The SGM Board’s Letter To All SGM Pastors
November 14, 2011 in Sovereign Grace Ministries
A few people have written to ask if I was aware of a letter that had gone out from the board of Sovereign Grace Ministries. The letter purportedly had been sent to all SGM pastors, and its topic was the board’s differences with Josh Harris and Covenant Life Church. Here is one such letter, which was posted as a comment under the previous post. This letter was apparently sent out the week prior to the SGM Pastors’ Conference.
___________________________
To the Pastors of Sovereign Grace,
Thank you for your continued labor of love in your churches, your ongoing support and partnership in the gospel, and your unshakable confidence in God during these months. Many of you have asked questions about the current relationship between Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM) and Covenant Life Church (CLC). We realize this is of interest to many of you, and it’s a relationship we cherish, so we are grateful for your inquiries and prayers.
Over the past few months, we have been discussing areas of disagreement with Josh Harris and our brothers who lead CLC. So far we have taken the approach of privately engaging with CLC over the disagreements and concerns we have for them. It has been our hope from the beginning that these disagreements could get worked out privately, and that we would not engage in critiquing each other beyond the private realm. Some of you men have challenged us for failing to make statements about CLC’s public leadership and the effects of it upon your churches. Our goal has been to interact privately and through conversation, withholding public critique. We have not wanted to do anything that would unnecessarily put CLC in a negative light or multiply their local church challenges. We dearly love these brothers and the church they lead.
Why Write to All the Pastors?
Those of you who have been around for a while in SGM know we normally wouldn’t communicate to pastors throughout our family of churches where we disagree with a particular member-church. But there are a number of factors that seem to make this a helpful and necessary step in this case. The major reasons already mentioned include the number of pastors who have inquired about these things and the affect CLC leadership has had on some of our member-churches as the CLC pastors have chosen to broadcast their differences and disagreements in public meetings and through the internet.
But another reason for updating you of these things is that in the past, CLC has always functioned as something of a model of SGM belief and practice. Pastors throughout our churches could assume CLC and SGM are on the same page, and look to CLC to observe the direction and positions of SGM. However, despite our many agreements on essential issues, SGM and CLC now find themselves with some differences and disagreements, and it seems important to begin explaining those differences for the benefit of pastors and churches throughout SGM. We do not plan to post this correspondence on the Plant and Build blog right now, nor are we planning on sharing it with a broader audience at this time.
A final reason for sharing these things with you—and really the one that ultimately prompted this letter—is that public statements continue to be made from CLC pastors that seem to us to significantly misrepresent SGM and have the potential to implicate and cast suspicion upon you and the churches you serve. The CLC pastors have publicly voiced their concerns and criticisms for SGM broadly, and continue to call for reform in SGM in a number of areas. We feel their approach makes it necessary for us to explain our perspective and pass along to you our thoughts on their public critique.
Thoughts from the Recent CLC Members Meeting
In their most recent family meeting, made public through Josh’s Facebook and on their website, CLC openly shared their negative assessment of SGM leadership. They expressed their belief that there are deep-seated problems in SGM, and that our authority has operated in unaccountable and arbitrary ways. On a few occasions, we have shared our concerns with Josh regarding the sweeping and pejorative assessments he is making of SGM, his broad conclusions about the way SGM functions based on his limited exposure to SGM, and the apparent lack of consideration for the impact of his leadership statements on the broader family of SGM. We wanted to share our perspective with you here because of the public nature of Josh’s comments and our concerns for how SGM is being portrayed.
The pastors of CLC shared their concerns under two main headings in their family meeting: 1) leadership structures and 2) due process in evaluating charges against SGM. We readily agree with the need for growth in these categories, and we are indeed expending much energy in seeking to address these. Our disagreement lies with aspects of their assessment, their presentation of these issues, and the impression their public statements can have.
First, we agree on the need to address organizational weaknesses. The last four months only highlight the need for more clarity and definition in certain areas. However, Josh’s comments imply that the board (the old one of which he was a part, and the new one convened in July) has not been already occupied with reform in this area, and could leave the false impression that we are uninterested in or resistant to change and growth.
Although CJ’s LOA and the release of Brent’s docs have certainly diverted efforts over the past few months, the board has spent much of the past two years evaluating ourselves and exploring changes. Included in this has been an evaluation conducted by the regional leaders of the former board in 2009. That same year the board also conducted an assessment of our governance structures, and began a thorough polity evaluation. Our size as a family of churches, coupled with our desire to walk carefully through this process with our pastors’ input and involvement, have made the polity process a painstaking one, and much work remains to be done, as our recent experience and the constructive criticisms of Ambassadors of Reconciliation have made clear. So it is no secret that SGM has identified weaknesses in our structures and our polity, and we are eager to address these. We are disappointed that there has been so little mention made in CLC’s public statements of the history and nature of these efforts. Instead of acknowledging the ongoing process and the steps taken in this regard, many of which preceded the current crisis, CLC presented their critique as a call to reform. Such an approach, we believe, presents a skewed picture of the situation and can leave the impression that we are resistant to change and that problems are only being addressed in response to recent accusations. We feel this is misleading, one-sided, and uncharitable. It is difficult to understand why there is a call to reform in areas that we are already seeking to address, and we are seeking to do so with the counsel of our pastors.
The second heading they presented is also a category where there is much agreement. Before Brent’s documents were released, we had become aware of our lack of appropriate procedures for handling grievances, and this season has intensified this realization. We failed to implement policies for bringing charges against an elder and against an SGM leader. We are especially grieved to see how this has adversely affected not just C.J., but some former pastors from SGM churches over the years, and addressing this weakness is a significant priority. We must and will reform there. We also need to make a clear way for people to bring grievances, and create a process for establishing what charges are to be heard and what should be rejected. We have learned that many church bodies have these policies. So we have been at work to develop, alongside our polity changes, appropriate policies to process grievances that both protect leaders and churches and afford redress to those truly offended. This is one of the many reasons we secured the assistance of AOR. But here too, we wish CLC would have more clearly acknowledged both our recognition of this weakness and our efforts to address it. Their presentation takes pains to stress our absence of such policies and their own call for change, which can obscure our concrete efforts and raise questions about our clarity, sincerity, and good will. Again, we do not believe that they communicated an accurate picture of our efforts.
Although we are agreed about the need for change in this area, it also seems we may disagree in what some of these processes should look like. For example, we believe that allegations made against a minister are to be discussed and weighed only in the context of private confrontation and appeal (Matt. 18:15-16) or in the context of a church judicial process (1 Tim. 5:19-21). We believe the Scriptures require a just process, in which a man should be publicly rebuked or corrected only after “two or three witnesses” have given their testimony in the presence of the accused, if at all possible (“both parties to the dispute shall appear before the Lord”, Deut. 19:17), and the accused has been given an opportunity to speak in his defense (Prov. 18:17). Furthermore, sins which have been publicly confessed should be publicly forgiven, not dissected and rehearsed. Any further consequences of confessed sins should be determined and announced by way of a church judicial process (1 Tim. 5:19-21). We do not believe that it is appropriate to discuss at length the sins of a leader nor allegations against him (or anyone for that matter) in congregational forums.
Beyond these two categories, the CLC pastors also discussed the need for congregations to be vitally involved in significant decisions. This would be another area where we believe there is much agreement. However, CLC’s presentation stressed their own commitment to change while leaving SGM’s position in question. Josh’s comments made no reference to the specific teaching we did on this topic at the T4G meetings in 2010 in which we encouraged every church to give attention to this area. Moreover, it would appear that the CLC pastoral team would be unaware that this has been a growing practice in some SGM churches and has been the longstanding policy in others (At Covenant Fellowship Church, the elders have involved the congregation in the purchase of land and the evaluation of elders for many years as well as in the affirmation of Jared Mellinger as the new senior pastor over three years ago). We are grateful that CLC is addressing their weakness and now seeing the need to involve the congregation in meaningful ways. But we find their omission of references to SGM’s instruction and the practices of many churches to be misleading, and their assumptions about SGM in this area somewhat misinformed, and therefore illustrative of how they can at times mischaracterize SGM.
We have communicated to Josh that his broad critique of Sovereign Grace in public forums, while identifying certain weaknesses with which we all agree, is having the effect of raising suspicions in local churches against local church pastoral teams – something we assume he does not intend but that he does not seem to adequately consider as he seeks to lead his own local church. Moreover, these critiques can also fail to present an accurate picture of SGM’s leadership, particularly as it seeks to navigate the current crisis and address areas needing change. This, too, can raise unwarranted suspicions throughout our family of churches.
Our Commitment
We are committed to our relationship with the pastors of CLC and we continue to dialogue with them. These are men we greatly love and respect, and we cherish our partnership together—a partnership that spans three decades. We recognize they have been facing a very challenging season, and we pray for these brothers and for their church as they walk through these difficulties. Our request to them at this point is to confine their public pronouncements concerning reform to issues CLC is facing, although we have urged them to please continue to share concerns for SGM privately with the board, just as we have sought to share our concerns for them privately. We are eager to deal freely with any and all issues, questions, and even disagreements. However, doing so publically in a way that doesn’t present the full picture can often be unfruitful and have negative relational effects as well.
Furthermore, we are committed to doing whatever we can to help meet the very real leadership challenges CLC is facing as a result of this crisis. We believe God has much good for the future of CLC because he has so evidently been pleased to bless others through them in the past. This church has been an abundant means of grace for SGM for nearly three decades. Through their training up of leaders, their example of faithfulness to the gospel and their financial giving, CLC has been at the forefront of much of our mission together.
No matter where you fall on the spectrum of agreeing or disagreeing with their leadership, we hope you will see them through this same lens of faith and grace. It is impossible to ignore the difficulty of having to work through these issues when in the past there has been so much unity, but God is with us and has good for all of us in this. We are learning from each other, sharpening one another, and are eager to see how God glorifies himself as our dialogue continues.
Please pray for us all, that our discussions will be marked by grace and humility, and that God will be honored in all our conversations and decisions.
As always, we desire to continue to receive your feedback.
In His Grace,
The SGM Board
© 2011, Kris. All rights reserved.
Since this has been sent to all SGM pastors, it looks like they saw the effectiveness of Brent’s tactics in so doing. Next will be a letter from CLC to refute this one, and on and on.
They would all do well to hear what the “Getting to the Heart of Conflict” seminar had to say. But then maybe this is so much bigger that it’s almost impossible to handle.
Our hope is that God is the God of the impossible.
Left same comment at SGM refuge…
It seems that so much of the language employed is just dancing around making a statement, “SGM believes that pastors and those they select make all church decisions, and we believe it is wrong for congregational involvement.”
At Covenant Fellowship Church, the elders have involved the congregation in the purchase of land…
My recollection of that time is that fairly regular updates were provided to the congregation from the pulpit. But in my opinion “elders involved the congregation,” does not signify meaningful involvement. Perhaps I am not remembering, and with the updates congregational input was invited, but I do not remember anything to that effect, in a decision making process that would come to involve asking for a vast amount of money to be donated and for the church to move to an entirely different geography.
“We do not believe that it is appropriate to discuss at length the sins of a leader nor allegations against him (or anyone for that matter) in congregational forums.”
Wow I would never have guessed this when I was present at a leaders’ (then family) meeting where they publicly humiliated one of their own pastors after discussing his sins at length (truly garden variety sins as far as I could see) and then watching him publicly humiliate himself further by reading his letter of confession as he stepped down for a second time from leadership. No, they would never speak badly of any leader they were trying to get rid of, not in front of the people. And they wouldn’t tell blatant lies about anyone either. This is ridiculous. They want to silence CLC and Josh because they’re finally being honest with people? Oh, they’re portraying SGM in a negative light? Publicly??? Poor poor SGM board… Even the slightest whiff of your own medicine is pretty bitter isn’t it? And no one is even lying about you, we don’t have to–the truth isn’t pretty.
TOMCOV,
Thanks for posting that letter. It clears up a few things for Wallace & me and I’m sure for many others too.
When we were trying to get Fairfax to answer our questions, it seemed to us that they were winging it…making things up as they went along. It appears they just didn’t have a category for dealing with an accusation against an elder. This letter proves it.
In the end, they protected their dishonest pastor and their reputation which is what they value most over the welfare of victims/children.
julie,
:clap
“We do not believe that it is appropriate to discuss at length the sins of a leader nor allegations against him (or anyone for that matter) in congregational forums.”
Great point Julie…
… it’s also ok for the leaders to have MEMBERS get up and confess their sins before the congregation???????
Interesting to note that they admit the current situation is (to use their word) a “crisis”.
Also:
implies that CLC’s statements (while misleading, one-sided, and uncharitable) are also true. Words like “untrue”, “false” or “lies” are missing from that sentence.
I love this statement …”the board has spent much of the past two years evaluating ourselves and exploring changes.”
And Dave … you don’t see this as part of the problem??? Two flippin years??? You guys are worse than the government!
What Dave doesn’t understand is that people don’t trust HIM and they don’t trust the SGM Board.
SGM needs new leadership. This team in ineffective and unable to lead us forward. Replace them all at the top and we would bet better off the first day.
It is fascinating to watch the process evolve. Changes have already happened, I suspect more are on the way.
By the way, has anyone been keeping up with the Girl Talk blog? I was just reading through and it’s quite disturbing. Check out this post:
http://www.girltalkhome.com/blog/dwelling-in-peace
Here are a couple of excerpts:
“I remember a conversation where CJ exhorted me: “Carolyn, we must not only respond with loving words and actions, but we must also honor God with the thoughts and attitude of our heart.”
To begin with, this meant I needed to spend less time reading, following, and focusing on the constant stream of slander against us. The more I read or listened to, and the more I thought about what I had read and heard, the more difficult it was to guard my heart, the more difficult it was to cultivate a heart of compassion and love. So I had to make a conscious choice to stop reading, stop paying attention to the words and actions against us.”
Trial? Slander? Saint C.J. exhorting her to love and compassion? I don’t know what to say.
John Loftness et al:
“We do not believe it is appropriate to discuss at length the sins of a leader..”
My edits:
I do not believe it is needful to discuss at length the sins of a leader when his sins are evident to all.
I am amazed that John, Dave and CJ think so little of the intelligence of their pastors that they suppose they will swallow the gibberish about how Josh has somehow slung mud on all their faces.
Josh has been most delicate and gracious in is his handling of the awful maelstrom CJ brought his way.
MAELSTROM. 1. : a powerful often violent whirlpool sucking in objects within a given radius
Josh has not harmed CJ. CJ has harmed himself and continues to do so the longer he defends himself the against honest charges swirling around him.
From the letter to SGM pastors comes this sentence about involving the congregation, using Cov Fel as an example: (At Covenant Fellowship Church, the elders have involved the congregation in the purchase of land and the evaluation of elders for many years as well as in the affirmation of Jared Mellinger as the new senior pastor over three years ago).
I was not in attendance when the land was purchased, but I was there when we got Jared M. It was announced along with Dave’s stepping down as Sr Pastor to go full-time with SGM. Jared was an intern with Cov Fel at the time, had been used to bring the message on several Sundays and was an effective preacher, I must say. This was probably in the spring and Jared would be our new leader effective in the fall. We were encouraged to voice our opinions/concerns about Jared in the meantime. The following week (?) after the announcement, CJ made a visit to us, and it was a week when he should have been at something for one of his SIL, (maybe ordination), but had chosen to be with us to give his stamp of approval to Jared and to encourage us to be glad for our getting Jared; smart guy, etc. CJ probably thought no one could do a better job of convincing that he could. I remember thinking it must be important to them to have us agree, bringing out the big-guns (CJ) to speak to us.
We never had a meeting with a time to vote, just told to tell our concerns/opinions. How to do that was not told to us; phone, email, stop someone in the lobby (?).
Is this seriously congregation involvement in a decision? I think not.
I heard an interview with a psychologist about the smarmy affair up at Penn State. He said a couple very interesting things about why people tend not to confront people of rank and power.
He said:
The more power they have, the less anyone will confront.
The more they want that person’s approval, the less they will confront.
And the more they admire the person, the less likely they will confront them when they do something wrong.
Imo, this explains a lot about why so few people have confronted CJ over the years.
I have been involved in and observed many church-related crises over the years. As I observe it, Josh and the CLC pastors have done an excellent job so far in managing the challenges. What is still hard for me to understand is the continued lack of a sincere/deep repentance at SGM. Repenting in dust and ashes should be the first and continued response to the seriousness and the long-standing patterns of sin. Then they would wait for the results of the assessment by AoR. Criticizing CLC the way they just did is sad and shows to me that God’s discipline has not truly reached them yet. So I am praying that he will do a sovereign house-cleaning at Sovereign Grace.
New #15 — Welcome.
I think many of us agree with your assessment.
I was a member of CF when the land was being purchased. The only congregational input was financial. There was a large part of CF that left because of the location. Church was planted north of Phila to help some, but many who gave for years to the building fund, found their church leaving them…
See #’s 3, 13 17 for inside info on this statement from SGM letter to pastors.
(At Covenant Fellowship Church, the elders have involved the congregation in the purchase of land and the evaluation of elders for many years as well as in the affirmation of Jared Mellinger as the new senior pastor over three years ago).
Anybody see spin here?
“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Patrick #19 — Reposting these two links here since comments closed on the other entry.
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/45283472/ns/sports-college_football/
http://mattpaknis.blogspot.com/2011/11/absolute-power-corrupts-absolutely.html
“We do not plan to post this correspondence on the Plant and Build blog right now, nor are we planning on sharing it with a broader audience at this time.”
I find it amusing that CJ and friends still think that they have an air tight level of secrecy and unaccountability. More evidence of CJ delusions.
I , like Josh Harris, would love to see SGM put their Pastors conference messages online. I would hope in ‘raw’ form, that is unedited.
IMO
“They expressed their belief that there are deep-seated problems in SGM, and that our authority has operated in unaccountable and arbitrary ways.”
Truth hurts! Sounds like the wounds from ‘faithful friends’ to me.
Did AOR not also point out that SGM has no real meaningful structure, or means of self assessment? It is what it is gentlemen.
http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/2011/11/14/trust-and-obey-for-theres-no-other-way-to-possibly-stay-at-c.html
SGM and Crossway: I follow Jesus Christ (not ashamed to say His Name!) and the Bible, NOT John Murray’s words.
Your injunction towards Brent is puritanical SHUNNING!
Your commands to your congregation, about what to read, amounts to mind-control and censorship! Shame on you!
How much better to prove your trustworthiness as pastors it would be, if you would encourage your members to be skilled at discernment of WHATEVER they hear or read, guiding them to seek that skill from rightly dividing the word of God and examining others words and writings like the noble Bereans did!
]
Josh’s LIMITED exposure to SGM??? What more exposure can someone have than Josh and his living in the Mahaney home and being hand-groomed by CJ himself? And the letter mentions that some of the CLC pastors have been around for 30 years – so, what, exactly, is Josh’s limitation.
Furthermore, why would any such “limitation” prevent Josh from clearly seeing or discerning the Board’s actions? Will the Board uses this ridiculous accusation of “limit exposure” when assessing AoR reports?
And maybe Josh does not have an “apparent lack of consideration for the impact of his leadership statements on the broader family of SGM.” Perhaps Josh and the CLC pastors are being very deliberate in this regard.
But now that CLC is actually DOING it – allowing the congregation to be vitally involved, the SGM board is alarmed and blaming Josh for actually obeying SGM edicts by getting the congregation vitally involved. They still want to control the congregation by limiting the topics they are permitted to be vitally involved.
The Board is concerned that their dirty laundry is being exposed by CLC. They don’t understand that the Board has been exposing their own dirty laundry for decades and that, finally, someone – CLC leadership – is acting courageously by dealing with the inappropriate behavior by Board leadership.
CLC is doing nothing major wrong here. These aren’t personal sins, these are institutional sins. If CJ’s issues were with a small group of men, then those scriptures quoted would apply, but we are talking about structural issues. CLC is the largest church in this institution, they therefore can make statements regarding it.
When the President of the United States, or Congress, etc make moral choices that are damaging to the country, we don’t expect those to be dealt with privately, because they affect the broad base of the country, the same concept applies here. Institutional sin.
Also, I’ve been at all the CLC member’s meetings. Josh isn’t after anyone, he’s just speaking from the heart, and a desire to see God’s Word held to.
Also, I think in response to Mickey’s command to de-friend Brent on Facebook, we should all “friend” Brent instead! Currently, Brent has just over 1200 FB “friends”. :D
“Furthermore, we are committed to doing whatever we can to help meet the very real leadership challenges CLC is facing as a result of this crisis.”
I realize that CLC has had a number of pastors step down; however, this statement might also imply an intention of replacing Joshua Harris and the other pastors with newly approved SGM leadership. So sad…
#3, #13, & #17
As members we didn’t have say about where the land was being purchased. I remember the Sunday that they announced that they found a parcel of land and I think Dave telling us how many parcels they passed up until they found the one on RT 322.
We never got to vote on any of our pastors. We were only asked to submit questions, concerns & our support of the different men that were becoming pastors.
If anyone was at the family meeting I think in August to finally discuss in more detail this situation concerning CJ. The only thing they could come up with that the members voiced the outcry against and they listened to us is when they wanted to change CFC name.
Interesting that this letter often emphasizes the importance of doing things privately, and yet CJ, in his speech at the PC, called for pastors to publicly identify “divisive” people. I would say that Brent did that in his documents, but I don’t think that that was what CJ had in mind.
I have to say that while Josh is at the helm, the other CLC Pastors seem to be in agreement with Josh. Grant Layman has been there since day one. As CJ’s brother in law, I would imagine that Grant knows CJ well, and with a career of thirty years in the SGM/CLC world, knows what it is and what it is not.
Then there is Robin Boisvert, he has been with CJ since the beginning.
These men, part of the nineteen staff Pastors at CLC, all seem to see the same thing.
The eleven guys at SGM should spend more time listening, and less time complaining about context, as it evades the real issues here.
These men are, by SGM teaching via the flagship roles in which they were placed, the best of the SGM best. CLC has always been more that “something of a model.” It is and always has been the model, and is doing what it was trained to do. That is to be faithful in pursuing God, pursuing sanctification, and correcting where needed. ( Wah!)
CLC is the ‘homeland,’ the ‘shining beacon,’ the ‘best of the best.’ It is where the PC students plug in during their time at the college, and see all that is good and right about the SGM way. Now this assembly of what CJ has refereed up to recently as the best, brightest, finest, and most humble of ‘servant’ leaders has steeped back and said enough is enough with SGM.
Given that CLC is the ‘Local Church,’ and by SGM teachings, the primary context by which all things should flow, should these SGM men not consider the weight of the
CLC assessment and benefit from the ‘mirror’ that CLC is holding up to SGM.
Was it not CJ who has said on many occasions who said it is a fool who looks in the mirror, and does not benefit from that look by making adjustments?
The letter also states that there are, “Many agreements on essential issues.”
From Brent we know that,
CJ, you are quite the fool. You are the divisive one, and the one who should be rooted out publicly. Don’t complain when these men, out of care employed ‘divisive’ and yet similar actions, albeit with much more prayer, love, and grace, as you. You are the one who called for more of the same to a greater degree on the stage of the Pastors conference.
(Such a vague and nefarious statement. I fear you have lost your mind, I will know you have once you list of ‘qualifications for divisive dissenters’ comes out.)
Josh is doing his best to preserve the local church, what are you trying to preserve Mr. Charles “CJ” James Mahaney?
The carefully crafted letter sent out on the eve of the PC was planned carefully (gauntlet thrown down to divisive church), Cj’s speech was planned – but obviously not carefully crafted (that is because he probably would never allow anyone to correct or edit his words), the AOR being there the same weekend was carefully planned (look how humble we are), and finally, the excommunication of Brent at Crossways, immediately following the conference, was by careful design (hey guys, let’s get a jump on this new SGM dictate regarding slanderers)….
A movie could be made out of this…
The sgm board has planned and calculated all of this to happen at once… I am a good chess player, and i think these guys could give me a strong game..
Yes, let’s all “friend” brent on Facebook…
I will do it for 2 reasons, some of you may just do it for the 2nd reason:
1: show brent some encouragement and support
2. If Micky’s followers do unfriend him (and i hope they don’t), and we make up the difference by friending him… Micky will think his church isn’t following him…. I know this sounds conniving and mean, but i think Micky is a turd, and i’d rather not see him succeed, and his arrogance rewarded….
So I read the letter to the Pastors and read the portion of Crossway Family Meeting that Brent posted 8O
What can a person say ? How can a rational human being make sence of such insanity ?
I really think there needs to be some medication passed around 8O
KAZ…yes, I just read Brent’s latest as well. My comment at Refuge was that Mickey sounds like a whiney adolescent girl trying to keep her clique together. But I think you are right, it seems more like mental illness. They do not seem to be in touch with reality.
Coming soon to a church near you …. The “Trust Me” tour!
This is the beginning of the end. There is no stopping a church split now. This is how they happen. Be prepared to leave. SGM and the zombies one way, those listening to the Holy Spirit the other.
Jeff #30 Love your comments!:
‘Interesting that this letter often emphasizes the importance of doing things privately, and yet CJ, in his speech at the PC, called for pastors to publicly identify “divisive” people. I would say that Brent did that in his documents, but I don’t think that that was what CJ had in mind.’
CJ absolutely hates this kind of notoriety.
When I saw your comment, I had a thought it would be cute if you were Jeff Purswell making his debut.
Then I had the idea that it would be fun to use the names of SGM glitterati if we ‘friend’ Brent or when whenever we post here. It might not fly very well at headquarters but it would be fun.
QE2 #26- thanks for the laugh about your barrel falling off. I hope this was not in a starbucks somewhere.
I remember when Jared became senior pastor. We were told to ask any concerns and I do remember they had a special Q &A between the services. I think sgm is basically accept this or leave.
Oh and I had a thought about the education thing. This is about a mom who said her daughter loved God more by going to a state school rather than go to some art school. It brought me back to Rachel Scott who was killed the in the columbine high school shootings in 1999. This girl wanted to leave her christian school and attened public so she could be a witness to others. If you ask me, I would much rather have my kid go to a place where people have not heard the name of Christ. idk, i guess staying committed to the local church is more important than being committed to spreading the gospel.
Persona #37, I hope that’s a joke. While we can make up a pseudonym to post online if we have no intent to break the law, I am pretty sure it is illegal to take another person’s name and act as that person , even while posting online. Such action could result in considered criminal charges, potentially. Just FYI.
Yikes…this family flogging, I mean meeting, at Crossway was horrific. Let me help those still in SGM wondering if they can trust their pastors. The answer: you can’t. Don’t trust any man who tells you that you do not own your mind; and commands you not to think. They have assumed moral superiority, have assumed they speak for God as evidenced…by what? Their great seminary training? Their consistent sympathy with and covering of all the aggrieved out there? Their loving handling of families dealing with cases of molestation? All those fancy churches they’ve “planted”. What gives them the right to demand your mind? Answer that, and please let us all in on it. Trusting pastors in this case means owning your mind, your thoughts, and your reason. Tell me how they can biblically do that; by what command of God; by what scripture? And tell me what they’ve done that they may presume to speak not only about God, but for Him?
OK so call me drifty…but I just realized that there is an Argus AND and Argo! I always thought you were the same person! :D
Please pray for Josh. I thought he’d tuck tail and run; I thought he wasn’t all he’d been cracked up to be. I had issues when he came on board way back in the 90’s; I was like, oh, some young famous upstart author with a fancy legalistic book now rubbing shoulders with CJ…it just struck me as, I don’t know “preferential” (kinda like the physicians at my old church who so quickly became leaders of things, in a matter of weeks… again, preferential). So I never fully believed in Josh so to speak. So glad to see that he does appear to truly love God and wants to hear His Spirit, and is willing to suffer for His glory and love. Seems I might have been wrong about him.
SGMNot…well, Argus wanted Argo, but we rock-paper-scissored for it and I won. :D
Just kidding. We don’t know each other…er, well, I don’t think, that is.
Argo and Argus… not being quite as “drifty” as SGMNOT i noticed the both of you early on… But i think i still get the 2 of you mixed up…
However, i am pretty sure i like, and usually agree, w/ you both!
Not that you need my vote of confidence…
You just both like Ancient Greek stuff! :clap
My error, really. Argo was here first and I blundered in choosing a name so close. Maybe I will switch to another name. Is ‘Cassandra’ taken?
In Greek mythology, Argus was the Watcher. Argus was also Odysseus’ faithful old watchdog, who saw through disguise and the changes of time to recognize his long-gone master.
In the Iliad, Cassandra was a prophetess, cursed to tell the truth but not to be believed. She warned Troy of its doom but no one listened. She was right, though.
Nevertheless, I believe that, by the grace of the true and living God, those who have ears to hear the truth will hear.
On the topic of this letter from SGM, though, it is most ominous.
Remember, they are (mis)using as their go-to text lately Titus 3:9-11, (ESV)
So, this letter is essentially putting CLC on notice, “That’s once!”
Yellow’s Short and Sweet Summary:
Dear Everyone,
We don’t like when people make us look bad.
In Christian love, humility and blah-dee-blah blah,
SGM
Deut. 32:35 –
I wanted to thank you for your thoughtful responses to me on the last thread. I also would not question someone’s salvation. Just wasn’t sure what you were saying in regards to that so I asked for clarification :D
But, to the matter(s) at hand, we can see that the chess game has resumed, and was even going on in the background as we conversed. A letter sent on the eve of the conference to the pastors of SGM expressing SGM’s concerns regarding CLC. So were the pastors of CLC shunned at the conference for fear of a pastor being considered divisive or slanderous if they were seen conversing with CLC pastors? CJ makes a stunning statement at the family meeting about publicly rooting out divisive people. Why at a family/pastor’s meeting? I wonder if he never intended for the congregations to hear that? And, again, what are the pastors supposed to do with that? Does he intend them to go home to their churches and start rooting? I’m still not clear what SGM means by divisive and slanderous.
And, now, the marking of Brent with no direction to the congregants at that church to pray, weigh these issues against the word, nor seek the discernment of the Holy Spirit. (Unless the transcript was not complete.) The pastors at CW appear to be the holy priests now, interceding on behalf of the church. Where in the BIble are pastors given such overarching authority. Why don’t these pastors or SGM leaders point the people to God, His Word, prayer, or ask for the help of the Holy Spirit in discernment? It all leaves me wondering what their definition of the Church is. It seems like they just view people as stupid sheep wandering along a path to nowhere unless one of the SGM pastors hauls them in to the pen :huh