I am still new I know a lot of you people are not surprised. Still not sure what I wanted from this. I am frustrated and worried….. and sad. My family loves my SGM church and there has been fruit. This feels like having a child that you love dearly and they just continue to make bad decisions and break your heart.
I think Oswald would come on here every so often and call for us to be praying, and we need to do that.
As for me – I need to stand on my own two feet. Seek the Lord’s will, and be content. I have let church issues consume me in the past (before my SGM church), and I cannot afford to do that. I will try to put this garbage out of my mind and evaluate my SGM church for what it is, and shoot straight. If I get heat for being honest, then there is my answer. If there is collaboration and we work to move things forward with the congregations help, then that is even better.
What I find troubling are the aspects of the reports (particularly Why Not Vote?) that would seem to indicate that SGM is hunkering down and clinging to its authoritarian pyramid-shaped leadership model, despite all the talk of change.
The odd thing, Kris, is that I am 100% in favor of “elder rule”, and I do not like “voting”. But something just feels so wrong to me and one would think that I would have no problem. There is just something discomforting about the way they “do” elder rule. Anyway – enough posting and reading for me. It gets unhealthy.
#119 – Golden said, “I am personally tired of SGM/CJ beating up on Josh/CLC”. Exactly, this is why it is important for Josh and the church to stand up to them. They (CJ/SGM) have behaved like spiritual bullies for far too long.
#122 Steve – good posting!
#126 Persona – regarding your concern that there is no forum, I agree, there needs to be a forum.
#143 ExCLcer’sMom – Just to be clear, I am not advocating a “mass exodus” from CLC….quite the contrary. I am advocating a mass “stand up and be heard” from the members of CLC. However, your idea about putting a note in the offering plate is very creative and would show an eagerness on the part of the congregation to be heard.
8. Final Comments on the Life and Ministry of CJ Mahaney
“He served…”
“he was instrumental…”
“he has led this ministry…”
“He has worked hard…”
“He has taught us…”
“He has modeled…”
“He has promoted and established doctrine…”
“He has shown us how…”
“He is the best man for this position”
Surely they’re talking about Christ or Paul of Tarsus? Nope… CJ Mahaney
Bonus:
“Our ministry and our churches have gained respect”
Kris…sorry for posting so much today but I have to respond to “Sick With Worry”. My heart goes out to you regarding your confusion and frustration with Elder Ruled polity. Would you feel more comfortable with: Christ Ruled, Elder Led, Congregational Accountable? If so, throw your support behind CLC and pray that they stand strong in the polity they proclaim.
Off to my church’s prayer meeting. catch you guys later…..
That portion of the document really sounds like it was written by Dave Harvey (the next president of SG?). It oozes with authoritarianism as he expresses their inclination to retain their grip over the organization.
Pretty scary in that there appears to be no one above them in authority (maybe not even God Himself?) It almost looks like deism, where God gives all authority to SG pastors for a lifetime, and then stands back and observes how they use it.
Do they really think everyone is going to take this sitting down?
I think SGM’s approach to “elder rule” feels wrong because it’s not actually true representative elder rule. Also, true representative elder rule does not necessarily mean congregational rule (where members vote on all church governing matters).
When one hears the phrase “elder rule” in “normal” Christianity, it generally means that church members have some official voice in the selection of elders. Men from the congregation – laymen, not vocational pastors – will be nominated and then submit themselves to a congregational vote. Whomever the members elect then form the board, which makes most decisions. (Some church constitutions will stipulate that if a decision involves spending more than a certain amount of money, the congregation also must vote to approve such a decision.)
At SGM churches, they talk about “plurality” and say they are “governed by elder rule.” But the “elders” at SGM churches are typically paid staff pastors whose livelihood depends upon maintaining the continued good graces of the senior pastor. These “elders” actually answer in no formal manner to the congregation. At some SGM churches, the “elders” (paid staff pastors) even make their own salary decisions. The more senior a member of the church staff is, the fewer (if any) people there are to whom he is accountable.
The SGM type of “elder” rule bears little resemblance to actual elder rule as it is practiced in “normal” Christianity. I think that’s probably why it doesn’t sit right with anyone who actually stops to think about how SGM has redefined key terms.
Just thought I’d mention: Justin Taylor’s popular blog, Between Two Worlds, has excerpts from the report and a link to it. One of the excerpts, concerning Larry Tomczak’s departure, says, “The coercive threat was sinful.” I wanted to comment that the “coercive threat” was blackmail. When I tried, here’s what I got:
“There are no comments yet. Be the first!
Comments are closed.”
Taylor’s blog has been known for being open about comments. But, for some reason, he’s making an exception here. Near the end of the post, he writes: “This has been a trying season for a ministry and friends I love and respect.” Tim Challies forbad any negative comments about CJ Mahaney. Taylor has gone him one better by forbidding any comments at all. The wagons are always kept ready for circling.
Before SGM Survivors, I had a tremendous amount of respect for Reformed bloggers like Tim Challies and Justin Taylor. Now, though, after watching their steadfast refusals to quit endorsing and promoting SGM/CJ, even after a veritable chorus of voices has begged them to ask their SGM “friends” the hard questions, I’ve come to the reluctant conclusion that ultimately, these bloggers’ judgment has been clouded by their need to maintain the good graces of all the others out there in the book-writing, book-schlepping, book-endorsing Reformed world.
Sigh.
I’m not surprised at Justin Taylor’s response. Or lack thereof.
And, of course, there’s this: if many SGMers themselves can barely digest the reality of their leaders’ authoritarian abuses, then why would these outsiders see it, when CJ and Co put on only their brightest, shiniest, most appealing faces when they’re interviewed or are out promoting their books?
I have decided I just don’t like the way “The Board” communicates. CJ’s letter was fine for me, all of the reports were good to me, but the notes from “The Board” all come across as… proud? I am not sure if that is the right word… not humble? :-p
In case you didn’t see it yet, Brent has responded to the report concerning his dismissal from Grace Community Church on his blog. Also, SGM has a link to the report on CJ on their blog now. I guess they figured they’d better post it since it has already hit the internet. They do not, however, include “Why Not Vote”.
Kris: “And, of course, there’s this: if many SGMers themselves can barely digest the reality of their leaders’ authoritarian abuses, then why would these outsiders see it.”
I’m sure many/most people at Cov Fel will be satisfied with CJ being declared fit to be president. And they’ll wonder what was all the to-do about, anyway. But, ahhh, it’s over now and we can go back to things as they were.
Unbelievable.
This sentence really rang true for me:
“…the net result was that they were manipulating Larry to act in a way they deemed righteous and doing so at the potential expense of his child.”
I have personally done this. Not in relation to blackmail or threatening someone else’s child, but in trying to help someone “act in a way I deemed righteous” at their potential expense. I did this kind of “forced accountability” a number of different times with different people, thinking I was helping them. I deeply regret it. This has been one result of the SGM stuff happening: it’s helped me to realize how wrong this mindset is. It’s not accountability; it’s self-righteousness and trying to be the Holy Spirit.
I would say :new but I’ve been around for a while, just reading.
You said “The blame more on SGM” … That’s the problem. SGM is an entity. Sin doesn’t come from an entity. Sin comes from individual people. Individual leaders within SGM sinned against Larry. Their sin was BLACKMAIL.
How can any of them, CJ included, be allowed to continue to preach the gospel??? They BLACKMAILED a fellow believer.
No church discipline???? A few “I’m sorry”s???
Forgiveness, Yes!!! Allowed to continue leading??? NO FLIPPING WAY!!!!!!
#143 ExCLcer’sMom – Just to be clear, I am not advocating a “mass exodus” from CLC….quite the contrary. I am advocating a mass “stand up and be heard” from the members of CLC. However, your idea about putting a note in the offering plate is very creative and would show an eagerness on the part of the congregation to be heard.
I bet you that if the congregation began to do this, they would at least make a “less costly” means for them to be heard! It is sad when people are guided by money. :(
Someone asked about the FL pastor who was on one of the three committees who made the judgement call on CJ. His boss is Aron Osborne. Aron was mentored by Dave Harvey for many, many years. There are people who see him as a VERY ambitious mini me of Dave’s.
People always said that someday Joshua Harris would take the reigns of SGM. I always shook my internal head and said to myself, “No way, it’s going to go CJ, Dave, then Aron.”
I would take little comfort from the hope a pastor under Aron that
Sorry, computer problem.
I was saying I would have little confidence that any pastor under Aron would not be heavily influenced by Dave Harvey.
We can hope, but I highly doubt it.
Dave, you ARE my brother. Please open your heart to hearing the voices of the saints and the HolySpirit. I beg you to soften your heart to all the nameless, faceless saints. Those who have had no voice, but bleed when cut. Please SEE their pain. Please HEAR their cries. Goid can and will change your heart. He will make it of flesh. Yes, it means you will feel more pain, and you will hurt, too. But I know you are strong enough to be made tender.it isn’t easy, but allowHim to make you tender and gentle. You will seldom regret it.
Just read through the docs and I am not at all surprised. It’s typical sgm. They will not change, they do not and have never believed in any type of member owned church. It’s a leader owned organization. Always has been and always will be. That is not going to change. It’s easy to see why Pope Ceej believes it – he’s in charge and he will always be on the top of the food chain. That will never change. He managed to surround himself with people who bought into his view. A narcissist would not surround themselves with anyone but yes men.
Same as why it’s easy for the men to buy into the whole patriarchical system – they are the ones in control.
SGM is all about control of the sgm population – that is never going to change. No one that sees SGM for what they are should not be surprised at all at the documents or the decisions made. That is who they are – a narcissist doesn’t change, especially one pushing 60.
One possibility that I thought of this afternoon and is only a possibility as far as I know is that CJ only being reinstated temporarily might be enough to appease some churches that were going to leave SGM if CJ came back. That is maybe this is one of those back room deals where this was the agreement.
Thus maybe there is a possibility that even CLC will stay within SGM since CJ is supposedly only coming back temporarily as a leader. Again just another possibility.
Things may now start to get a bit complicated. From CJ’s letter today:
First, I want to give immediate attention to helping the interim board transfer governance to their successors. In 2010 we began considering how to expand the SGM board and better define their role in evaluating and overseeing the president. Now that the interim board has served its purpose, it is time for us to complete the transition to a more permanent expanded board. I look forward to seeing this process through and benefitting from the leadership that an expanded board will provide for Sovereign Grace.
1. What were the original plans in 2010? Have those original plans changed or been reworked since that time, especially given the last 6-7 months?
2. Will the “more permanent, expanded board” look more like a standard parachurch or non-profit board (i.e. individuals from outside the denomination, other ministry/business/academic leaders), or is it going to remain a denomination-only body?
3. If the latter, what will be the involvement, if any, of individual SGM churches in the new board composition?
4. Will there be a “polity test” for continuing affiliation with SGM? This is a question of current import given that CLC is working on a new church constitution and FFX’s Polity Working Group is busy evaluating different systems of church government.
I suspect Joshua knew very early-on that the Mahaneys, Ricucci’s and, the ‘band of brothers’ intended to permanently flee CLC. And yet, nothing was said about that.
I am even willing to bet that Joshua knew quite early that there was no possibility of ‘working things out’ between him and CJ. He likely knew it after their private meeting, over the summer, about six months ago.
He also probably had a real good idea of what the SGM Board was composing. And yet, the church was left hanging for months.
And so, why did Joshua choose to make it seem as if he and CJ were merely having a ‘minor disagreement’, one that would surely be resolved, when it was obvious they were drifting further apart? Why would he continue to allow the church to believe this, even after the brothers-in-law departed, enlisted in seminary classes, took internships in Baptist churches and at least one sold their house and moved out of state? Why was the church told nothing?
Why were the members of CLC misinformed of the seriousness of the dispute? Why did Josh not even inform the church when his private meetings with CJ ended?
I wish these were only transparency issues. Unfortunately, they, long ago, moved into the realm of deceit and obfuscation.
To prove this you need only see who is the beneficiary of this kind of behavior? I guarantee you, the people in the church do NOT benefit in ANY way by being uninformed or duped.
On this very tough day may I encourage all those who believe in Jesus.
God has long been in the business of revealing and tearing down idols. Men have long been in the business of erecting idols and putting faith and trust in anything but God. This season has been a tough one, and I suspect for many in SGM, that SGM has long been that idylic, perfect Chistian experience where the SGM brand FINALLY got Christianity right! SGMers have no way to diffuse attacks on their idol except to declare slander and gossip.
I am not sure this story is about abuse and shepherding as much as it is a story about “idol destruction”.
My encouragement to SGMers is that you, as a spirit filled Christian, can have relationship and fellowship with God, can lead your families, can find new churches, you can have meaning and can have peace filled faith apart from SGM….by following Jesus and not the “idol of the perfect Christian Church”. I believe the spell cast on SGMers is the fear that SGM is the true Church, and that for individuals SGM has become an idol…..God is smashing the golden calf…..I for one am finally completely done with the idol of SGM and will pray for my brothers and sisters to see the light and follow Jesus not some mad made idol. Rant over.
Haymitch #26 — I read the reports of the panels and also found the Tomczak part to be well done. The panelists there seemed to be fairly open-minded and articulate.
To add to #31 — Unfortunately the panel considering the Tomczak situation was not asked to say if CJ’s actions there were worthy of disqualification from ministry or from the presidency of SGM. That’s a whole other matter to address. Questions carefully worded can bring about desired conclusions.
Many people at my SGM church will hear that CJ has been found fit for ministry and never even know, or care what he was judged on. They’ll think, “ok, just as we thought”.
There is wickedness afoot. God will not be mocked. Nor will lies and deception always reign. The truth will be revealed, no matter what kind of deception is used.
The people who have stuck their heads in the sand for far too long, will eventually have to take it out and see that their idol is just that.
Questions carefully worded can bring about desired conclusions.
That’s the thought I kept having as I read through that report.
Honestly, the whole thing has seemed like a gigantic face-saving exercise, with a predetermined outcome. The Tomczak portion is particularly interesting in this respect. Yes, it feels as though the panel performed a thorough investigation. But built into the report throughout are plenty of little things that could explain and excuse CJ’s behavior – not the least of which is the panel’s statements about the culpability of the entire organization for CJ’s actions.
On the face of it, indicting the whole bunch is pretty radical. The panel comes across as open-minded and fair. But what they seem to forget is this: CJ bears the responsibility for being the one to introduce the Tomczak child’s sin into the conversation in the first place, since the sin was confessed privately to him. He could have controlled the release of that information to the rest of the board but did not…and that fact gets glossed over.
Above all, I think what’s missing from all the reports is an objective perspective on the dynamics at play in how CJ’s magnetism, force of personality, and leadership style affected the thinking and behavior of the rest of the board. From little statements woven throughout, it’s evident that there was a tremendous amount of concern that the board give off the appearance of unanimity and unity. There was a palpable sense of worry, for instance, over how Larry’s stated doctrinal differences would affect SGM members’ receptiveness to the “Reformed direction” in which SGM was moving at that point. Image and appearance were paramount. It is clear that under CJ’s leadership, a great deal of thought was put into controlling people’s perceptions of what their leaders were really doing and thinking as they made leadership decisions behind closed doors.
Considering all of this, it’s almost crazy that the present-day board sees themselves as still having the authority to state whether or not CJ is presently qualified for ministry. Yes, a lot of the panelists weren’t around back then, but several of the key leaders who were so consumed with following CJ’s leadership and presenting a unified face back in the Larry T days are still exerting major amounts of influence over the current process. (Dave Harvey, I’m looking at you.)
If they exercised bad judgment back then and if they failed to rein in CJ and stand up for righteousness back then, then what in the world makes some of these same guys qualified to issue statements about anything now? We can see from the panel’s summary of the Larry T scenario that they all shared culpability under CJ’s leadership. Why would anything be different now?
Honestly, the more I think about this whole process, the more head-spinning it is…the more of a kangaroo court…the more theatre of the absurd…
I think you’re spot on with the comments. And further, I think these guys feel qualified to do what they do because of the way they perceive the nature of their “calling”. They are uniquely qualified to run the show because they are endured from on high with authority and ability not based on their office. Not much different than the concept of Apostolic succession and papal infallibility. So even when they screw up in the human sense, they have a divinely sanctioned “I’m rubber, you’re glue” view of the world.
Also, about how it feels like a face-saving exercise with a pre-determined outcome…
I don’t necessarily think that the pre-determined outcome and the face-saving are primarily about saving CJ. Instead, they are about engineering a way to let CJ leave his president position with dignity…while preserving the credibility of the rest of SGM’s leaders (many of whom have been, as I said, culpable in everything CJ did wrong during the Larry T debacle)…and preserving the credibility of the larger SGM brand…which in effect comes back around to preserving CJ’s own reputation…
Hang with me here. Let me try to explain my thoughts…
I think it’s safe to say that prior to his own statements about his supposed areas of true giftedness, very few people would have characterized CJ as someone who was more cut out to be a pastor of a local church rather than the president of and “special guest speaker” for a denomination. Also, considering CJ’s multitudes of statements over the years about the need to pass the torch on to younger guys, and considering how long it’s been since he’s actually been involved in the day-to-day nitty-gritty of actual pastoral work, it’s downright ludicrous to think that sending CJ off to be a plain old pastor at the age of 60 (give or take) is something that would have sprung up spontaneously in CJ’s own heart. It’s pretty obvious that this “I am actually gifted to be a pastor – that’s what I need to do” business is more of an exit strategy, a way for CJ to ditch his role at SGM in a manner which won’t make it look like he was forced into stepping down.
Considering how CJ doesn’t attend an SGM church and considering how his sons-in-law and daughters have all run for the exits as well, and considering all this weird out-of-nowhere talk about CJ’s need to go back to being a little ol’ ordinary pastor, it seems pretty obvious that it was already determined a long time ago – no matter what these panel reports would say – that he would not keep his job as SGM’s president for the long term.
Yes, the panel reports are in, and the SGM interim board has declared CJ fit for ministry. But what is that about, really? Is that about CJ’s own fitness? Or is it about preserving the SGM organization (face-saving), even as CJ is actually shown the door?
It’s all tremendously clever, if you think about it. Everyone involved in this process knows that CJ has actually been a hot mess when it comes to following his own prescriptions for humility and submission to authority. They all know that he strong-armed Larry out and has been running the show for years. They all know that if the truth were to be revealed, CJ’s real persona is nothing like the one he presents to the public – he’s not actually the humble Reformed clown.
The majority of SGMers – including key board members – don’t actually want CJ as their president.
But CJ is so closely identified with the SGM brand that they can’t just say this. They can’t disqualify him from ministry, for in doing so, they will disqualify SGM in the minds of too many. Plus, enough about CJ’s bad behavior and lack of accountability has gained traction with the public. Enough of the truth is out there now. The curtains have been pulled back just enough that to do nothing would be a public relations nightmare.
And by their own words, we know that SGM leaders are very concerned about public relations, about how their actions appear to their constituents.
So what to do? They have to do something. But whatever they do cannot actually detract from CJ’s credibility. CJ needs to go, long-term, but CJ cannot go out on bad terms.
So they split up the task. Divide and conquer. Give little groups of guys little pieces of the puzzle and hope that nobody fully grasps the big picture. They all do their thing. The board is implicated just enough but not too much so that CJ can be declared “fit for ministry.” CJ starts spouting off the ridiculousness about needing to be a plain old pastor again. His whole clan actually knows the real scoop, so they all flee for greener pastures.
And SGM is able to carry on. They appear to have gone through all the steps to hold their leader accountable, all the while not actually disqualifying their leader. But their leader is, ultimately, out the door…his legacy intact…his hand-selected successor in place.
Haymitch, welcome. Gotta love the name. You from the UK?
Rabbit trail alert, y’all.
Haymitch is a character played by Woody Harrelson in an upcoming movie based on the novel series “hunger Games”. Haymitch is, speculating of course, a post-apocalyptic version of the current English name Hamish.
“Hamish Macbeth” was a BBC television program, with the main character described as follows…
” Macbeth is a police constable in the small Scottish town of Lochdubh, who occasionally bends the rules when it suits him or when it can help some of his fellow eccentric townsfolk.”
Sounds a lot like the panel’s evaluation of CJ and the blackmail incident…
But who will be the successor?! Can it be that Josh Harris has actually also been brilliantly engineered into being the “One” – coming across through all this as the object of active resistance, being rebuked by “the Board” several times – and openly pleading for change, repentance etc? Yet underneath was still having his apron strings tugged by C J? Oh I hope not. I hope it was real and genuine. :(
Hey ATC – from #90 (previous post),
Thanks for the warning/reminder!
Oh trust me – there is a HUGE difference between forgiveness/reconciliation and “undying trust” like many SGM members used to have in their leaders. I am more than aware of those gentlemen’s reputations and past history. :( I am just an “eternal optimist” – I guess!! :wink:
The glaring problem that colors the “Larry section” is the implication that since the blackmail-spun-as-mere-coercion threat was only in effect for 11 days, that the Tomczak’s statement that it hung over their heads for a decade is somehow not true. :barf:
A simple retraction does not, in any way, remove the emotional trauma that could hang over someone for years. The panel’s statement about this is, in itself, spiritually abusive, and shows them to be sanctimonious bullies. Bad form from the panel. Or, perhaps I should say it in language these men of proven character can understand. This was simply not helpful. :barf: .
And so, why did Joshua choose to make it seem as if he and CJ were merely having a ‘minor disagreement’, one that would surely be resolved, when it was obvious they were drifting further apart? Why would he continue to allow the church to believe this, even after the brothers-in-law departed, enlisted in seminary classes, took internships in Baptist churches and at least one sold their house and moved out of state? Why was the church told nothing?
Why were the members of CLC misinformed of the seriousness of the dispute? Why did Josh not even inform the church when his private meetings with CJ ended?
This is confusing to me, since it is not what I have experienced. I’ve been in several contexts with Joshua, such as the “coffee with the pastors” meetings, where it seemed to me that Joshua was not in any way attempting to minimize the level of disconnect between him and CJ. It seemed very clear that he was grieved by their disagreements and frustrated by lack of progress toward reconciliation. There was also a post on the members’ blog about CJ and Joshua’s initial mediation meetings describing how they had reached an impasse over confidentiality issues. And it was also reported on the members’ blog how CJ had communicated a number of serious concerns to the CLC pastors about their leadership. I’m not sure how all these communications are minimizing the seriousness of the dispute or failing to inform us of the lack of progress?
Bob K. posted this on his Facebook wall yesterday:
The impulse of the legalist is to leave rather than love, separate rather than serve, condemn rather than care.
This had 35 “likes.”
Given the timing of the quote it seems the under lying message is: you’re a “legalist” if you leave, separate, or condemn CJ and SGM.
I commented on this post with the following:
A legalist is, by definition, one with excessive adherence to law or formula. The theological definition is dependance on moral law rather than personal faith. “Leaving” a corrupt institution has nothing to do with dependance on moral law for personal faith. Someone’s personal faith could be damaged by staying in certain damaging situations/environments, therefore leaving would be beneficial to their personal faith. Especially when an institution has systemic problems they refuse to acknowledge. Or such an institution, or leaders of such an institution, cannot admit wrongdoing. Leaving would then be the pertinent thing to do for one’s personal faith.
“Leave” is not juxtaposed to love
“Separate” is not juxtaposed to serve
“Condemn” is not juxtaposed to care
Those are not opposites. Except, perhaps, in some other “dictionary.”
The “impulse” of the legalist is to excessively adhere to law or formula; to rely on moral law rather than personal faith. A personal faith can then be free to leave, love, separate, serve, condemn, care, etc. without an excessive reliance to some moral law, which destroys personal faith.
:scratch Im scratching my head wondering what the hubbub is now. did he not confess and repent? are we not to then seek reconciliation. was this a sexual sin that disqualifies him from ministry? What do people here define as something that disqualifies? is CJ not saved or something? please enlighten me :) wrong is wrong and it seemed to me like wrong was made plain as wrong and OPENLY not quietly. if it was a shallow confession then ok, but that he stepped down was proper right? Was it that we all want to vote like Baptists, Democratic Americans or ? I believe God knows all that is going on and I trust in Him, not these fallible men of SGM. If that was the case, I’d leave everytime my pastor was snippy. so please enlighten me. Im missing it and PROBABLY HUGELY from all these negative responses. :oops:
Another one of your brilliant analyses. It sure seems to make sense why this was all done the way it was done. A great way to save face. As you point out, with how intertwined Mahaney’s reputation is with SGM’s reputation they wouldn’t dare want to point out the obvious about Mahaney or it would reflect poorly on SGM.
It was a crafty way of handling this. If SGM knows how to do anything it is protecting their image.
Mahaney may say he is going to step down and just be a regular pastor with a plant but that is really doubtful. It’s similar to when someone steps down from a high profile position in a corporation they say that this was due to caring for a sick relative or something like that when there was a lot more to the story. ;-)
I couldn’t believe how the report claimed CJ stepped down to not have any influence during all of this. If that was the case, why was CJ allowed to speak at the Pastors’ Conference? Does that really show him stepping down?
As I said before, why did the report not mention CJ’s talk at the Pastors’ Conference where he seemed to backpedal on his confession CLC in July 2011? The report used Mahaney’s “confession” as a way to justify not disqualifying Mahaney for what he did to Tomczak. How could they do that and not mention Mahaney’s subseqiemt backpedaling?
They pointed out what Mahaney said about Tomczak to CLC (with the tape recording off) but sadly didn’t use the term slander that SGM so freely uses. Why didn’t they call for some type of a public apology/repentance to Larry if it was so wrong?
If it’s OK, I am going to respond to one of your questions with a question. (I hope this doesn’t annoy you.)
You said, “was this a sexual sin that disqualifies him from ministry?”
In that question I almost felt an implication so that is what I am going to ask you about. Are you trying to say that it is only sexual sin that would disqualify CJ from ministry?
I am still new I know a lot of you people are not surprised. Still not sure what I wanted from this. I am frustrated and worried….. and sad. My family loves my SGM church and there has been fruit. This feels like having a child that you love dearly and they just continue to make bad decisions and break your heart.
I think Oswald would come on here every so often and call for us to be praying, and we need to do that.
As for me – I need to stand on my own two feet. Seek the Lord’s will, and be content. I have let church issues consume me in the past (before my SGM church), and I cannot afford to do that. I will try to put this garbage out of my mind and evaluate my SGM church for what it is, and shoot straight. If I get heat for being honest, then there is my answer. If there is collaboration and we work to move things forward with the congregations help, then that is even better.
What I find troubling are the aspects of the reports (particularly Why Not Vote?) that would seem to indicate that SGM is hunkering down and clinging to its authoritarian pyramid-shaped leadership model, despite all the talk of change.
The odd thing, Kris, is that I am 100% in favor of “elder rule”, and I do not like “voting”. But something just feels so wrong to me and one would think that I would have no problem. There is just something discomforting about the way they “do” elder rule. Anyway – enough posting and reading for me. It gets unhealthy.
Responses to the previous thread:
#119 – Golden said, “I am personally tired of SGM/CJ beating up on Josh/CLC”. Exactly, this is why it is important for Josh and the church to stand up to them. They (CJ/SGM) have behaved like spiritual bullies for far too long.
#122 Steve – good posting!
#126 Persona – regarding your concern that there is no forum, I agree, there needs to be a forum.
#143 ExCLcer’sMom – Just to be clear, I am not advocating a “mass exodus” from CLC….quite the contrary. I am advocating a mass “stand up and be heard” from the members of CLC. However, your idea about putting a note in the offering plate is very creative and would show an eagerness on the part of the congregation to be heard.
The final report is on wikileaks:
8. Final Comments on the Life and Ministry of CJ Mahaney
“He served…”
“he was instrumental…”
“he has led this ministry…”
“He has worked hard…”
“He has taught us…”
“He has modeled…”
“He has promoted and established doctrine…”
“He has shown us how…”
“He is the best man for this position”
Surely they’re talking about Christ or Paul of Tarsus? Nope… CJ Mahaney
Bonus:
“Our ministry and our churches have gained respect”
Kris…sorry for posting so much today but I have to respond to “Sick With Worry”. My heart goes out to you regarding your confusion and frustration with Elder Ruled polity. Would you feel more comfortable with: Christ Ruled, Elder Led, Congregational Accountable? If so, throw your support behind CLC and pray that they stand strong in the polity they proclaim.
Off to my church’s prayer meeting. catch you guys later…..
Kris 2
That portion of the document really sounds like it was written by Dave Harvey (the next president of SG?). It oozes with authoritarianism as he expresses their inclination to retain their grip over the organization.
Pretty scary in that there appears to be no one above them in authority (maybe not even God Himself?) It almost looks like deism, where God gives all authority to SG pastors for a lifetime, and then stands back and observes how they use it.
Do they really think everyone is going to take this sitting down?
I think SGM’s approach to “elder rule” feels wrong because it’s not actually true representative elder rule. Also, true representative elder rule does not necessarily mean congregational rule (where members vote on all church governing matters).
When one hears the phrase “elder rule” in “normal” Christianity, it generally means that church members have some official voice in the selection of elders. Men from the congregation – laymen, not vocational pastors – will be nominated and then submit themselves to a congregational vote. Whomever the members elect then form the board, which makes most decisions. (Some church constitutions will stipulate that if a decision involves spending more than a certain amount of money, the congregation also must vote to approve such a decision.)
At SGM churches, they talk about “plurality” and say they are “governed by elder rule.” But the “elders” at SGM churches are typically paid staff pastors whose livelihood depends upon maintaining the continued good graces of the senior pastor. These “elders” actually answer in no formal manner to the congregation. At some SGM churches, the “elders” (paid staff pastors) even make their own salary decisions. The more senior a member of the church staff is, the fewer (if any) people there are to whom he is accountable.
The SGM type of “elder” rule bears little resemblance to actual elder rule as it is practiced in “normal” Christianity. I think that’s probably why it doesn’t sit right with anyone who actually stops to think about how SGM has redefined key terms.
Just thought I’d mention: Justin Taylor’s popular blog, Between Two Worlds, has excerpts from the report and a link to it. One of the excerpts, concerning Larry Tomczak’s departure, says, “The coercive threat was sinful.” I wanted to comment that the “coercive threat” was blackmail. When I tried, here’s what I got:
“There are no comments yet. Be the first!
Comments are closed.”
Taylor’s blog has been known for being open about comments. But, for some reason, he’s making an exception here. Near the end of the post, he writes: “This has been a trying season for a ministry and friends I love and respect.” Tim Challies forbad any negative comments about CJ Mahaney. Taylor has gone him one better by forbidding any comments at all. The wagons are always kept ready for circling.
I just finished the Larry portion – and DANG SON – that was really good (to me)
I thought they hit almost every nail on the head in that situation.
They’re conclusions about the blame seeming to be more in SGM as a whole rather than CJ as a person ring true with how I’ve been feeling as well.
Before SGM Survivors, I had a tremendous amount of respect for Reformed bloggers like Tim Challies and Justin Taylor. Now, though, after watching their steadfast refusals to quit endorsing and promoting SGM/CJ, even after a veritable chorus of voices has begged them to ask their SGM “friends” the hard questions, I’ve come to the reluctant conclusion that ultimately, these bloggers’ judgment has been clouded by their need to maintain the good graces of all the others out there in the book-writing, book-schlepping, book-endorsing Reformed world.
Sigh.
I’m not surprised at Justin Taylor’s response. Or lack thereof.
And, of course, there’s this: if many SGMers themselves can barely digest the reality of their leaders’ authoritarian abuses, then why would these outsiders see it, when CJ and Co put on only their brightest, shiniest, most appealing faces when they’re interviewed or are out promoting their books?
I have decided I just don’t like the way “The Board” communicates. CJ’s letter was fine for me, all of the reports were good to me, but the notes from “The Board” all come across as… proud? I am not sure if that is the right word… not humble? :-p
In case you didn’t see it yet, Brent has responded to the report concerning his dismissal from Grace Community Church on his blog. Also, SGM has a link to the report on CJ on their blog now. I guess they figured they’d better post it since it has already hit the internet. They do not, however, include “Why Not Vote”.
CJ also has a ‘View from the Cheap Seats’ today.
Kris: “And, of course, there’s this: if many SGMers themselves can barely digest the reality of their leaders’ authoritarian abuses, then why would these outsiders see it.”
I’m sure many/most people at Cov Fel will be satisfied with CJ being declared fit to be president. And they’ll wonder what was all the to-do about, anyway. But, ahhh, it’s over now and we can go back to things as they were.
Unbelievable.
This sentence really rang true for me:
“…the net result was that they were manipulating Larry to act in a way they deemed righteous and doing so at the potential expense of his child.”
I have personally done this. Not in relation to blackmail or threatening someone else’s child, but in trying to help someone “act in a way I deemed righteous” at their potential expense. I did this kind of “forced accountability” a number of different times with different people, thinking I was helping them. I deeply regret it. This has been one result of the SGM stuff happening: it’s helped me to realize how wrong this mindset is. It’s not accountability; it’s self-righteousness and trying to be the Holy Spirit.
I would say :new but I’ve been around for a while, just reading.
Haymitch #15 — Praise God for the ways He works in us.
:welcome
Brokenhearted …
You said “The blame more on SGM” … That’s the problem. SGM is an entity. Sin doesn’t come from an entity. Sin comes from individual people. Individual leaders within SGM sinned against Larry. Their sin was BLACKMAIL.
How can any of them, CJ included, be allowed to continue to preach the gospel??? They BLACKMAILED a fellow believer.
No church discipline???? A few “I’m sorry”s???
Forgiveness, Yes!!! Allowed to continue leading??? NO FLIPPING WAY!!!!!!
Haymitch, post #15 :goodpost
Bob,
I bet you that if the congregation began to do this, they would at least make a “less costly” means for them to be heard! It is sad when people are guided by money. :(
Welcome, Haymitch! Thank you for piping up and joining in! I really like what you said.
Someone asked about the FL pastor who was on one of the three committees who made the judgement call on CJ. His boss is Aron Osborne. Aron was mentored by Dave Harvey for many, many years. There are people who see him as a VERY ambitious mini me of Dave’s.
People always said that someday Joshua Harris would take the reigns of SGM. I always shook my internal head and said to myself, “No way, it’s going to go CJ, Dave, then Aron.”
I would take little comfort from the hope a pastor under Aron that
Sorry, computer problem.
I was saying I would have little confidence that any pastor under Aron would not be heavily influenced by Dave Harvey.
We can hope, but I highly doubt it.
Dave, you ARE my brother. Please open your heart to hearing the voices of the saints and the HolySpirit. I beg you to soften your heart to all the nameless, faceless saints. Those who have had no voice, but bleed when cut. Please SEE their pain. Please HEAR their cries. Goid can and will change your heart. He will make it of flesh. Yes, it means you will feel more pain, and you will hurt, too. But I know you are strong enough to be made tender.it isn’t easy, but allowHim to make you tender and gentle. You will seldom regret it.
I like the sand
It’s really grand
It gets in my eyes
And it gets in my mouth
But I like
I like the sand
I like the sand
It’s really grand
It keeps me from seeing
And even from thinking
So I like
I like the sand
I like the sand
So here I’ll stay
The truth, it keeps at bay
I like the sand
It’s really grand
For me, it’s the only way
Just read through the docs and I am not at all surprised. It’s typical sgm. They will not change, they do not and have never believed in any type of member owned church. It’s a leader owned organization. Always has been and always will be. That is not going to change. It’s easy to see why Pope Ceej believes it – he’s in charge and he will always be on the top of the food chain. That will never change. He managed to surround himself with people who bought into his view. A narcissist would not surround themselves with anyone but yes men.
Same as why it’s easy for the men to buy into the whole patriarchical system – they are the ones in control.
SGM is all about control of the sgm population – that is never going to change. No one that sees SGM for what they are should not be surprised at all at the documents or the decisions made. That is who they are – a narcissist doesn’t change, especially one pushing 60.
Here’s my prediction . . .
CJ will plant his new church, and take away all of the CLC-ers who are unhappy with CLC leaving SGM.
CJ’s new church will take over CLC’s place as The Model SGM church.
Anyone want to place odds?
:new
One possibility that I thought of this afternoon and is only a possibility as far as I know is that CJ only being reinstated temporarily might be enough to appease some churches that were going to leave SGM if CJ came back. That is maybe this is one of those back room deals where this was the agreement.
Thus maybe there is a possibility that even CLC will stay within SGM since CJ is supposedly only coming back temporarily as a leader. Again just another possibility.
Thanks so much for the kind comments. Whether in or out of SGM, God has been kind and good to all of us through Christ.
I just finished reading all 51 pages, and I actually thought the Tomczak section was pretty solid.
And Brent’s crusade is looking more and more like a personal vendetta every day.
Christianity Today has a blog entry about this:
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2012/01/sovereign_grace.html
You can post comments there.
Things may now start to get a bit complicated. From CJ’s letter today:
1. What were the original plans in 2010? Have those original plans changed or been reworked since that time, especially given the last 6-7 months?
2. Will the “more permanent, expanded board” look more like a standard parachurch or non-profit board (i.e. individuals from outside the denomination, other ministry/business/academic leaders), or is it going to remain a denomination-only body?
3. If the latter, what will be the involvement, if any, of individual SGM churches in the new board composition?
4. Will there be a “polity test” for continuing affiliation with SGM? This is a question of current import given that CLC is working on a new church constitution and FFX’s Polity Working Group is busy evaluating different systems of church government.
Quiet observer…I think I’m with you.
I suspect Joshua knew very early-on that the Mahaneys, Ricucci’s and, the ‘band of brothers’ intended to permanently flee CLC. And yet, nothing was said about that.
I am even willing to bet that Joshua knew quite early that there was no possibility of ‘working things out’ between him and CJ. He likely knew it after their private meeting, over the summer, about six months ago.
He also probably had a real good idea of what the SGM Board was composing. And yet, the church was left hanging for months.
And so, why did Joshua choose to make it seem as if he and CJ were merely having a ‘minor disagreement’, one that would surely be resolved, when it was obvious they were drifting further apart? Why would he continue to allow the church to believe this, even after the brothers-in-law departed, enlisted in seminary classes, took internships in Baptist churches and at least one sold their house and moved out of state? Why was the church told nothing?
Why were the members of CLC misinformed of the seriousness of the dispute? Why did Josh not even inform the church when his private meetings with CJ ended?
I wish these were only transparency issues. Unfortunately, they, long ago, moved into the realm of deceit and obfuscation.
To prove this you need only see who is the beneficiary of this kind of behavior? I guarantee you, the people in the church do NOT benefit in ANY way by being uninformed or duped.
On this very tough day may I encourage all those who believe in Jesus.
God has long been in the business of revealing and tearing down idols. Men have long been in the business of erecting idols and putting faith and trust in anything but God. This season has been a tough one, and I suspect for many in SGM, that SGM has long been that idylic, perfect Chistian experience where the SGM brand FINALLY got Christianity right! SGMers have no way to diffuse attacks on their idol except to declare slander and gossip.
I am not sure this story is about abuse and shepherding as much as it is a story about “idol destruction”.
My encouragement to SGMers is that you, as a spirit filled Christian, can have relationship and fellowship with God, can lead your families, can find new churches, you can have meaning and can have peace filled faith apart from SGM….by following Jesus and not the “idol of the perfect Christian Church”. I believe the spell cast on SGMers is the fear that SGM is the true Church, and that for individuals SGM has become an idol…..God is smashing the golden calf…..I for one am finally completely done with the idol of SGM and will pray for my brothers and sisters to see the light and follow Jesus not some mad made idol. Rant over.
Haymitch #26 — I read the reports of the panels and also found the Tomczak part to be well done. The panelists there seemed to be fairly open-minded and articulate.
To add to #31 — Unfortunately the panel considering the Tomczak situation was not asked to say if CJ’s actions there were worthy of disqualification from ministry or from the presidency of SGM. That’s a whole other matter to address. Questions carefully worded can bring about desired conclusions.
Many people at my SGM church will hear that CJ has been found fit for ministry and never even know, or care what he was judged on. They’ll think, “ok, just as we thought”.
Sad how Christianity Today glossed it over –
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2012/01/sovereign_grace.html
There is wickedness afoot. God will not be mocked. Nor will lies and deception always reign. The truth will be revealed, no matter what kind of deception is used.
The people who have stuck their heads in the sand for far too long, will eventually have to take it out and see that their idol is just that.
God will not be mocked.
Oswald said,
That’s the thought I kept having as I read through that report.
Honestly, the whole thing has seemed like a gigantic face-saving exercise, with a predetermined outcome. The Tomczak portion is particularly interesting in this respect. Yes, it feels as though the panel performed a thorough investigation. But built into the report throughout are plenty of little things that could explain and excuse CJ’s behavior – not the least of which is the panel’s statements about the culpability of the entire organization for CJ’s actions.
On the face of it, indicting the whole bunch is pretty radical. The panel comes across as open-minded and fair. But what they seem to forget is this: CJ bears the responsibility for being the one to introduce the Tomczak child’s sin into the conversation in the first place, since the sin was confessed privately to him. He could have controlled the release of that information to the rest of the board but did not…and that fact gets glossed over.
Above all, I think what’s missing from all the reports is an objective perspective on the dynamics at play in how CJ’s magnetism, force of personality, and leadership style affected the thinking and behavior of the rest of the board. From little statements woven throughout, it’s evident that there was a tremendous amount of concern that the board give off the appearance of unanimity and unity. There was a palpable sense of worry, for instance, over how Larry’s stated doctrinal differences would affect SGM members’ receptiveness to the “Reformed direction” in which SGM was moving at that point. Image and appearance were paramount. It is clear that under CJ’s leadership, a great deal of thought was put into controlling people’s perceptions of what their leaders were really doing and thinking as they made leadership decisions behind closed doors.
Considering all of this, it’s almost crazy that the present-day board sees themselves as still having the authority to state whether or not CJ is presently qualified for ministry. Yes, a lot of the panelists weren’t around back then, but several of the key leaders who were so consumed with following CJ’s leadership and presenting a unified face back in the Larry T days are still exerting major amounts of influence over the current process. (Dave Harvey, I’m looking at you.)
If they exercised bad judgment back then and if they failed to rein in CJ and stand up for righteousness back then, then what in the world makes some of these same guys qualified to issue statements about anything now? We can see from the panel’s summary of the Larry T scenario that they all shared culpability under CJ’s leadership. Why would anything be different now?
Honestly, the more I think about this whole process, the more head-spinning it is…the more of a kangaroo court…the more theatre of the absurd…
All I got to say is “unfreakenbelievable”.
Kris #36 –
I think you’re spot on with the comments. And further, I think these guys feel qualified to do what they do because of the way they perceive the nature of their “calling”. They are uniquely qualified to run the show because they are endured from on high with authority and ability not based on their office. Not much different than the concept of Apostolic succession and papal infallibility. So even when they screw up in the human sense, they have a divinely sanctioned “I’m rubber, you’re glue” view of the world.
Endured = endued
Autocorrect is evil.
Ack. And I meant based on their office, not their ability. Coffee, where are you?
Read it. :(
So he’s only stepping back in “temporarily” as many predicted. C J M says;
“I think it would be wise for SGM to have a new president who has gifts better suited to serve SGM in the coming season”. (p46).
I suppose that’s something.
Also, about how it feels like a face-saving exercise with a pre-determined outcome…
I don’t necessarily think that the pre-determined outcome and the face-saving are primarily about saving CJ. Instead, they are about engineering a way to let CJ leave his president position with dignity…while preserving the credibility of the rest of SGM’s leaders (many of whom have been, as I said, culpable in everything CJ did wrong during the Larry T debacle)…and preserving the credibility of the larger SGM brand…which in effect comes back around to preserving CJ’s own reputation…
Hang with me here. Let me try to explain my thoughts…
I think it’s safe to say that prior to his own statements about his supposed areas of true giftedness, very few people would have characterized CJ as someone who was more cut out to be a pastor of a local church rather than the president of and “special guest speaker” for a denomination. Also, considering CJ’s multitudes of statements over the years about the need to pass the torch on to younger guys, and considering how long it’s been since he’s actually been involved in the day-to-day nitty-gritty of actual pastoral work, it’s downright ludicrous to think that sending CJ off to be a plain old pastor at the age of 60 (give or take) is something that would have sprung up spontaneously in CJ’s own heart. It’s pretty obvious that this “I am actually gifted to be a pastor – that’s what I need to do” business is more of an exit strategy, a way for CJ to ditch his role at SGM in a manner which won’t make it look like he was forced into stepping down.
Considering how CJ doesn’t attend an SGM church and considering how his sons-in-law and daughters have all run for the exits as well, and considering all this weird out-of-nowhere talk about CJ’s need to go back to being a little ol’ ordinary pastor, it seems pretty obvious that it was already determined a long time ago – no matter what these panel reports would say – that he would not keep his job as SGM’s president for the long term.
Yes, the panel reports are in, and the SGM interim board has declared CJ fit for ministry. But what is that about, really? Is that about CJ’s own fitness? Or is it about preserving the SGM organization (face-saving), even as CJ is actually shown the door?
It’s all tremendously clever, if you think about it. Everyone involved in this process knows that CJ has actually been a hot mess when it comes to following his own prescriptions for humility and submission to authority. They all know that he strong-armed Larry out and has been running the show for years. They all know that if the truth were to be revealed, CJ’s real persona is nothing like the one he presents to the public – he’s not actually the humble Reformed clown.
The majority of SGMers – including key board members – don’t actually want CJ as their president.
But CJ is so closely identified with the SGM brand that they can’t just say this. They can’t disqualify him from ministry, for in doing so, they will disqualify SGM in the minds of too many. Plus, enough about CJ’s bad behavior and lack of accountability has gained traction with the public. Enough of the truth is out there now. The curtains have been pulled back just enough that to do nothing would be a public relations nightmare.
And by their own words, we know that SGM leaders are very concerned about public relations, about how their actions appear to their constituents.
So what to do? They have to do something. But whatever they do cannot actually detract from CJ’s credibility. CJ needs to go, long-term, but CJ cannot go out on bad terms.
So they split up the task. Divide and conquer. Give little groups of guys little pieces of the puzzle and hope that nobody fully grasps the big picture. They all do their thing. The board is implicated just enough but not too much so that CJ can be declared “fit for ministry.” CJ starts spouting off the ridiculousness about needing to be a plain old pastor again. His whole clan actually knows the real scoop, so they all flee for greener pastures.
And SGM is able to carry on. They appear to have gone through all the steps to hold their leader accountable, all the while not actually disqualifying their leader. But their leader is, ultimately, out the door…his legacy intact…his hand-selected successor in place.
Brilliant.
Haymitch, welcome. Gotta love the name. You from the UK?
Rabbit trail alert, y’all.
Haymitch is a character played by Woody Harrelson in an upcoming movie based on the novel series “hunger Games”. Haymitch is, speculating of course, a post-apocalyptic version of the current English name Hamish.
“Hamish Macbeth” was a BBC television program, with the main character described as follows…
” Macbeth is a police constable in the small Scottish town of Lochdubh, who occasionally bends the rules when it suits him or when it can help some of his fellow eccentric townsfolk.”
Sounds a lot like the panel’s evaluation of CJ and the blackmail incident…
But who will be the successor?! Can it be that Josh Harris has actually also been brilliantly engineered into being the “One” – coming across through all this as the object of active resistance, being rebuked by “the Board” several times – and openly pleading for change, repentance etc? Yet underneath was still having his apron strings tugged by C J? Oh I hope not. I hope it was real and genuine. :(
Hey ATC – from #90 (previous post),
Thanks for the warning/reminder!
Oh trust me – there is a HUGE difference between forgiveness/reconciliation and “undying trust” like many SGM members used to have in their leaders. I am more than aware of those gentlemen’s reputations and past history. :( I am just an “eternal optimist” – I guess!! :wink:
The glaring problem that colors the “Larry section” is the implication that since the blackmail-spun-as-mere-coercion threat was only in effect for 11 days, that the Tomczak’s statement that it hung over their heads for a decade is somehow not true. :barf:
A simple retraction does not, in any way, remove the emotional trauma that could hang over someone for years. The panel’s statement about this is, in itself, spiritually abusive, and shows them to be sanctimonious bullies. Bad form from the panel. Or, perhaps I should say it in language these men of proven character can understand. This was simply not helpful. :barf: .
Some questions for Persona (#30):
This is confusing to me, since it is not what I have experienced. I’ve been in several contexts with Joshua, such as the “coffee with the pastors” meetings, where it seemed to me that Joshua was not in any way attempting to minimize the level of disconnect between him and CJ. It seemed very clear that he was grieved by their disagreements and frustrated by lack of progress toward reconciliation. There was also a post on the members’ blog about CJ and Joshua’s initial mediation meetings describing how they had reached an impasse over confidentiality issues. And it was also reported on the members’ blog how CJ had communicated a number of serious concerns to the CLC pastors about their leadership. I’m not sure how all these communications are minimizing the seriousness of the dispute or failing to inform us of the lack of progress?
Bob K. posted this on his Facebook wall yesterday:
This had 35 “likes.”
Given the timing of the quote it seems the under lying message is: you’re a “legalist” if you leave, separate, or condemn CJ and SGM.
I commented on this post with the following:
The whole thing was deleted not long after.
:new
:scratch Im scratching my head wondering what the hubbub is now. did he not confess and repent? are we not to then seek reconciliation. was this a sexual sin that disqualifies him from ministry? What do people here define as something that disqualifies? is CJ not saved or something? please enlighten me :) wrong is wrong and it seemed to me like wrong was made plain as wrong and OPENLY not quietly. if it was a shallow confession then ok, but that he stepped down was proper right? Was it that we all want to vote like Baptists, Democratic Americans or ? I believe God knows all that is going on and I trust in Him, not these fallible men of SGM. If that was the case, I’d leave everytime my pastor was snippy. so please enlighten me. Im missing it and PROBABLY HUGELY from all these negative responses. :oops:
Kris Comment 42 :goodpost
Another one of your brilliant analyses. It sure seems to make sense why this was all done the way it was done. A great way to save face. As you point out, with how intertwined Mahaney’s reputation is with SGM’s reputation they wouldn’t dare want to point out the obvious about Mahaney or it would reflect poorly on SGM.
It was a crafty way of handling this. If SGM knows how to do anything it is protecting their image.
Mahaney may say he is going to step down and just be a regular pastor with a plant but that is really doubtful. It’s similar to when someone steps down from a high profile position in a corporation they say that this was due to caring for a sick relative or something like that when there was a lot more to the story. ;-)
I couldn’t believe how the report claimed CJ stepped down to not have any influence during all of this. If that was the case, why was CJ allowed to speak at the Pastors’ Conference? Does that really show him stepping down?
As I said before, why did the report not mention CJ’s talk at the Pastors’ Conference where he seemed to backpedal on his confession CLC in July 2011? The report used Mahaney’s “confession” as a way to justify not disqualifying Mahaney for what he did to Tomczak. How could they do that and not mention Mahaney’s subseqiemt backpedaling?
They pointed out what Mahaney said about Tomczak to CLC (with the tape recording off) but sadly didn’t use the term slander that SGM so freely uses. Why didn’t they call for some type of a public apology/repentance to Larry if it was so wrong?
Hi New York City,
Welcome! You ask some GREAT questions.
If it’s OK, I am going to respond to one of your questions with a question. (I hope this doesn’t annoy you.)
You said, “was this a sexual sin that disqualifies him from ministry?”
In that question I almost felt an implication so that is what I am going to ask you about. Are you trying to say that it is only sexual sin that would disqualify CJ from ministry?