a felony?
How do you explain this Pastoral incompetence? What training have your men had in professional counseling? Relatedly, what training does Mr. Harris have? What training does Mr. Harvey have in professional counseling? Or, what training and credentials do you have?
Why does a 10-year old have to live with “locks on her bedroom door” for several years?
Will you provide money for counseling services to the family? Restitution for emotional and pscyhological damages? Will you pay the attorney fees for the family to be represented?
After the news broke, why did you direct this Taylor-family to a “new church plant? A coverup?
Mr. Mahaney, you can run to the furthest end of the globe, but you can’t hide. There are questions that will be mounting.
CJ, You have believed the best, and stood by Brent D for many years-(even when you knew of his overbearing attitude with the sheep) until he attempted to call you into the same standards that you made everyone in SGM adhere to.
What gives you the right to run off when your circumstances and situation gets uncomfortable? When the rest of us had questions and concerns we were told to like it or lump it and stop causing dissention and discord. Or that we would be more comfortable somewhere else.
I guess you are more comfortable somewhere else.
Does that mean you are unfaithful to and rebellious to your local church? That is what a lot of us were told when we left PDI/SGM.
I would like further info and clarification about several points brought up here:
— In the main post, Kris, your fourth question implies that you have heard rumors that CLC is on the brink of deciding whether to remain part of SGM or not. I would like to know whether you have heard that information from different sources, and I’d especially like to know whether those sources are in a position to know this or are simply wishing or speculating.
That would be a bit awkward for Pastor’s College, big events, etc. My understanding is that PC students attend CLC and that SGM hosts big events in the CLC facilities.
— In #13, Unassimilated, you posted documents and a timeline. It sounds like you are pointing out that C.J. Mahaney reorganized everything to erase Larry Tomczak and the PDI name, and recast the organization(s) with a more Reformed name and to make himself president of the whole ball of wax. Correct?
This raises two points — well, an observation and a speculation.
The observation is that it is not at all clear where the lines of authority and jurisdiction between CLC and SGM are drawn, at least not to me without further legal knowledge. From the history, practice, and common sense of things, SGM should be just a para-church division or adjunct of CLC, an “integrated auxiliary” (http://www.irs.gov/charities/churches/article/0,,id=155750,00.html) with CLC the lead institution and SGM the spin-off. Yet, clearly, it has not functioned that way at least since Mahaney passed the CLC baton to Harris and ‘stepped up’ to preside over SGM at large.
The observation is that Mahaney seems to harden his heart and bear grudges against those who cross him. Tomczak presses Mahaney to repent and reconcile. Mahaney gets busy with a bunch of legal incorporation that erases Tomczak and names Mahaney President of all. Tomczak sends tapes of Mahaney’s coercion of him to seven leaders he respects(and, presumably, Mahaney once respected, as well) and relays their displeasure to Mahaney with another call to repent. Mahaney feels pressured to act, so decides to apologize to the son in question, but is apparently still so put out by Tomczak’s insubordination years before that Mahaney does not feel the need to apologize to him and does not want even to be in the same room with him, but he intends simply to copy Tomczak on the apology to the son.
If Mahaney was showing this deceptive, protect-and-spin, high-handed, hardhearted behavior back then, everyone who was on the SGM Board who didn’t call him on it, but rather publicly lauded him, should step down at once, in my opinion.
— In #17, wondering, you say that Mahaney’s third son-in-law, Steve Whitacre, is also stepping out of pastoral ministry at Fairfax now. Can you clarify or can anyone else confirm?
Apparently Whitacre denies that his move has anything to do with unhappiness over how his father-in-law has been treated or over any secret plans being made. Still, as Wondering points out, it is getting curiouser and curiouser.
Three son-in-laws pursuing further training, if that is indeed what is happening, might imply intentions to abandon SGM for a denomination that requires more schooling than the SGM Pastor’s College of its ministers.
A few questions for each of you–Detwiler, Mahaney, Harvey, P. Ennis, Shank, Pursell and Harris.
Background: Detwiler reports that Mahaney switched to a “Third Wave” understanding of baptism of the Holy Spirit at a Team Retreat, Herndon, VA, 23-25 Jan 2007. “Response Regarding Fellowship,” p. 119-121. It’s news to Detwiler. He asked about it. Mahaney responded 25 Jan 2007, 8:49 AM, “This change has taken place only recently [without interaction with the apostolic team] when I was able to study the topic and related topics thoroughly again.
1. Mr. Mahaney, can you authenticate this email? It also sounds like you were not physically present at this meeting when the dates are evaluated. Was this sent by you from somewhere else?
2. What is “Third Wave” theology to you?
3. If you changed this view, did you alone change the view or were other SGM team members working with you on this?
4. Six months later, 18-21 Jun 2007, Detwiler claims you, Harvey and Shank were questioning Brent’s “charismatic theology” in light of this shift to a “Third Wave” understanding.
Mr. Mahaney, there are a lot of smart folks in this forum. You may end up with a 1000 good questions that inquirers have a right and need to know. Best regards in your “season of deliberation.”
DPV #20: love it.
Off the top of my head:
1) Is it better to believe the best or believe the truth when the best and the truth are different?
2) Are leaders of SGM and their children ever treated differently in discipline/discipleship/pastoral counseling issues than ordinary members? If yes, is it right that that’s true: if no, are the people who think based on their personal experience that the answer is yes all lying?
3) If an SGM pastor knows that someone convicted of child sexual abuse attends his church, is the pastor under any obligation to inform other attendees of this?
4) Same as 3) but where the pastor knows that someone might have been convicted of child sexual abuse had the police been informed, although in fact they weren’t so there was no legal conviction.
5) Is SGM willing to tolerate pastors who have an MDiv degree or some stronger background in Greek and Hebrew than the Pastor’s College and who, based on that background, define slander quite differently from the way SGM defines it?
DPV,
You asked about membership covenants. Not sure if you are looking for more specifics but Covenant Life Church has quite a bit in their Starting Point Handbook available online, there is specific membership and disciplinary agreements in that.
Just click on the New button in the left hand corner, Then click on the sixth option and you will find the handbook available in pdf.
Why does CLC allow teaching IF YOU DON’T TITHE, YOU ARE SINNING?
Malachi verse used in CLC 01/22/2006 Affluenza (giving) series, part 3 of 3, towards end of sermon (impling if you are not tithing, you are stealing (i.e. sinning) and Grant Layman (CLC executive pastor) QUOTED from Randy Alcorn’s, Money, Possessions and Eternity, “…and as you continue to tithe, you’ll sense GOD’S APPROVAL.” :trainwreck (see aforementioned book, Chapter 12, also note Profile of Christians Who ROB God also in same book).
Teaching that not tithing the 10% is SIN, is such legalistic SLOP, considering our Lord Jesus Christ ended the tithe(es!), circumcision, and a whole lot more on the CROSS ( Eph 2:14-18, Colossians 2:8-15!!! ) :clap .
Instead of teaching GRACE GIVING, and what Jesus clearly did on the cross, many SGM pastors are guilty of: lying, stealing and defrauding those for whom Christ died. Worse :barf: , you pass it on to the next generation (note: generational examples of tithing given in sermon). Impling sin on those for whom Christ died, past, present and future who don’t meet up with your legalistic, pharisee type requirements. And, worse, not representing the Lord Jesus Christ to the congregations correctly.
I rebuked a SGM San Diego pastor (Craig Cabiness, back in 2001/2002, who, at the time, reported to Steve Shank), this was before Craig and many others moved to TX. Through MUCHO travail, Criag (to his credit) finally changed his teaching on this subject, which was part of the “Discovering Grace” class for new prospective members (I see he continued the teaching change in his Frisco TX church, which is good, but would be better, if he explained that tithing ended because of WHO JESUS IS and what Jesus did on the cross! :word ). Interestingly enough, Craig and Steve are both part of the SGM BOARD nowadaze. The aforementioned book, was also promoted on the SGM website in those daze, too. :beat
For those of you who fell into the doctrine that not tithing is sinning, I hope the TRUTH of who Jesus is and what he did on the cross will FREE YOU of such BONDAGE. :lol: Time for SGM accountability on a larger scale…time to lay the ax to the root!
CJ, Dave Harvey & the SGM Board,
1) If a pastor or leader is publically dismissed and then there is news of reconciliation should not the reconciliation and terms thereof be public knowledge? Shouldn’t there be a public acknowledgement of those terms and not just a vague… we are reconciled? I am thinking initially of Larry Tomczak where the reconciliation terms are secret. With what was said from pulpits and also released in writing to all of SGM and all the world concerning LT’s character be retracted PUBLICALLY? (to the extent of the reconciliation) If repentance is appropriate should it not be PUBLIC? I believe CJ has apologized in confidence and behind closed doors to at least one pastor who was maligned publically. Currently there is a public (and private) rift between CJ and Josh Harris.
To all SGM Pastors
2) Same for question for you but include families and the sexual abused children and those who were publically shamed or ostracized in the church communities. This includes unjustified dismissals of fellow pastors and leaders.
Wow. So many excellent questions!
Welcome to our new commenters.
Unassimilated, your #13 could be its own post. When laid out all in one place like that, those facts – the timeline, the various entities being incorporated, and the dealings with Larry T – pretty much speak for themselves. Or, paint such a clear picture that to “believe the best” can’t help but strain credibility.
Argus asked,
I have heard this information from 4 different sources. At least one of those people would appear to be in a position to have “insider” knowledge. But I don’t have definitive answers yet. That’s why I’m wondering if there’s truth to the rumor. SGM-the-corporation seems so enmeshed with CLC-the-“local”-church that it’s hard to imagine how they would separate the two.
to all that question…………BRAVO
so many questions……….so little time
N.S.L.B.
As I read this wonderful compilation of very valuable, astute, and meaningful questions I couldn’t help but consider how overwhelming these questions may be to answer all at once, and how much easier it would have been to simply deal with these issues appropriately as they arose in the first place. (It is said how hindsight is always 20/20) I would like to encourage the involved pastors now, however, that, like a cavity, or a toothache, does not ‘go away’ until it is drilled and cleaned by a professional, this situation is not going to ‘disappear’ either. Therefore it would be best to simply deal with it all now,even as hard as it seems to have become.These questions demand answers, and it will only get harder, like a cavity becoming a root canal, the longer you wait.
Thanks, Kris, for your response in #31.
Buckle up, everyone. This may be a bumpy ride!
I haven’t posted in a loooong time so mine will be short… why is it that CLC/SGM supports NO missionaries in foreign mission fields? If the organization does… who are they, where are they, can they be contacted by the general congregation so if SGM/CLC implodes they will not be left hanging with no support?
Breeezey,
Sgm announced several years ago, in several sunday teachings (at least CFC in Phila did) that they did not support missionaries in favor of planting “local churches” as they believe scripture teaches… To my knowledge, even before that, they never supported missionaries… and i attended an sgm church for over 20 years…
The only thing now that resembles missions, is when, in a foreign country, SGM “adopts” a small church and conforms it the SGM way…. which they have done several times in the recent past… (pardon the quotation marks… i’m never sure these days…)
For the record, i think NT scripture does support this model…
Re: Patti @#128, thanks for the lead..now have CLC Handbook downloaded and there will be questions about that also.
Re: New Questioner @#19, most astute. Also, although not asking, you sound like a lawyer. In any case, home run questions. Also, sounds like you have some insider-info.
Re: Argus @#34, concur. This is going to be a bumpy ride. I think others will continue to build a pile of questions begging for answers.
Question: The CLC Handbook discusses conflict resolution in an appendix with a membership-contract.
1. Is AoR the “superior court” for CLC and unresolved issues? Functionally, a higher presbytery?
2. How many SGM-AoR cases have been handled by AoR over the years? We know of Mahaney’s dispute with CLC. We know of the independent panel being overseen by AoR. However, how many cases have been adjudicated by AoR for SGM?
3. Relatedly, how much money has been spent–overall–funding these AoR cases for resolution?
4. Speaking of AoR, are they as an organization qualified to address the psychiatric dimension? That is, will there be an ordered pyschiatric evaluation of Mahaney to resolve determinations of histrionic personality and/or narcissistic personality disturances with clinical expressions across the spectrum? For this scribe, this is a growing concern–on a clinical level rather popular one. Does AoR have the qualifications to evaluate the psycho-social (sociology of organization) relationship between CJ (SGM) and observed behaviours in the organization? More largely, what are the specific qualifications of the AoR investigators? Lawyers? Theologians? Historians? Sociologists? Psychologists?
5. Kris, you really launched a potent question and post. As Argus said, “Buckle up!”
A coupla simple q’s:
1. Why do you keep people’s secret files secret? What’s the big secret?
2. If someone doesn’t appreciate you keeping such personal files about them, will you give them their file without keeping a copy, and without ANY repercussions and without starting a new file?
3. CJ – did you get paid for your sermon last weekend?
1. Following up on Remnant @#38, will SGM put the full “accounting record” on internet? An accounting record that would pass muster with a competent CPA and forensic accountant? Will CLC do the same?
2. Will SGM “publicly” post IRS-990 forms on Mahaney, Harvey, Harris and other board members, said to include, but not limited to: salaries, honorariums, book royalties, health insurance or other benefits? In other words, to counter a legimate rebuttal that an average Maryland family makes $70,000 per year and an average American family earns $50,000 per year while you, CJ, make $250,000 per year. CJ, will you counter the legitimate objection that has been offered to this?
3. Dr. Dever, will you come to this website and, openly, directly, forthrightly, answer some of these questions, given your support for CJ? Also, Dr. Dever, are you qualified to assess histrionic and/or personality disorder? Your PhD is from Cambridge in Puritan literature. What are you qualifications for reviewing the wider set of questions offered here?
Why the HEii don’t you report pedophiles to law enforcement???????
Hello glad i am out… 10/4, Thank you for your response. Over the course of church history there have been teams sent out, church plants, and individuals who went on their own just because God sent them.
FYI… this is an area that has bothered me about SGM for years. Back in 2003 I was attending CLC but was not a member. (I had left ten years before but was returning.) My car broke down on a Saturday afternoon so I walked to a neighborhood church that Sunday morning. That Sunday the pastor tells the story of a missionary (Coptic Christian) they were supporting in Lebanon (I think) who had his church and home burned down by the radical muslims. He and his family were personally attacked. One of his kids were hospitalized and (I think) his wife was killed. They were taking a special offering to help this missionary. I asked for some information to take to CLC because I was sure they would help this brother in Christ in obvious need. Answer… no. They said because they didn’t know him or his doctrine they would not help. You read stories like this in Voice of the Martyrs all the time of believers in foreign lands that endure persecution and sometimes death. Yet SGM wastes $$$ on CJ’s issues. This is my pet peeve.
Here is another question:
There seems to be a lot of nepotism in SGM. For example two of CJ’s brother in laws (was 3) are employed within SGM and all of Mahaney’s son in laws are or were pastors. There is similar nepotism with other pastors’ sons being selected to become pastors.
Were these people selected due to their being the most qualified or were they selected due to family influence? What is being done to insure that these are the most qualified (if they are related) in the future?
Also didn’t Mahaney’s son in laws resigning from CLC show the problems with having so much nepotism? In light of this, is SGM reconsidering how healthy it is to have so many people related working within SGM?
Steve said,
Steve, funny you mention this. It was actually something that occurred to me today, too. I was thinking along the lines of, if the employment of the Mahaney sons-in-law had nothing to do with their relationship (by marriage) to CJ, then logically their continued employment ought to have nothing to do with CJ. Right?
The fact that the two guys at CLC saw fit to quit (and send their nastygrams out to the congregation) because of CJ’s present issues shows that the family relationship proved to have an effect on how these guys were able to do their jobs. I would think that this scenario is a prime example of why nepotism is not a good idea.
Maybe another question should be:
Is SGM or the individual SGM churches working on putting together a formal written policy that would address issues of nepotism?
Also, closely connect to that would be this:
Is SGM going to formalize the admission process to the Pastors College? In the past, it has appeared that being a current SGM pastor’s son was a huge piece of what helped a young man be recognized as leadership material. Who gets to decide who is admitted into the PC? What are the qualifications for admission? What about the cost? Why does it cost something like $75k to send a guy and his family to attend the PC for 9 months?
Breeezy, this is an area about SGM that also bothered me for years…. along w/ not having regular altar calls…
what sold me on the sgm model is this, although this is not what they taught, but what i inferred from their teaching (little fuzzy, it was so long ago):
If you send a white american into the jungles of africa, you have a guy (family) who does not speak the language, has no knowledge of local customs, and has no relationships with anyone in the culture….
But, if there is a christian family (however they got there) who is a part of the culture, does know folks there, and speaks the language.. and just needs help and support to build a church, well, they are the best candidates to plant a church…..
Sgm, as i recall, was doing some of this in india, or over there somewhere, and it makes sense to me…
However, i do not think that the SGM way is the only way, but if a local body feels supported by them, and helped… then good (hopefully) for the locals….
As for them refusing to help some missionary you told them about, well, it is a big world… and i am thinking just now how Jesus told his disciples, who had just witnessed that a woman wasted one years salary of perfume…. The poor will always be with us…. in other words, “there is more where that came from…”
I do really really disagree w/ the SGM model for church plants in the U.S. in most cases (in upper middle class areas w/ plenty of other good churches) – it does seem so economically purposed to me…. but in the few cases of their involvement in other cultures, i think it is good…
To revise and extend on Steve240 @#42.
1. “Humility” (Portland, OR: Multnomah Press) was published in 2005. Does “humility” involve saying, “Ego sum ignoramus et semper ignorabo?” CJ, you can translate the Latin I trust. I’m sure, or am I, that you have skills in Greek, Hebrew, Latin and Aramaic? For others, the Latin phrase means, “I am an ignorant man and will always will be an ignorant man.” It’s a good phrase for all. Under such a “humble” claim, would not humility suggest that you, CJ, should have said, “I am quite an ignoramus. I need to get a BA and at least 90 hours for an MDiv, as starter degrees?” Would humility, CJ, direct you to get educated before daring to speak–an implicit acknowledgement of your humble ignorance and quest for continuuing remedies?
2. CJ, why did you not insist and advocate that Mr. Harris get educated? “Be humble” and submit to the process of learning? Doesn’t that show “humility?” CJ, as a mentor, may it be suggested that you failed this young man, Mr. Harris?
3. Extending on Steve240’s comment about potential nepotism, what about the “educational levels” of your two sons-in-laws? Are they educated? Is this arrogance or humility to not get educated? How much money were the sons-in-laws making at CLC? Do CLC-members know? CJ, the questions won’t be going away. Some weighty questions have been levied here. Legitimate ones. Why are the two SILs, allegedly, going for further education, one on-line and the other at Dr. Dever’s church? How were they–the SILs–appointed to CLC Eldership in the first place? Did CLC-members choose them or were they appointed?
So many great questions.
#19 New Questioner posts excellent questions for Mark Dever/CHBC
I know that most of us would love to hear his answers.
Here’s my question for C.J.
C.J., I’m out of work right now and finding it’s hard to find employment. I was thinking about how lucrative preaching is, especially when a cult is created. Could you give me some tips on how I can form a cult like yours and make a killing financially? I’d also love to be adored as a celebrity preacher. Right now I think the shaved head look and beard stuff is really hip, but I’m trying to think of some other visuals I could use to attract people to me. You’ve got the hyper manic hand waving and jumping around down really good, so I won’t steal your thunder on that. But do you have any other ideas of ways I can set myself apart with some charisma? I’m a female so if I shave my head, do you think that might click with people like it has for you and Josh?
Thanks for sharing your expertise. I’ve been a strong fan for about, uh, two minutes. I saw your YouTube clip showing off your office and Spurgeon books. Wow, I was so impressed, but mostly by your baseball glove. Man, you are really the athlete! I hope there’s room at Dever’s church for all your books and stuff because you’re loaded with what it takes. Dever is lucky to have you.
Wishing you the best a crooked life has to offer,
Patricia
Kris and Guy, I hope this thread remains open for days and days and days, a collection point for inquiries that may rise to 1000s of questions. There may well be 200-300 so far? The questions raised thus far–throughout–are tremendous. A “powerful post” by you two, especially after the quibble-operations yesterday. I would hope Jim of SGM Refuge might levy his inquiries to SGM, CLC, and relevant leaders as well. Mole, Irv, and others. This post is a “keeper.” Let a few 1000 questions be raised.
Since this post is about questions, I would like to resubmit an earlier post relevant to this discussion………sorry for the weird formatting, don’t know how to fix it.
1.Does SGM agree that a local body of Believers constitutes a local expression of the Body of Jesus Christ?
2.If yes, as the Body of Christ, does each local church have any authority whatsoever in any of its affairs?
3.Are the local churches within SGM independent and autonomous from SGM?
4.Does SGM have authority over any of the SGM churches?
5.If no, why do the leaders of SGM speak and act contrary to this? (see: http://www.kingswayaudio.com/?p=440 – (Sept. 6, 2010 at KWCC)
6.Did you (SGM board) inform CLC of how you intend to handle CJ’s case or did you ask them? Did you ask the church/members of CLC, since they are ultimately responsible to judge these charges? Matthew 18: 15-19
7.Do you believe pastors are subject to the adjudication process found in Matthew 18: 15-19?
8.Do the members of all the SGM churches understand the reason the SGM board believes that CJ is not accountable to the church (CLC) is because SGM doctrine asserts, the church has no responsibility or authority in any matter in the church whatsoever? Therefore, what the members of any SGM church think is irrelevant and inconsequential.
9.Does SGM support Scripture’s admonition that those who constitute the local church have, inherent in their membership, capable and spiritually mature members able to make judgments and determinations for the sake of the church/their members? I Cor. 6: 1-5
10.Does SGM, and in particular the board, see that they have effectively removed themselves from being accountable to the churches/members they purport to serve?
11.Does SGM see that they have insulated themselves from these churches/members by creating and maintaining the polity structure they have?
12.Do SGM pastors see that they have made themselves accountable to each other (other pastors) but not to members of the churches they purport to “care for”?
13.Do SGM pastors see that they have created a polity structure that propagates and protects their pastors from being accountable to the members of each local church where they “serve”, that they have insulated themselves from the voice and will of the people?
14.Do the pastors of SGM see that when you tell the people you “really want to hear what they have to say” but do not intend to allow corresponding weight to attend the people’s voice, you are merely patronizing the members of the church.
15.Do the members of SGM churches understand that they do not have the prerogative or authority to trump any decision made by the elders, including who will lead and pastor you as a church?
16.Does SGM see the discrepancy/contradiction/absurdity in acknowledging that each local church is an expression of the Body of Jesus Christ yet, have negated the authority, responsibility, and power of the Body of Jesus Christ and have gutted it of the possibility of making any significant and/or substantive determinations for itself?
17.Does SGM see that they have systematically and intentionally perpetuated a polity system that promotes a separatist and elitetist persuasion? In essence, that divisiveness is inherent in their polity because it separates the members from those who lead?
18.Does SGM understand that CJ is a member of CLC and accountable to CLC and not to SGM?
19.Do the SGM board members understand they are not a church but that CLC is?
20.Does SGM see how they have undermined and marginalized the members of CLC and, in essence, have communicated that of the 3000 plus members in CLC, those outside the membership of CLC are the only ones capable of judging and adjudicating these matters in a God honoring fashion?
21.Do SGM, CLC, and everyone else see that this undermines the biblical responsibility of the local church to adjudicate and monitor its own affairs and is an insult to the spiritual maturity and capability of the members of CLC? (1 Cor. 6:1-5)
22.Do all the members of CLC see that in conceding to the process the SGM board has imposed upon CLC, that CLC (collective members) have abdicated their biblical responsibility and authority as the Body of Christ? (Matthew 18:15-19)
23.Do all the members of CLC see that CJ is subject to Matthew 18: 15-19, just like any other member of the Body of Christ? He is not special, that first and foremost he is a brother, subject to any and all members of the church to which he belongs?
24.Does everyone see that Peace Maker Ministries, A of R, or any other outside organization should not subvert the authority and responsibility of the local church to adjudicate its own affairs? Rather, they should be in the business of supporting biblical processes like those found in Matthew 18: 15-19?
25.Does everyone realize that at the end of the day, SGM is determined not to relinquish their conviction, that they have sole and exclusive authority over the church (members) and the church (members) will never have any authority over them (board , pastors/elders)?
26.Does everyone see that SGM has constructed a polity where pastors will never be subjected to the will of the people and that CJ’s situation is a perfect example of this assertion?
27.Do the members of CLC see, that if you continue to tolerate this course of action, you are effectively enabling these men to behave like this, and until CLC/members say, “Enough!”, these unbiblical behaviors will continue to be perpetuated to your own harm and that of many others?
28.Do the members of SGM churches realize that one option you have as the Body of Christ is to decide, as a church, you don’t want to have anything to do with SGM, secede from them, reform what needs to be reformed , and continue on as a more “spiritually healthy expression of the Body of Christ” in your community.
29.Does anyone see that at the bottom of this …….. at the root of this is the insistence, by SGM and by extension the elders, that they must maintain control and authority over the members in their churches at any cost? Indeed, they are willing to sacrifice entire churches in order to maintain a firm grip on what they believe is rightfully theirs (authority and control unto themselves and over the people of God).
30.Does everyone see that God could be after something……that He has been saying to SGM for a long time,
“You are desperately holding onto something that is not yours to have? It is authority (Matthew 20: 25-28). Authority in the church, necessary to monitor and adjudicate its own affairs, ultimately rests with the Body of Jesus Christ not with any single individual, group, organization, or board (Matthew 18:15-19). The “keys” belong to the church/all the members collectively, because the church is the presence, power and ministry of Jesus Christ in the earth today.” Therefore, I believe the Lord continues to say to SGM leaders, pastors, and elders, “Give Me what is in your hand or continue to receive My rebuke and correction.”
Donald – With respects to salary and other income, shouldn’t they to be tied to job description, sphere and depth of responsibilities and the measure of fruit with regards to the goals (or expectation of goals) of God and the church.
CJ spoke for years about the need to be professionals in our field and how we should be equated to the corporate world with regards to out time on the clock and our responsibility . Personally from a corporate or for profit corporation standpoint I understand risk, reward, profit, fiduciary responsibility and answering to stockholders but I am not sure there is the same understanding by CJ and SGM with regards to their organizations based on how they determine standards for remuneration, bonus and benefits (or the lack standards)
Donald – in light of your comments and questions I would ask the following:
1 – Is there a standard by which CJ and the board is paid commiserate or related to the product and consumer satisfaction? The end product is not money or how many books they sell but it is the fruit of their labor that has produced measurable fruit in the lives of believers they love and serve. Do they have anything in place to evaluate the fruit they bear by their ministry and/or efforts? If they are paid according to their marketing and sales skills rather than true fruit that remains, it is fine to set their remuneration accordingly just be honest with those they serve. You know, just be honest with their customers and/or clients.
1a – If the remuneration is determined on their marketing and sales figures rather than fruit then there needs to be a delineation between travel and expenses that are determined by care for pastors and churches and what is marketing and sales. It does get complicated but it also seems that the only ones in charge of accountability of the funds are determined by those who actually receive and oversee the money. Then it appears to be out of line when the church and world sees the salary, bonuses and benefits received by ‘pastors’ without a reconciling and/or explanation. (I would say the same concerning Osteen, Warren and others)
1c – The definition of serving and loving the flock should be clear. There is all the talk of how privileged you are to serve but what the heck does it mean? This would help delineate between marketing/sales and actual shepherd responsibilities. You use the word serve when you teach but at the same time you sell books and whatnot which is marketing and sales. What is what? They can’t be the same. Do you, SGM, have these broken out so those whom you serve and love can understand what you are doing and why you are doing what you are doing?
2 – Because your organizations are 501c3 (not for profit corporations) you are obligated to post your financials publicly every year like other 501c3s involved in significant revenue (over $25K according the IRS). I say this because SGM is no longer a church but a 501c3 not for profit selling services, books and tapes. There is a difference but I wonder if your hearers are aware.
3 – Who is responsible for your corporate fiduciary responsibility to the members of the church, the IRS and an outside board of directors/advisors? When Steve S. received an accusation against me (by one witness)for financial impropriety, they sent Bo and Dick to go through all the church finances from when we took the first offering to then the present. (total clean bill of health btw) Who are the people that keep SGM financially responsible when there are accusations concerning financial impropriety? If my information is correct CJ has run off Dick W, Bo, Bill G and others who tried to keep them accountable. CJ’s immature response to Brent on wanting funds to cover family travel expenses when he tried to keep CJ accountable leads me to believe there is a possibility of financial improprieties. Who is the outside group to keeps you financial accountability?
Great blog Kris!!! I hope somebody out there is reading besides just the bitter angry bloggers :D