Brent’s Latest, A Question About The Pastor Assignment Process, And One Member’s Message To The SGM Board
October 28, 2011 in Sovereign Grace Ministries
Brent Detwiler put up a new post on his blog yesterday. In it, he shared a lengthy string of emails he had exchanged with a number of Sovereign Grace Ministries pastors. I believe Mr. Detwiler wanted to illustrate many of these pastors’ unfair and occasionally insulting responses to his request that they all write to the SGM board and ask that the board reconsiders entering into an adjudication process with Brent.
(Almost lost in the shuffle of the childish put-downs was the apparent development that after asking repeatedly for certain other conditions for the adjudication with the Ambassadors of Reconciliation and being turned down, Brent has now requested that he be permitted to accept the SGM board’s original terms for adjudication…but now the SGM board won’t agree to the terms that they had initially offered.)
In my opinion, those email exchanges make no one look good. Brent seems clueless for seeking support from guys who have everything to lose and nothing to gain in going to bat for him. And some of these other pastors are showing themselves to be patronizing and mean-spirited in their replies.
While I can sympathize with Brent’s dogged determination to seek some vindication, it’s starting to seem like an unfortunate side show that distracts from the solid facts buried in his documents.
The SGM board and the Ambassadors of Reconciliation ought to do everybody a favor and agree to the adjudication process they’d originally offered Brent. If it was good enough for them a month or two ago, I can’t imagine why it’s not good enough now, especially if Brent is now willing to go with their terms.
——————————-
On another topic, last night a reader asked a very good question about the pastor selection/assignment process. “Sick With Worry” wrote,
This is a little off topic, but I am curious to know how pastors are chosen, moved around, or relocated. I am not referring to the “Shankings”, but the moves conducted from church to church. This may not be a big deal or any different than some other denominations.
I responded,
I’m not sure if anyone here really knows precisely how these decisions are made.
We know there is basically no input from the membership. If I had to make a semi-educated guess, based upon observing the Shankings and other de-giftings, it would appear that hirings and firings happen at the discretion of the regional apostles (or whatever title they go by now), along with some (and occasionally a LOT of) input from SGM Headquarters.
The thing about this is, how SGM does these things would really make no difference at all, if the procedures and the REAL relationship between individual churches and Headquarters were fully and freely openly disclosed. If SGM wants to model their polity after the Catholic church, or some combination of a Catholic structure and the way that pastor-owned-and-operated Charismatic churches run things, that’s their business. I think a good case can be made for various types of church governance.
The problem, though, arises in that SGM Corporate is NOT forthcoming and clear about its governing relationship with the local franchises. Check out how SGM describes itself on the SGM website:
We are a family of churches passionate about advancing the Great Commission through church planting. In support of that mission we facilitate partnerships among pastors, operate a Pastors College, host events, and publish books, music, and other resources.
There’s absolutely no HINT of the fact that SGM Corporate has made decisions (or “strong suggestions”) about hirings and firings on the local level. For instance, I’ve heard through several sources now that Steve Whitacre will likely be placed as senior pastor at New Covenant Church, where he preached a week or two ago. It would appear as though this church (which is becoming part of SGM through a “replant” of an existing church) is essentially being told that this is happening. Or that it has been strongly suggested to them that they call Mr. Whitacre…”suggested” in such a way where – since they are clearly desiring to be part of SGM – they really cannot choose any other course of action.
Like everything else that is dysfunctional with SGM, the problems arise with the secrecy, the lack of clarity, and the downright deception that we can see in the likes of SGM’s vague mission statement that gives us NO CLUE about how they weigh in on decisions at the local level.
On this same topic, reader “Persona” had this to say:
One humorous aside to this topic is something I noticed on the New Covenant (Arnold) website. They say that there is a ‘pastoral selection team’ formed of three lay persons and guess what? – two of the three appear to be women!
I had to chuckle as I imagined how John Loftness and CJ were going to navigate that one. They have to somehow convince the panel that it is really their decision to appoint Steve Whitacre to the much-coveted position of senior pastor of their church. Somehow, I have the feeling, there will be a few ruffled feathers in that church, during the process of making it into a genuine SG church.
I think they have no idea what they’re getting themselves into. Here is a snippet from a Q&A that came out of New Covenant’s July 4 family meeting:
Q: Will there still be ongoing Pastoral Search Team (PST) efforts at this time?
A: We do not want to have parallel efforts at this time, so the role of the PST has changed. They will still be responsible for leading the prayer effort and coordinating with the congregation; however, we are not searching outside of SGM for a pastor.
Q: Will we interview the person John Loftness selects?
A: Yes, we feel that we should be able to interview this person and be an integral part of the selection process. SGM and NCC want to find the person who has the right skills as well as being a good “fit.”
Q: Are we currently interviewing anyone?
A: Not outside of SGM.
Q: So SGM is picking a pastor?
A: This is a joint effort. We will ensure that the person presented by SGM is indeed a good fit for us.
Elsewhere in the family meeting notes, they describe their current relationship with SGM as akin to being in a courtship – in other words, they are committed to SGM but nothing has been made official yet.
Anyone want to predict what would happen to that “courtship” if the Pastoral Search Team were to be anything but a rubber stamp for John Loftness’ pick for senior pastor?
——————————-
Finally, reader “Michael” shared with us in a comment that he had sent the following to the Sovereign Grace Ministries board:
I was in a Sovereign Grace church for over 20 years, long enough to remember back when the ministry was called People of Destiny International. I chose to leave that church this year for reasons involving differences in doctrine and vision, months before I heard anything about C.J. Mahaney having charges brought against him, but I must say that the present crisis SGM now faces solidifies my decision to leave.
You have hurt people tremendously over the years by the way that you have conducted yourselves, and you persist in trying to manage this ministry of churches as some sort of business. While C.J. Mahaney has definitely led SGM in ways that are hurtful, and he has sinned in ways that a man who speaks so much about humility should have no problem retiring over, this is not merely about C.J. He is only a part of a broken, dysfunctional system. Your vision is not to spread the gospel, but to spread your own gospel–a culture that is part and parcel with faith in the Savior, a functional synergism.
What is most disturbing to me is how dismissive the SGM board has been not merely of Brent Detwiler, but of the hundreds of people who have left SGM because of how they’ve been hurt by leaders within it and by the system in general. Do you understand how demeaning it is to hear that your testimony will be “evaluated” rather than listened to? Do you understand that people who say they have been wounded by you are not necessarily going to be prepared to come to you graciously? Do you understand that you appear to be more interested in protecting respective shepherds than protecting their flocks?
I would challenge you to read through Luke 19:37-40, and meditate on that if you truly desire to cultivate humility. I would also challenge you to lay down your preconceptions of what “your” ministry is about: so many churches have already walked through these sorts of issues across history, and your desire to be unique is poisoning the way that you could be building up the Church. Consider that this is a time to reevaluate your building’s foundation, lest you try to continue to build and find it all crashing down on you.
© 2011, Kris. All rights reserved.
I don’t know what AoR will decide, but it looks like some of the big dogs have already decided.
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2011/02/09/t4g-plenary-speakers-in-2012/
http://t4g.org/about/
I hope they don’t all die with the house of King Saul like Jonathan did.
Ugh.
5 Years,
I think this is an old post on the Gospel Coalition’s site. The comments on the post were from February.
I just have this gut feeling that the main verdict about CJ’s fitness for these various ministries has already been in for a long time. Almost no matter what, I’m going to predict that CJ’s speaking schedule is going to remain exactly the same.
I assume you have seen this: http://www.sovereigngraceministries.org/blogs/sgm/post/Evaluating-Brent-Detwilere28099s-allegations.aspx
One thing I do hope is that when the smoke clears after the AoR/Brent ruckus, SGM Corporate will work on making some clarifying statements about the role they clearly play in having input into major decisions on the “local church” level.
I wonder how the people of the still-not-SGM church, New Covenant, feel about having Steve Whitacre sent their way (if indeed that happens, as it supposedly is set to happen).
Yeah, I saw the most recent SGM blog post after I put up this one. Unless I missed something, it didn’t seem like Dave Harvey shared much that was news.
The fact that Steve Whitacre fled the Fairfax church means their pastors were no longer on the same page as CJ. They might have been 99% in agreement with him but, that isn’t enough for CJ. He wants 100%.
By the questions they ask, it seems like the congregation of New Covenant has some inkling that things might change but I don’t think they have any sense for how much. Steve is 100% committed to following CJ and he will be his ‘voice’ in Arnold.
Here is more from NCC about their relationship with SGM:
And here’s the rest of the Q&A from July 4:
I find it incredible that NCC believes they will be an “autonomous, local church” and yet are having a pastor essentially foisted on them. Even if they are thrilled about Steve Whitacre, he is not someone they found for themselves. And as I’ve said, I think it would be very intriguing to see what would happen to their “courtship” with SGM if they were to out-and-out refuse Steve Whitacre.
They would then have a much more realistic sense of just how “autonomous” they will actually be as part of the SGM organization.
FWIW…definitely April 2012.
Perhaps THIS NCC should review SGM/PDI’s LAST marriage to an NCC (North Coast Church, Cleveland) and see how that worked out?
Been reading, first time posting here but Ive posted a tiny bit of my history over at TWW.
Short story: was in, was not perfect, was out. Still not perfect but have the liberty to admit it. Way more freedom when you are able to be authentic.
Observations:
Danny points out what we have observed. Brent continues to ignore his part in the building of this empire and the way in which it has functioned.
Curt seems to be SGM’s version of Driscoll. I do like that he doesn’t use the worn out SGM-ese lingo…but it’s only original in the SGM world, not the Church in general.
Brent has lost touch with reality. He needed to move on ages ago and shake the dust off his feet. His identity was based upon who he was in SGM, now it’s wrapped up in SGM’s rejection of him. Neither of these entail who he is in Christ.
Kris #8 — Way down at the bottom of your post, the last line, in answer to a question from someone at NCC, it says ‘…and (we will have) access to all their (SGM) resources.’ It should be added, ‘and they will have access to ours’.
The person answering the questions has total control of the answers to give hope to the people without revealing the whole truth of how they will give up their congregational-ness.(new word) Reminds of a character seen in a TV show “Breaking Bad” where the head bad guy answers questions without any hesitation and always a smile to go with it, like he’s completely on your side. I know of a SGM pastor who just fits that role, and may have even been at NCC some time (not sure of that).
Read Brent’s latest and could not believe that Curt tried to sell (or give away) his ‘music’ before saying anything else. Don’t know whether to call ‘rap’ music or not. It’s really not music, just a lot of (fast) talking. Or maybe I’m just very, very old.
5years — I like the GUEST speakers for the upcoming T4G. I am unfamiliar with only David Platt. DeYoung and Anyabwile each have a blog at The Gospel Coalition. I first heard Matt Chandler at one of Piper’s Pastor’s Conferences in ’09. I found him to be a little arrogant, but have warmed to him quite a bit. I listen to his sermon each week when it becomes available online. He’s at The Village Church in Texas. Anyabwile has had some good posts lately about Celebrity Pastors. Also some good comments. I usually ‘attend’ Piper’s conferences and T4G by online streaming.
I thank God for technology. I would be lost without what I thought I didn’t need or want.
There are various schools of rap; Curt ascribes to one of them. I first heard rap on the radio in 1978 so it is not a very new art form. It seems more like poetry than music and I’m glad to encourage poetry in any form.
Curt is a sincere artist but, I don’t know how effective he is as a pastor. I have yet to hear him preach but, I know he is more evangelistic than most other SGM leaders.
Curt took John Loftness’ son under his wing, when he was a teen so maybe that is how he endeared himself to John.
I thought Curt’s apology to Brent, which appeared near the end of the quoted emails in Brent’s post, was interesting:
What struck me as particularly noteworthy was this part:
Mr. Allen sandwiches the statement that he’s “not going to get all sovereign grace languaged out” between two lines that are pure SGMese. Yes, he apologizes, which is nice. But what does he apologize for? Making the offensive statements about how only homeless losers would listen to what Brent has to say?
No.
Instead, he apologizes for tempting Brent with his humor.
How is that even an apology?
Really, by saying that he tempted Brent with his humor, what he’s actually conveying is the idea that he caused Brent to subsequently sin. (Otherwise, why be sorry for “tempting” someone?)
And what does it even mean, to “tempt” someone with “humor”?
Whatever else Mr. Allen may be – nice guy, talented rapper, whatever – he’s obviously just as self-deceived as anyone else if he doesn’t think he speaks SGMese and yet still frames up an apology around “tempting someone with his humor.”
Very intriguing development. I find that the board’s path forward simultaneously is the most logical, given the circumstances, the most advantageous to them, and the most disconcerting for families that have been hurt along the way.
Most logical:
Brent has created an environment that allows the board to presume he will not be satisfied no matter the outcome. Hence his concerns can be farmed out to AOR for advice and counsel.
Most advantageous:
Meanwhile the evaluation of CJ can be handled in-house, by a jury of “peers.” This doesn’t mean CJ will get a pass, however of the potential evaluation options (AOR, CLC, SGM, or Federal Court), SGM probably has the highest likelihood of the lowest penalty.
Most disconcerting:
Meanwhile, the grievances of hurt families will be heard in an AOR process that is no longer center-stage in this circus.
Now for my non-expert opinion and analysis:
I think Brent saw his issue gaining traction and support and went into over-drive. I suspect his peers, who know his M.O., knew he would put the pedal to the metal, and put just enough lubricant in the path for him to spin out of control.
Current standings:
1. Brent is side-lined
2. AOR is side-tracked
3. Solid Rock is on the fast track
4. Covenant Life is on the last track
5. CJ has the inside track
6. Hurt families are still on the outside
7. Outside observers (I suspect) are beside themselves
Kris,
For what It’s worth, when I first read Curt’s comment, I thought he was attempting humor. It is a common stereotype, at least in the “hood”, that Christian organizations providing food to homeless people more often than not require that attendees listen to a pitch before getting a plate. When it’s your first and last meal of the day, enduring the shpill is a small price to pay.
Kris #17, You are correct in your analysis of the phrase that includes the idea that Curt ‘tempted’ Brent to sin.
Gary Ricucci used to use the same idea of ‘tempting’ you when he apologized, too. It is a way for him to be absolved and also get you to apologize for your percentage.
Maybe Curt learned that strategy from Gary or maybe, John Loftness; they were BFFs back in the day.
You gotta give them points for clever craftsmanship of the language. And they get credit for sounding very humble.
Sounding humble is an essential component of the image of a SGM pastor.
P. S. In the “hood” you would get “props” for the excellent play on words for saying that Curt “sandwiched” his statements. It would be perceived as a sly reference to the comedic theme that homeless people putting up with anything to get some food.
P.P.S. The fact that he added a plug for his new song underscored (to this reader anyway) the light-hearted nature of his response. But, in this day and age, such efforts require an lol or smiley.
P.P.P.S. I suspect even the hungriest homeless person would go on a fast rather than have to read Brent’s docs before eating. :spin
Unreformed #19 I didn’t get the idea that Curt was being all that humorous with his comments. I guess sometimes people say some pretty serious things as they joke around. But to me, he sounded more like he was scolding or exhorting Brent.
Anyway, if he was joking, maybe he could apologize for bad timing too. Brent doesn’t seem to be in the right frame of mind for jokes these days.
He seems to be quite beside himself, needing prayer more than humor and understanding more than lectures.
Please help me understand why some people see these issues as if Brent was the only person who is upset and that he should just get over it.
I know that abusers will typically blame the victim rather than take responsibility for their actions but I assume these are my brothers and sisters in the Lord and so they have Christ in them, too, and the Holy Spirit and His fruit in their lives, right?
Long-suffering? How could CJ decide to leave his own church? How could Josh let him and not speak up? CJ is suppose to obey his pastor, right? Aren’t they both doing exactly the opposite of what they wrote books about?
70 x 7, right? Why isn’t Dave bending over backwards to embrace Brent in love and why not let him oversee the entire process? Who better? Why would they hire someone who doesn’t even respond to Brent’s concerns?
Is that how anybody actually treats their family?
I don’t understand how we can all read the same documents and yet end up with such different opinions about what the most loving and God-honoring response should be.
I feel like a Curt apologist (though, I barely know him), so hopefully this will be my last comment.
When I first read Brent’s reply, I was hot. I did not appreciate him referring to the only large, dark complexion, former gang member in their ranks (that I know of) as a thug. There is probably only one word that would have been more offensive. Yes, THAT word. From my view, it was an unwarranted response to a very clever (and obvious) joke.
Then it occurred to me that (1) Brent likely didn’t have the background needed to appreciate the humor; (2) even if he did have the background, he’s in a no nonsense mood right now because; (3) he was trying to put together a posse of honest men who would go after the SGM villains.
My guess is Curt realized his ill-placed, ill-timed humor provoked Brent’s (what could be construed as sinful) response. In other words, he tempted Brent with his humor. :beat
Persona (#22),
we were posting at the same time (though my post took much longer to formulate).
I concur. IF it was a joke, as I assumed, the timing was waaaaaaaay off. I know several professional comedians. They will confirm that timing is everything. Also, It is critical that your material is suited to your audience.
Martha said:
“I don’t understand how we can all read the same documents and yet end up with such different opinions about what the most loving and God-honoring response should be.”
We’re all being transformed and renewed and are at different stages in the process. At one point, Peter thought mobs should be addressed with a sword (in the garden). Later he addressed the mob with a sermon (Day of Pentecost). His first response almost derailed salvation. His second led to the salvation of thousands.
Good morning Guy,
Can you make a “creepy” symbol, so that I can use it next to CJ, Steve Harvey or Danny Jones comments…..
(being that it is Halloween and all….and that these men creep alot of us out)
Well, I predicted months ago that there would be no real change for CJ or SGM, and I’m not the only one of course. Yes, a few SGM churches may leave, and even CLC under Josh (who, for all his weaknesses, at least appears to NOT be so like-minded as his Calvanista friends (a term I’m borrowing from Dee and Deb over at Wartburg…I’d call them modern day Pharisees, but I’m not sure that’s helpful for dialog)). In the end, say what you want about Brent, his documents have merit. It has always been about love of reputation and I would probably add money, too, as we all know the love of money…, though, who can say for sure about the money part. It just seems to fit.
And this love of reputation is not only CJ, obviously. In the modern Calvanista movement, there are a lot of very rich, very famous “Pastors”, and the temptation to maintain the status quo of adoration and wealth must certainly be unbearable to many. I’m afraid it is now up to the remnant; those who truly fear and love and follow God without regard to wealth, success, or rewards in this life, to continue to bring the message of God’s love to the lost. It has always been the remnant…the lowly people of God, who’ve taken up the banner of the love of God. To Him be all the glory…may we be willing to lose everything to show the care and salvation of God to the hurting people of our world, without loading them with baggage so heavy that they collapse upon the hill before reaching the cross.
I wonder if NCC’s Rosa Snowden and Deb Rinker know that as soon as they are officially SGM, they will get the boot from any leadership/board/important/church governing/decision making position just because they are not male?
@Argo#28: I personally think that this will play out over the next however many months. SGM churches will divide themselves among those who are SGM-loyal and those who are not as much. Actions on the part of churches are starting to speak for where they stand in their loyalty. CLC doesn’t really need SGM but there are family ties and history, as SGM rose out of CLC’s congregation. The reason that they are not outright leaving immediately in many of these churches is because it is hard to say goodbye to people who you have grown up with. Still, as more and more people are speaking up about what has happened in the past, some people are asking for change. CJ will still have SGM but I don’t think it will be anywhere near as big as it used to be.
unreformed, that was NOT humor, it was MEAN. He was saying, “Shut up and sit down. NO ONE wants to hear from you.” He may have been using humor to say it, but that is exactly what he was saying, nonetheless. It doesn’t matter how much humor you use to say something mean, it’s still mean. He was still being 100% dismissive of Brent. Worse yet, he started it off with a “hug”? Talk about screwy.
As far as the race thing goes, I had no idea Curt was black. I thought he was another white punk. Who cares? He was still being a bully and using his humor to humiliate Brent and dismiss him. I ain’t no Brent fan in the least. But why not respond with a, “No thank you”? Rather than a cruel barrage? Why the hate? He was a bully. Don’t care what color his skin is. Bully is bully.
Stunned
When I read Brent’s post, my head was spinning. Brent had started to annoy me awhile ago, with his insistence on things being a certain way and presenting so many details. I agree with Kris that, at this point, none of the people on his post look good at all, neither are they looking godly or loving. It makes me think back to my most recent church split/collapse, where the people who walked away early without slandering anyone ended up looking the most loving and godly.
On another note, I looked at the girl talk blog and it made me kind of ill. It’s amazing that Carolyn can present this as unwarranted gossip and slander. Come on – I could see C.J.’s mile-high pride and narcissism when I was there in the 80’s and 90’s. He is not following any of the counsel that he’s given others in the past. I understand it’s tough, but please take the log out of your own eye.
I have a number of thoughts I’d like to share about the topics at hand, but since I have grading to do, I’ll just have to mention one thing. The comments from the other SGM pastors aside, when it comes to Brent’s most recent posting, the only thing I could think of was this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpraJYnbVtE.
http://www.boundless.org/2005/articles/a0001467.cfm
An interesting article by Curtis Allen after he sang his rap music at, of all places, John Piper’s Baptist church. He received a much more positive response than he expected (of note is his comment on how much merchandise he sold…), but then received many negative emails when his video of the concert became publicized on the net. He struggled with anger but responded with humility, and received some repentant emails from his previous detractors. What struck me were his final comments, including “I was grateful to God. He reminded me once again of the reality of my sin, the reality of the penalty for my sin, and then allowed me to glorify him in my response to intense criticism.” This is standard SGM — It’s all about “any godliness I demonstrate is the result of realizing what a terrible sinner I am”, instead of “if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.”
Oswald, we too appreciate the fine teaching of many of the celebs. Piper is excellent, my husband likes DeYoung. I was in no way trying to demean the teaching gifts of those on the conference lineup.
What I was trying to point out is that when you have an April 2012 conference already taking registrations, with CJ in the line up next to the other big dogs as usual, it does seem clear that before AoR has even begun the process of evaluating CJ and SGM, the Gospel Coalition guys have decided he is just fine and worthy of national influence. How else can you take this?
No matter what you think of Brent, as Martha reminds us above, CJ is going against everything he ever taught by taking himself off to Capital Hill. And the things in the docs that are facts, backed up by emails and multiple witnesses, have not been apologized for in any honest fashion. I know the outside panel of three with Trueman and Ortland brushed them off, but still, a head apostle of an entire denomination??? Even if you say he’s human like the rest of us and not disqualified by it, don’t you still ask for specific admission of sins and apology? SGM certainly demanded that of everyone else.
Sometimes I think maybe you had to be there. As former CLC said “Come on – I could see C.J.’s mile-high pride and narcissism when I was there in the 80′s and 90′s. He is not following any of the counsel that he’s given others in the past.” Maybe its almost impossible to believe if you were not there under it, feeling it, listening to it, watching it. But nevertheless I am disappointed. CJ said he was stepping back for a period, and he never stuck to it, and it looks like the Big Dogs don’t care.
I pray for AoR. I believe the weight of the letters is going to force them to issue some strong reproofs. Whether or not they disqualify certain men is uncertain, but assuming their integrity, they are going to have to judge many things done to sheep as sinful and unjust.
At this point, if somebody is forced to admit to wrongdoing by AoR and apologize, I would not believe they had a heart change. I would think they are just trying to keep their job at any cost.
I sure hope Mole’s tidal wave vision is from the Lord. Only God can end this injustice.
5years #35 — I agree with you. I was just saying that in spite of the 4 leaders of the thing, there are some good speakers scheduled.
I think we’ve known for some time how CJ would come out. It reminds me of OJ Simpson; not guilty by law, but everyone knew the truth and he was not in a good place thereafter. The more CJ appears in public and tries to appear like everything is fine, the more he looks like who he is; an insecure man trying to run with the scholars. Because of the Det docs and the blogs, many more people will now be seeing CJ for what he is. In their mind’s eye, maybe for the first time, they will see what has been pointed out to them.
@ Unreformed in post #21 – having spent time around Curt for a few years, you are correct in your analysis. What Curt responded back with was the equivalent of a ‘yo momma’ joke…but then realized later on that it was ill-placed with someone who really wasn’t culturally equipped to handle it and interpret it properly.
(waiting for someone to say “what do you mean culturally equipped ? are you saying there are differences between ‘black’ culture and ‘white’ culture ? Are you playing the race card ?” or any number of similar responses…..)
I do agree, however, that that entire exchange of e-mails makes everyone look bad…..the town crier should keep talking, but he needs to take better heed to himself, lest he too fall (his ‘thug’ and ‘hood’ comments were unnecessary and based off of faulty stereotypes….).
@ Oswald in post 14 – yes, you are really really old. LOL No, seriously – hip hop is not everyone’s favorite genre. My degree is music education – public school teacher for 11 years now (instrumental and vocal) with extensive experience as a DJ and a rapper. Hip hop is just as much a genre of ‘real music’ as any other style of music. Much like I have to teach my students WHAT to listen for and HOW to listen to music pre-1990’s (because they don’t have a frame of reference and/or understanding to appreciate what they are listening to), sometimes it’s necessary for folks in other generations to get that same type of ‘introduction’ for other genres of music. Once folks learn to understand it (not ‘like’ it), they appreciate it more. Much of the ‘I don’t like it’ that many folks (younger or older) have toward genres of music outside of their generational range comes from the fact that they hear ‘noise’ and don’t understand what’s going on in the music they are listening to. As a result, all of the ‘noise’ simply becomes that….and they write it off as ‘not real music’. To be fair, there is GARBAGE out there that calls itself music and it isn’t…. but
Curt ‘s stuff is far from that category.
5years #35 — I think AoR has stated that they are not in a position to disqualify anyone, but only to say how they see the situation (make judgements) and make recommendations and suggestions. Further, Dave Harvey said SGM takes seriously what AoR tells them, and will do what is suggested by AoR. At least, that’s what he said after the preliminary findings of AoR were put forth.
I guess we’ll see. We can mainly watch and pray.
BC #37 — Actually, even though I am very old, I like a lot of rap music. (I really like most kinds of music) I enjoy Lacrea and like things when I can understand the words. There was a good song I heard at Piper’s web site called “Desiring God” and it may have been by Curt. Anyone know? I’d like to hear it again.
I had it on by bookmarks but my system crashed and I lost everything.
I went to the Desiring God web site and typed in Curt Allen in the search and found what I was looking for. I didn’t have a name before now. This was sooo easy. DUH! I am really OLD.
Worth a listen!
http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/a-desiring-god-rap-by-curt-allen-aka-voice
Stunned said, in #32 –
I quoted the entire comment because it is EXACTLY what I was thinking.
But no matter what each of us thinks about whether or not Curt was trying to be funny or just downright thoughtless and mean, the pseudo-apology was still SGMese at its most manipulative.
BlackCalvinist –
Welcome to the site (a day late). Thanks for your comments.
I totally agree with you about learning to understand and appreciate all the genres of music. My own iPod contains the most eclectic mix of stuff – my kids laugh at the randomness of some of my playlists.
OK, I went and checked out a couple of Curt Allen’s raps on youtube.
I am officially a fan.
Now if only they’d make it illegal for CJ Mahaney to attempt a fist-bump. Talk about cringe-inducing.
Pre-SGM, Guy and I were longtime members of a hyper-Charismatic church that happened to be quite racially mixed. I’d say whites represented maybe 50% of the congregation. Honestly, the diversity was probably the best thing about that church. We loved being in an environment where your ethnicity/color/background wasn’t what defined you. We loved that our kids truly didn’t notice or care whether their friends were Latino or Asian or black or white – they were all just friends together.
But there still ought to be a law that white people shouldn’t fist-bump.
That’s all I have to say.
:D
Oswald, below is a quote from Jim’s Refuge site, a quote from AoR end of August.
You write: “Dave Harvey said SGM takes seriously what AoR tells them, and will do what is suggested by AoR. At least, that’s what he said after the preliminary findings of AoR were put forth. I guess we’ll see.”
Oh? SGM has had two months to do what they suggest, not only with Brent but with all the others they know about (and they know plenty). So read this and let’s see if Harvey is taking seriously what AoR suggested.
Maybe behind the scenes they have approached some ex pastors or members, I don’t know. But I’ll not be convinced until the bungled sex abuse cases are all dealt with-and Greg S’s letter, nice as it was, wasn’t the SGM board, or churches other than CLC. Plenty of people posting here they know about who haven’t been sought out yet either. I’d say the burden of proof is on them to show that they will indeed do exactly what AoR said.
Post Oct 22, 2011 titled “AoR”
AoR speaking:
Here is the latest from Brent’s blog, posted this morning. He seems decidedly back on track, in my opinion. http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/2011/10/29/get-out-of-jail-free-card-for-cj-no-adjudication-hearing.html
I just find the hypocrisy amazing; and I continue to be amazed in this day in age about how okay so many people are about it. Curt uses ghetto slang to insult and patronize Brent; Brent never “went there” in calling out Curt; Curt was all to happy to use lingo “of the hood” to uncharitably attack Brent. Whether Curt agrees with Brent, or likes him, or not, it’s low and it sounds incredibly sophomoric (a nice DPV term that I love) for a pastor, especially in the button up, upper middle class world of SGM pastors. So Brent responds by calling him a bully and a thug, as is a common term used to describe criminals of the inner city, of which Curt has already GONE THERE ANYWAY with his choice of words to Brent in his e-mail. So if Curt is going to act like and use the lingo of a thug, what on earth is wrong with Brent pointing out the obvious? But no…can’t do that; can’t say the obvious because when it comes to a “darker skinned member the SGM pastoral ministry” (as loosely quoted from another blog post)that makes you a racist, as opposed to simply standing up for yourself.
Must be nice to operate in the world of being able to say anything you want in any way and then have totally immunity to being called out on it because of the color of your skin. America obsession with race–1963 (old boss), American obsession with race–2011(new boss…same as the old boss).
QE2 said,
I wonder that, too. I really do.
I continue to be mystified by these churches that are seeking to hand themselves over to the SGM organization. I don’t understand what they think they are gaining. And they seem – dare I say it? – almost deceived about their autonomy (or lack thereof) after they join SGM.
5years #44 — We can only hope that, with the whole (SGM) world watching, SGM will do what they say they’ll do and we as congregations should make ourselves heard and known to our local leaders as well as SGM leaders, whether we think we count or not. There are ways of having ourselves heard; not tithing and leaving if needed. I think they would notice.
Argo #46 — Last paragraph; agreed.
:word
Kris – you nailed it the other day – this is almost my story to the letter:
You wrote:
“They come in to SGM churches, often disillusioned with the wimpy seeker-friendly 40 Days Of Purpose Evangelicalism of their previous churches, and they find SGM’s harsh talk about sin and about being both Reformed and Charismatic bracing and refreshing. They are impressed with the outpourings of friendliness, and often find themselves embraced into a social world they had only dreamed was possible at church. They like what they are told about accountability (again, this is refreshing after how other wimpy churches shy away from talking about sin), and they like how orderly the families seem.”
OK – that’s us. But, I want to be fair to my SGM church, after several years, I still feel like I am better off for having been there. I am not a new Christian, and where I have been able to learn from my church, I have learned a lot. Likewise, where I think they are “off base”, I just explain to my family that people have different views, here is what this person thinks, and this is what Mom and Dad think.
What I find interesting about your insight, is that a larger percentage of our members seem to have a story similar to mine. We seem to be pretty diverse, and I am hoping our diversity helps us navigate this time. I frankly do not care if we pull out of SGM and never look back. I really think we have enough mature leaders in my church to go it alone. That is why I am “Sick with Worry”. If the polity does not change and allow for more local input, then I need to follow my heart and leave. We love the people, we have enjoyed our time there up until now, but our situation is “under review”. I think several families feel the same way. We would leave on good terms, but leave nonetheless.