Larry and Doris Tomczak’s Response To SGM Panels’ Reports
February 1, 2012 in Sovereign Grace Ministries
Open Letter Upon Release Of SGM Panel Report On Tomczak Departure
7 Concerns
Larry and Doris Tomczak
A week ago my wife and I completed a 21 day fast to seek the Lord for 2012. Near the top of our list were issues related to SGM (Sovereign Grace Ministry). At the end of the fast we received a call from Dave Harvey, interim President of the ministry, wanting to ask forgiveness for his sinful behavior towards us and our family almost 15 years ago. A week later he sent us an advance copy of their panel report dealing with our departure from SGM.
What follows is our public response to this public report. It would serve the reader to first read the statement we made available on our website larrytomczak.com entitled, “The Tomczak Departure from SGM – What Really Happened?”
As Doris and I said in our “Departure” statement, we are not blameless in our journey. We love all those involved and simply present here observations that either amplify or adjust some points expressed in the SGM report. We forgave our brethren years ago but, as a matter of integrity, present here seven significant points that need to be addressed.
1. BIAS
The hope of onlookers regarding the panel was for an unbiased 3rd party to assess a few of the critical issues and offer their wisdom. Unfortunately, the examination was basically handled “in house” by sincere men who had a definite stake in the outcome – namely their livelihood and the preservation of the ministry image.
The SGM board member and two SGM senior pastors who wrote the report are to be commended for their hard work. This was an unenviable task because of their longstanding close association with SGM leaders, direct involvement in the ministry, and their families’ ties with many church members. Would they “get in trouble” if they stated things contrary to what other senior leaders desired in the outcome?
When President Clinton was being accused of immoral and unethical behavior, an independent counsel, Kenneth Starr, was brought in with his team to investigate matters for Congress and the American people. If something similar happened to our current President, you would not think it wise to have fellow Democrats, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid leading the panel! Yet this was the approach chosen by the SGM board. And while others objected, we felt it was important to participate despite our misgivings and trust God to work through a less than ideal process.
2. BLACKMAIL
On October 14, 1997 our journal entry records the following: “Larry and our child talked by phone with a lawyer. He advised Larry to tell the Team (the board) to ‘not even think of using our child’s confessed sins to blackmail Larry.’ ‘It’s blackmail and punishable by jail, prosecuted in every state – no exceptions. It’s a breach of penitent/counselor confidentiality.’”
When Ted Kober, the President of Ambassadors of Reconciliation heard the tape recording of what was said to us repeatedly by the Team he dropped his head in dismay while his associate literally wiped away tears.
The panel report says, “CJ allowed for the possibility of making known their child’s sin if Larry communicated that he was leaving SGM over doctrinal disagreement.” This minimizes CJ’s sin and describes it far too mildly. He made a direct, emphatic and unethical threat. He was not allowing for the possibility, he was promising to expose our child. In our conversation, we confronted him three times with the word “blackmail” to describe his threats. His exact words back to us were “I’m stating it!” He threatened us with blackmail!
- At the first mention of the threat, Doris called CJ on it: “That’s blackmail!”
- In two subsequent taped conversations with other SGM leaders we again labeled it “blackmail.”
- An attorney from whom we sought counsel defined it as “blackmail.”
- National leaders who heard the tape recordings referred to it as “blackmail.”
I read the following words to CJ in Nashville from Webster’s dictionary:
“Blackmail: extortion (the act of obtaining from a person by force or undue or illegal power or ingenuity) by threats especially of public exposure.”
Webster’s dictionary defines what it is and, as they say, “It is what it is!” Why soft-pedal this coercive threat that was used to obtain our silence? Plus we have the recordings to prove it and have requested on several occasions that the SGM board and others that were involved listen with us to themselves on the tapes before there’s asking of forgiveness. To date they have dismissed our request.
While CJ, and the SGM board and the panel report acknowledge what happened was “coercive, wrong and sinful,” they all stop short of being specific about the most egregious offense which is immoral, illegal and unethical. It was premeditated, repeated and agreed upon by all the leadership team. (The report makes this clear.)
Departed board members Paul Palmer and Brent Detwiler both cited “blackmail” when they asked forgiveness – the former over 8 years ago! Yet when Dave Harvey called us the week before the report’s release, he (like CJ, Steve Shank and Larry Malament) hedged on using the accurate and serious designation.
Isn’t it time to once and for all stop any “spin,” man up, and confess it for what it is? And an addendum…if CJ and Steve have a “vague recollection” (as stated in the report) of CJ supposedly calling us within a few days to “withdraw the threat” so it really didn’t “hang over” us for over a decade, why when CJ and Steve called our child 5 years later to finally ask forgiveness for some of the areas of offense did they still refuse to call and ask forgiveness of Doris and me even when our child asked them to? Why would it take 14 years before CJ and Steve would finally confess the injustice and even then “tone it down” with softer terminology? These are real questions that warrant real answers. By the way, they have a “vague recollection” of some call. WE HAVE NO RECOLLECTION of any such call! We wouldn’t have forgotten it or failed to put it in our journal of those events!!
3. BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY
The vow of confidentiality that CJ made to our child is sacrosanct and inviolable. Tragically, CJ broke this vow by divulging details to a person who is trustworthy and who came forward with the specifics. The report said, “CJ has no recollection of this conversation,” and then moved on. A serious ethics violation of this magnitude cannot be brushed off as seemingly insignificant. A man of sterling character who described in detail what was said to him by CJ in violation of a clergy/penitent vow has to be given weighty consideration. It should be considered alongside of other sinful conduct surfacing in a leader who is under investigation. More is needed here. In addition to this event, Larry Malament also revealed confidential details to other members of the SGM Team and local leaders in a conference call we were a part of on October 8, 1997. Later, a Team member relayed that Larry M. also did this on another occasion and stands ready to testify accordingly.
4. BREAKING THE MATT. 18 ETHIC IN A PUBLIC ASSEMBLY
At Covenant Life Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland (a church that we co-founded in our apartment and in which we invested 15 years of our lives), CJ stood before over 1,000 people (with guests and unbelievers present) and branded me a “liar.” He admits he instructed technicians to “turn off the tape” and did say, “I’d rather be dead than do what Larry Tomczak is doing.” In spite of several witnesses (for example, one teenage boy told us he confronted CJ to his face a few days later) and having been confronted with his exact words in print for over a decade, the report says, “CJ does not recall saying anything along these lines.” We do not believe this is sufficient reason for dismissing the charge.
Last year at Covenant Life Church, CJ acknowledged some of his sinful attitudes in the above episode. Many believe his confession was incomplete; he minimized the severity of public slander in violation of Matthew 18:15-17; and still needs to make amends for debasing in a single moment a leader’s reputation built upon 25 years of Christian ministry.
5. BANISHMENT
Over the years one of the most common accusations brought against SGM is one where former members are shunned or banished after disagreement with leaders or simply choosing to leave the church. The report confirmed this to be our experience, with which multitudes identify.
The panel cited CJ’s public criticisms “was the death of Larry’s reputation at CLC…church members stopped interacting with them.” [We would add these included close relatives for many years.] CJ sent a letter to pastors asking them “not to engage in casual conversation or pursue fellowship with Larry.” He penned a letter to thousands of folks throughout the movement of churches suggesting I was under “church discipline” when I never was. This manipulated people into shunning us by confusing them. Friendships built for years were shattered overnight. The panel members were courageous in allowing this material to be included. What needs to be underscored is how, under CJ’s leadership, instruction, and personal example, this un-Christlike treatment of us and many others of God’s precious sheep was allowed to flourish. Some SGM board members, local pastors and church members are guilty of blindly following his lead.
Our experience brings this to the surface and should not be ignored. We turned over to the panel the names of over 105 leadership couples who experienced spiritual abuse in SGM. Imagine how many other church members have also been victims.
Families have been devastated, close friendships destroyed and children have turned away from the Lord and church involvement in the wake of this uncharitable practice. Our own extended family was divided and still feels the painful effects of this ungodly treatment until this very day.
Where this has happened, may leaders humbly repent and change their ways to allow a new season of blessing and favor for SGM. The report says this is not “systemic”. The reality is, it has been a pattern that has devastated our immediate and extended families plus scores of God’s people across the country. It must be acknowledged, confessed and renounced. Our situation brings it into the light so changes can be made to avert future hurt and relational devastation.
6. BETRAYAL
When I consented to take a leave of absence to deal with family matters, I had every intention of returning to my leadership position in our local church and in SGM. This is very significant to grasp! In the months preceding the blackmail, our entire family experienced “lording over, abuse of authority, manipulation and control” (which CJ confessed and asked forgiveness for in our December, 2010 Nashville reconciliation). This treatment brought us to the point where it was untenable and as a matter of conscience, we had to leave SGM. We literally felt as an entire family we were under “house arrest” with our every action, word and motive scrutinized and questioned. The legalism became unbearable. The report also acknowledges I was “stuck,” left without any process of appeal.
The report cited how I initially “gave agreement” to Reformed doctrinal tenets, but later changed my mind. There is truth to this but two points need to be made: 1) I, like many former SGM leaders who had also left over the doctrinal changes, was wavering and reluctant to comply. I finally mustered the courage to speak up, die to “fear of man” and express my true sentiments regarding differences of doctrine. 2) My major battle was with the fear of man in an atmosphere of intimidation and man-pleasing. I remember sitting in a “Team” meeting where it was said, “Mark Altrogee and Benny Phillips (SGM senior pastors viewed as suspect at the time) may have to be let go if they don’t agree with the Reformed Doctrine.” I thought, “Larry, be careful – will I be next?” I should have spoken up and suffered the potential consequences. I confess my former cowardice.
What wasn’t made clear in the panel’s report are related and significant points revealing the depth of betrayal I encountered.
- Criteria established by SGM leaders for returning to my former role as senior pastor made it an impossibility unless I embraced certain Reformed doctrinal tenets which in my conscience I could not do.
- People nationwide were deliberately misled. An example would be, “It was always our intention to see Larry restored as senior pastor.” Numerous disingenuous public statements and letters went out to SGM churches and nationwide which misrepresented what actually happened.
- My “7 Reasons for Departing PDI” (SGM) were not conveyed to people as I requested.
- My “confession” letter was the result of intimidation which forced me to use loaded terms, affirm SGM leaders and insert material with which I was uncomfortable, but required to include.
- At a public church meeting, CJ instructed me to nod in agreement with what he would say while I appealed that I couldn’t do it in good conscience.
- Three former SGM board members, two former administrators and three of the Atlanta leaders in the church at that time (who have all left SGM) cite “abuse of spiritual authority, over lording, and deceitful conduct” in their experience. This is tragic.
Scripture calls us to “restore” struggling Christians in a “spirit of gentleness” (Gal.6:1). Although most of the leaders have come forward to repent and ask forgiveness for what was done to us (as the report reveals), what needs to be understood are the aspects of betrayal and levels of deceit that forced our departure from a ministry we co-founded and never intended to leave.
“Did you leave without the leaders’ blessing?”
Yes – we believe we had no alternative.
“Did you honor your commitment to not return to public ministry for ‘at least 6 months’?”
Yes – on the exact date the 6 month season expired, I spoke for the first time on a Sunday to an inner city church gathering at the invitation of a dear friend.
7. BAD THEOLOGY
This point can be made briefly. Over the years SGM has experienced “bad fruit” from “bad theology” and, thank God, begun to make changes. The panel stated the obvious, uncharitable treatment we endured, the lack of compassionate care in a difficult family situation, the “over emphasis on indwelling sin,” etc., etc.
A number of the same SGM board members and pastors who attacked us judgmentally have now experienced their own family “issues” which tempered them and drove them to confess their sinful, self-righteousness to us, several of them in genuine tears.
The report highlighted how “misguided” it was to believe the idea that “good pastors = good kids” and admitted “that there was too much of a link made between Larry’s parenting and his child’s sin.”
Other areas could be cited but our point here is that CJ and SGM leaders should be more forthright in their public repentance through public statements addressing where they veered off course theologically. Multitudes believe there still is too much “spin” and “self-vindication” among top-tier leaders.
A nationally known leader and frequent speaker at SGM churches and conferences told me something months ago that I can’t forget. For close to two decades this man has provided counsel and instruction to SGM and has intimate knowledge of the inner workings and problems of the ministry. Here’s his observation:
“The number one problem with many of the Sovereign Grace Ministry leaders is their propensity for self-vindication.”
We suggest you pause here and reread this leader’s observation.
May this panel’s report, our two published statements, as well as constructive criticism to SGM from numerous places (see the email at the end of this document from a former long-time SGM pastor) in this “time of discipline” for Sovereign Grace Ministry and its primary leaders, help these men to address unbiblical positions and practices to honor the Lord, heal wounds, and regain favor as an overall ministry.
POST SCRIPT: BLAMELESS [AND ABOVE REPROACH]?
In order to be faithful to criteria for Biblical leadership, SGM must steer clear of the sin of favoritism and partiality [starting with CJ], and be consistent with what was expected of former SGM leaders. The question still remains: should the SGM senior leaders step down for a season to be retooled for ministry according to I Pet. 5:1-5; Titus 1:5-9; I Tim.3:1-7; and I Tim. 5:17-24? Perhaps the best way to answer this is the following: “If the things in the panel’s report, in our two statements, and in the accompanying email came to light regarding your pastor, would you give him a “pass?” Would you deem him fit for ministry according to the qualifications of Scripture?
“Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task. Now the overseer must be blameless...” 1 Tim 3:1-2
BELOW IS A LETTER (E-MAIL) WE RECEIVED FROM A FORMER, LONGTIME SGM PASTOR. WE READ IT AFTER WE COMPLETED OUR “OPEN LETTER” AND FOUND THE OBSERVATIONS TIMELY, ACCURATE AND ILLUMINATING. WHEN GROUPS OF SGM LEADERS ARE MENTIONED, WE’D OFFER THAT THERE ARE DEGREES OF CULPABILITY. REMEMBER PAUL PALMER AND BRENT DETWILER, DEPARTED SGM LEADERS, CONFESSED AND REPENTED OF BLACKMAIL WHILE WE STILL AWAIT THAT RESPONSE FROM THE OTHER SGM LEADERS. HERE IS THE LETTER:
Friends,
First of all, I believe that the panel was inappropriately tasked to ask the Wrong Questions. He who frames the questions controls the debate, and I believe that’s exactly what the SGM Board attempted to do. Given the gravity of the situation, I don’t think three questions were nearly enough. But given the three, here’s my opinion of what they should have been:
1. Not – “Was CJ’s participation in fellowship in keeping with the teachings of scripture?”
Rather – “Did CJ violate the standards of fellowship, confession and repentance that he imposed on other SGM pastors & leaders? Did CJ behave in a manner that would not have been tolerated by any other SGM pastors under his authority? (Broaden the scope of the question to consider any wider patterns of double-standard hypocrisy. For example, did CJ’s own son act out in ways that would have, and did, get other SGM pastors fired from their jobs? Are there any other “high-status” leaders in SGM, whose teenagers experienced behavioral troubles, but they and their jobs were “protected” – unlike other SGM pastors before them?) In other words: Was CJ giving himself the benefit of living by different standards than he espoused and enforced?”
2. Not – “Did CJ wrongly influence the process of Brent’s dismissal from Mooresville?”
Rather – “Did CJ demonstrate a historical pattern of marginalizing and disposing of SGM leaders that did not meet up to his subjective, extra-biblical standards? Did he “shun” them and teach others to do so by his example? Was Brent already a “dead-man-walking” before he even started at Mooresville because CJ had already punished him, for self-serving reasons, with the loss of status & ministry? Did CJ preside over and infuse an entire SGM culture with an extra-biblical pattern of dismissing & casting aside some of its own pastor/leaders in an unloving and unreasonable manner?”
3. Not – “Was Larry Tomczak’s departure from SGM handled properly?”
Rather – “Did CJ attempt to blackmail Larry Tomczak by means of thoroughly unethical threats against his family? Did other members of the SGM board do the same? Was it a “heat-of-the-moment” threat made out of emotion & quickly regretted, or was it a “cold-blooded” & purposeful act, only rejected 11 days later after severe rebuke from a respected lawyer. (In other words, did CJ & others back off by reason of moral repentance or functional impracticality? It seems clear that they did not immediately express any sorrowful repentance to Larry and his family.) Is attempted blackmail an “ordinary” sin or a “scandalous” one?
On a secondary note, if the panels wish to address the legitimate question of whether Larry Tomczak’s departure was handled properly, they needed to dig back a little further. Larry’s departure began much earlier with his systematic marginalization from SGM ministry. After CJ assumed primary leadership of the organization, he acted to steadily limit Larry’s influence and opportunities there. He greatly limited Larry’s involvement in CLC, a church he had co-founded. He greatly limited his role as a speaker at SGM conferences and events. Larry had to move his church membership to Fairfax in an attempt to find meaningful involvement. Similar to Brent’s experience many years later, Larry had to move on to new territory, in Atlanta, to attempt a new church plant in order to satisfy his God-given desires to serve in ministry. The handling of the departure of Larry Tomczak from SGM began years before the blackmail. The whole process of fault-finding, leading to marginalization and more fault-finding, leading to removal and eventually active shunning needs to be examined. Especially in light of the widespread impression that this represents a pattern that was repeated with many other leaders in SGM.
Further questions:
A. Why does the panel lean so heavily on quoting Larry’s letter of resignation & repentance as a defense for CJ, seeming to implicate SGM’s partial justification in light of Larry’s admitted faults? That letter is actually “Exhibit A” in a very serious suggestion of abuse-of-power and manipulative practice by SGM. Many other deposed SGM pastors have been required to write similar self-incriminating letters against themselves. It’s a wonderful CYA tool for SGM, and is being used as such right before our very eyes. The problem is that these letters are frequently coerced and highly influenced by SGM. They are frequently edited to make sure they come out the way SGM wants them to sound. Larry, and other pastors in similar positions, was under enormous pressure to go along with the program and write what would satisfy those who wielded the power over his life and future. Think in terms of communist Chinese re-education camp confessions. That letter of Larry’s represents a shameful exercise in SGM bullying, manipulation, intimidation and abuse. They should be ashamed of using it against him now.
B. The report cites the board’s appeal for Larry to continue with their program of rehabilitation rather than leave prematurely. They so wanted him not to leave for the wrong reasons. They claimed this was a matter of integrity. And they so wanted to be able to commend him after a successful restoration process. The problem with this line of reasoning is that THERE WAS NO PROGRAM OR PROCESS OF RESTORATION!!!!! Just ask the other 100-150 pastors who have been cut loose by SGM. What is the recidivism rate for SGM pastors who have been deposed? Between 1-2%? Stick around for restoration? Really? SGM has no history of restoring pastors. SGM has a lot of explaining to do about its pattern of “throw-away” pastors.
C. The “ironic” integrity apparently sought by the SGM leaders, in dictating Larry’s departure terms, seemed to revolve around the proper portrayal of Larry’s disqualification as a poor parent. People who have been around Larry’s family know that is patently unfair! (Again I am reminded of the extra-biblical standards which were used as a cudgel on former pastors with teenage kids but which were no longer applied in later years to CJ and other “high status” SGM leaders.) Bear in mind the situation at the heart of the coercion. It involved a 17-18 year old young man who was not caught in his sin. Rather, he had taken personal initiative to expose his own failings by seeking out and confessing to spiritual leaders in the vain hope of finding help to experience the grace of God. Question: Did these highly-placed SGM leaders represent God well as conduits of His grace? This is the fuller context of the blackmail.
D. In the panel’s attempt to minimize the seriousness of the blackmail, (ie. It did not continue for a decade like Larry intimated… CJ & Dave & Brent & Steve were motivated by their desire to “protect” the movement of churches… They wanted to frame Larry’s departure with “ironic” integrity… They never acted to follow through on their empty threat…), the panel members overlooked an important point. The threat of blackmail actually worked!! By their own admission, Larry did NOT mention doctrinal differences in his departure explanations, even though he clearly wanted to. The coercion was effective!! CJ and the board were saved from the legal liabilities of applying blackmail, but they ended up achieving the desired goal.
E. If CJ had truly repented of his offenses towards Larry, why didn’t he act expeditiously to bring Larry back to CLC to publicly redress his public slander of Larry before the church? He publicly called Larry a liar and said that, “I’d rather be dead than do what Larry’s doing.” CJ actively destroyed much of Larry’s reputation and many of his long-time relationships at CLC and beyond, but was grossly inadequate in taking measures to publicly restore him.
Closing thought: I found it very disturbing that the panel overseeing the Tomczak blackmail repeated claimed to present findings in a way that was slanted against CJ. It seemed absolutely the opposite to me. I thought they took every opportunity to place Larry in a negative light in order to minimize the culpability of CJ & the gang. They repeatedly highlighted mitigating circumstances that took the edge off the crime perpetrated by CJ, Dave, Brent & Steve. And then, the SGM board has the audacity to refer to the panel’s report as “objective”.
Objective?!?!?!? That was never even a remote possibility given the make-up of the panels. Please don’t insult our intelligence by anointing them with “objectivity”. In fact, the SGM Board should make known the criteria by which the panel members were selected. The original process of selecting “jurists” was supposed to have some aspects of randomness. Can the Board unequivocally assure us that they did NOT hand pick the panelists of their choice and rule out the pastors that they didn’t want? Please defend the integrity of the process.
And now we wait for the AoR report. But that has already been re-framed for us as merely a catalogue of local grievances presented without corroborating witnesses or cross-examination. Something to learn from and use for making changes and addressing deficiencies. But apparently having no bearing on any evaluation of the qualifications of senior SGM leadership.
© 2012, Kris. All rights reserved.
Praise God!
The SGM Board is doomed!!! There is no way they can talk their way out of this one.
Another bomb has dropped.
I remember hearing one person talk about Anthony Weiner and indicating that it would have gone a lot better for him and would have made it easier to return to politics if he had been honest initially. Due to Weiner’s duplicity he drug himself more through the mud and will that harder to ever return.
It looks like C.J. Mahaney and other SGM Leaders are doing the same.
So many good points in what Larry wrote. What a sad story of SGM spin and deception.
Kris #156 in the previous thread although it’s also applicable to the email Larry includes at the end of this post.
My $0.02
That’s because Kevin DeYoung wasn’t asked to do any due diligence with actual former SGM members so he didn’t. Kevin chose to interpret the questions he was asked narrowly so that talking to actual former SGM members wasn’t required to answer them. (Kevin should have chosen differently but as a regular reader of his blog, I can say that Kevin isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed and has a hard time seeing things from a point of view that’s not his own.)
Nickname’s remarks that you highlight are important. That is, that the key thing is not getting the right answers it’s asking the right questions. SGM didn’t ask Kevin DeYoung the right questions so Kevin came up with unhelpful answers.
Once again I am reminded of Moses and Pharoah.
Each time it starts looking hopeful for the oppressed, Pharoah reverts back to stubbornness.
Then it’s the Lord’s turn.
So here’s the next chapter in the saga.
Fortunately, God always wins in these situations-remember, He cannot be mocked.
My respect for Larry increases each time we hear from him. He comes across as being honest, gracious, and firm. He admits his sins. He fasts and prays. He waits on the Lord for 14 years.
I wonder if CJ ever thought to fast during his “season of reflection”?
One other point here about Larry is how CLC had removed Larry from the Church’s history. At times their history was even deceptive indicating that CJ was the leader from the church’s start. Last I looked CLC put Larry Tomczak back into the history of CLC.
QE2 –
“Season of reflection”??? – Last I heard it was for the purpose of a “a fair process.” As if CJ not being around (which he was) was going to make the process “impartial.” What a silky smoke screen. It’s hard to believe that anyone reading the material that SGM puts out could actually buy into it. What I’d like to know is if they are so self-deceived that fhey don’t know what they are doing, or are the ones at the top purposeful? After reading this post, I would have to say purposeful. None of them should be leading anything for a very long time, if ever.
This is off topic and not intended to be snarky, but it made me laugh –
http://larrytomczak.com/parenting_cd_series.php
:p :p :p :p :p :p
In other news I though this letter was REALLY well written, well said, gracious and humble while still being TRUE. Very good. :)
Mom in #159 on the last thred –
When you look at amounts of money CJ has donated and the organizations CJ has made those donations to and look at the conferences he has attended and spoken at without asking for a speaker’s fee and other types of influence peddling you get a better idea ofwhat the money is spent on. When you think of almost a million coming in from CLC every year and a few hundred thousand from SGC-Fairfax, CovFel, Cornerstone you can see the means for a lot of influence peddling.
And a question that should also pop into your mind at this point is what do the base churches get for their tithe? Did CLC receive almost a million dollars worth of services from SGM and CJ this year? Was there a million dollars worth of missionary work going on under the umbrella of SGM? Will a million cover the cost the of AoR contracts?
I think this is “God The Rod and Your Child’s Bod” revamped a little?
http://larrytomczak.com/books/little_handbook.html
Again – not to be snarky – just posting.
God, The rod… was a book I read when I was EIGHT – to see where my parents were getting their crazy ideas ;-)
intheNickoftime, that is EXACTLY what I mean! Of course, it would seem inappropriate and guady for them to live “too lavish” a lifestyle, but there are other ways to misuse funds. As I stated in another post, I noticed back in the 80’s, when they first started the building fund, the “temporary offices” on Girard St had expensive furniture, expensive oil paintings, and snack machines (that did not cost anything for use) that had all the very expensive snacks(for that time period- perrier water, smokehouse almond packs-these were not so accessible in the grocery stores at that time), all the while, they were cutting funding to single mothers who wanted to send their children to the church school, etc. They were telling everyone to “give til it hurts”, while they snacked on such high dollar stuff, and decorated a temporary office so expensively? Not to mention how you can just see CJ oozing with pride over his office that overlooks the basketball court..those things are all more important than the children of single mothers being included and treated just like the other kids in the church? A lot of things like that I saw..they may not have had a lavish house, but they definitely lived above the means of the majority of the people who were giving til it hurt. I question if anyone can actually show that even 50% of the income was spent in a somber, trustworthy manner! It would be interesting to see how a detailed audit would go, but then again, they are not listed as a church, are they..
If these pastors are taking in a larger income than the average member in their congregation I am sure they are careful to not spend it on anything obvious that would flaunt their wealth and bring attention to how much income they are getting. They may spend it or have it at their disposal as intheNickoftime has indicated or they may spend on things like nice vacations and then don’t let the lavish details get out. They also may be well funding their retirement plans.
Thus just because pastors aren’t flaunting a lavish lifestyle doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t taking in a larger than average income. Again look at all the income the Mahaney clan had that allowed their son in laws to quit without another job and fund a $60K adoption cost. Mahaney didn’t spend it in a flaunting way but was able have nice savings reserves that I am sure most members don’t have.
Giving must be down…. :roll:
http://www.sovereigngraceministries.org/blogs/sgm/post/Announcing-our-February-Sale.aspx
Brokenhearted, I had a copy of that book too! I would be interested in how this one differs from God, The Rod..I know people grow, learn, and change – particularly when they actually own up to mistakes and wrong-doings..Larry and Doris have played their part in things, walked down some difficult paths of their own, and I trust experienced healing, learning and growth as well. I am glad they are being bold enough to speak out now.
Steve, so very true! To flaunt it would be to risk it being reduced! Paid for houses, and large savings accounts, while the congregation donates their children’s college funds! YUCK! :barf:
I hope this information indicating how the SGM leaders handled the situation is a wake up call to all those still in SGM churches. The nine pastors who served on the panels need to be held accountable for the lack of integrity and fear of man they apparently succumbed to as reflected in the above letter.
These nine men are members of their respective churches. The members of those churches have a responsibility before God to speak up and express their appproval or disapproval of how your pastor handled this situation. These men are not ultimately accountable to the SGM board. They are accountable to the members of the church where they attend. If those members do not say anything and thereby allow this atrocity to stand, then this will amount to further shame to the body of Christ. Please…. for Christ’s sake and for the glory of His name say something!
I think it is important, in light of this momentous post, to remind everybody that:
Hum. Does this apply to Plant and Build?
I wept again as I read this comment above. I wept before when it was mentioned here and someone, who is a CLC member or was back then, said ‘so, now what do I do with the feelings I’ve had (about Larry) for all these years’, thinking Larry was a liar and even worse.
“CJ stood before over 1,000 people (with guests and unbelievers present) and branded me a “liar.” He admits he instructed technicians to “turn off the tape” and did say, “I’d rather be dead than do what Larry Tomczak is doing.””
This is so, so sad. To imagine this from someone we trusted to be ‘in the place of God’.
I thought that Larry and Doris did a very good job with their letter. After a quick reading, here are two things that particularly stand out to me:
1. How crazy this panel investigation process actually was – how predetermined and biased, both because of the wording of the questions assigned to the panels and because of the composition of the panels. As the Tomczaks point out,
I think it’s fairly obvious that any panel comprised of SGM pastors would be biased in CJ Mahaney’s favor and would labor under tremendous pressure to conform to the perceived expectations of the majority of SGM pastors and SGM executives. And that leads me to observation #2 –
2. When I first read the panels’ reports last week, I was struck by the way the panel kept citing Larry’s one-time acquienscence to Reformed theology (in a group setting, with all the leaders being called on individually to give either their assent or dissent aloud, in front of the entire group) as though it were some sort of proof that Larry was lying later when he said he was departing from PDI in part because of theological differences over the change in direction. I thought it was very interesting that in this most recent letter, Larry said this:
Obviously, there is a tremendous amount of peer pressure that exists among SGM pastors to think a certain way – whatever way their leaders are thinking. That’s why the SGM board was (supposedly) unanimous in their decision to reinstate CJ. And that’s why Dave Harvey said that despite being in (supposed) agreement on 98% of the issues, Josh Harris still felt the need to step down from SGM’s board back last summer. It’s apparent that among SGM leaders, there really isn’t room for any meaningful dissent.
Keeping all this in mind, isn’t it ridiculous that ANYONE thinks there is ANYTHING particularly objective or meaningful about the fact that 9 of CJ’s underlings didn’t find anything in his behavior that would disqualify him from ministry?
All those quasi-celebrity Reformed bloggers out there who happily reported CJ’s reinstatement have revealed their ignorance about the group dynamic that exists in SGM, particularly among leaders. No matter how sincere and hard-working and honest the panel members might be, could anyone with such long-term conditioning in SGM-style groupthink be objective enough and strong enough to recognize and take a stand for the truth?
I will bet that any SGM member struggling with porn has been less tempted since July.
Sick with worry –
Maybe they came here to read instead and have been set free from SGM mayhem AND the need to look at porn!! :D
This is the part that got me:
This kid wasn’t caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He realized he was in sin and sought help.
In Luke 11 we find:
If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
He received anything but a heavenly example of a Father.
Have they not read?
Roadwork – that was the most disgusting part of the whole deal, that Larry’s son came for honest help to flee sin and he got blackmailed by some man posing as a spiritual leader. Gah! CJ needs to step down JUST for that one. Jerk.
Well, Larry’s teen son didn’t get blackmailed – his parents did.
And I know that by pointing that out, I sound like I’m nitpicking, but in my mind, having your parents blackmailed would be far worse. That kid had to live the rest of his life with the knowledge that his behavior was connected to the the demise of his dad’s career.
That’s correct. It was the parents that were blackmailed. But the kid was doing exactly as we were all taught to do – confess your sin to others and seek help. And he did exactly that. The mistake he made was asking someone in SGM leadership for help. They turned around and used his sin against his parents.
Roadwork,
I’m not meaning to minimize the grievousness of what happened – I actually think the grievousness is magnified by the fact that the kid did what he was taught to do, only to have his parents end up suffering in a big way with life-changing consequences.
I was thinking some more about the pressure put on SGM pastors to put on a show of unanimity, particularly the board members. And really, the object lesson staring them in the face right now has got to be what happened to Brent Detwiler.
No matter what anyone thinks of Brent, it is pretty clear that his SGM career troubles coincided with his efforts to hold CJ accountable and bring correction. With that staring the panel members in their faces, is it any wonder that they focused tightly on the narrow and oddly worded questions they were given…and ultimately presented the facts in such a way that the board members were comfortable declaring CJ fit for ministry?
If nothing else one thing is interesting is how SGM Leaders respond to what they call slander.
First with all the talk about how bad slander is within SGM one would think that there would be a call for Mahaney to publicly repent and correct the actual slander Mahaney did to Larry. Sadly there is no call.
Why was the SGM Board so concerned about the “slander” Brent supposedly did to Mahaney but not that concerned about the actual slander Mahaney did to Tomczak?
I guess they change the rules and consequences depending on who does it. Thus Mahaney is given a free pass.
That whole 3 panel set-up and the 3 whopping questions was a farse to accommodate someone’s idol. And the fact that many of the other RBDs have come out in CJs support without knowing what has gone on is yet more incomprehensible.
Bridget, I totally agree! I am glad that Larry T set an example for some who care to do what is right, and speak truthfully. I hope others follow. It is sad when leaders are the followers, and even more sad when leaders follow in the wrong direction!
Question: since blackmail is a criminal offense, is it too late (statute of limitations) to press charges. Maybe a court of law is what’s needed to resolve this little semantic difference of opinion once and for all. Just wondering. :scratch
Rick #30
or better yet…send it to judge judy…someone who won’t put up with doubletalk and spin….
Blues –
Are you out of your mind – a FEMALE judge!! Can you imagine CJ, Dave, or Steve in front of a female judge. They’d probably scream repentance from the rooftops before they would let that happen! It would be so fitting.
bridget :clap
SGM is banking on the hope that all the members of SGM churches will continue to do what they were taught to do in matters such as this…..nothing. SGM teaches that these types of issues are handled by other leaders, not by the people. Leaders are not subject to Matthew 18. Leaders have effectively insulated themselves from the reach of the people. Therefore, the members of a typical SGM church are inconsequential. The reason CJ’s actions and those of the board and panel appear and feel so brazen is because they believe the church has no responsibility or authority in these matters. Therefore, it makes total sense to do and say whatever SGM wants to do and say. They are very accustomed to receiving acquiescense from the flock, no matter how horrendous things may appear to be. They are not accountable to the flock and since the flock never has any say in decisions such as these, SGM leaders are free to do whatever they like without repercussion.
The scarey thing is, unless the members of SGM churches raise their voice with legitmate concern, ….. this too shall pass. It is this type of behavior from board members, panel members, SGM pastors, and church members that cause others to wonder if SGM is indeed a cult. When reasonable and intelligent men demonstrate a loyalty and allegiance to a man/movement above their loyalty to simply doing what is right, it causes onlookers to scratch their head :scratch .
So where’s the response from Josh Harris and his merry men? What are they waiting for?
The CLC pastors are probably crafting a carefully prepared response. ANY negative response given by the CLC leadership will now officially be labeled as slander by the SGM board since the kangaroo court reinstated CJ and exonerated him of any wrong-doing. The jury is still out on what the CLC leadership will do. We are all waiting. I sent my exhortation to the pastors this evening.
@ Steve240 #11
“If these pastors are taking in a larger income than the average member in their congregation I am sure they are careful to not spend it on anything obvious that would flaunt their wealth and bring attention to how much income they are getting. They may spend it or have it at their disposal as intheNickoftime has indicated or they may spend on things like nice vacations and then don’t let the lavish details get out. They also may be well funding their retirement plans.”
I was a member of Cornerstone Church of Knoxville. My husband was a member of the finance team so he knows this first-hand that the senior pastor has been getting “catch up funds” above and beyond the normal match and contribution to his retirement account.
I’m guessing this is how one feels when a rebellion in a country is about to begin. The winds are ripe for an overthrow of CJ and the current board of directors.
How do CJ and Dave wiggle out of this one? This letter from Larry demands a response. I think Mahaney and Harvey are going to show us all what an epic FAIL looks like.
Wow
I’m lovin’ it! These guys deserve the crow they’re eating right now. Wonder what the good ‘ol T4G boys are thinking. I think God’s had enough of this little group.
Wow, can you imagine the pressure on the AoR guys?
I still think most churches are waiting for the AoR report. I don’t know why, though, since it now will have no effect on CJ’s and the rest of the board’s fitness to minister. Very clever of Mr. Harvey and Co. to get it all cleared up for CJ. If CJ is good then the rest of the Board is good to go too. Wow!! The response from the Board on the AoR report will be “issues to work on.”
b said:
Thanks for sharing this. As has been shared before, there are beneficial tax laws for clergy such as being able declare a large part of their income for their residence and it be tax free. They can also at the same time deduct interest on their home loan. Thus even if a pastor makes a salary that appears average it may actually effectively e.g. take home higher than a secular person making the same salary.
From what I have heard, some SGM Churches have suggested to members they cut back on their retirement funding in order to be able to give more. I hope that wasn’t Knoxville Pastors that said this if they are funding their own “catch up” contributions. That would be quite hypocritical.
It has also been shared that in addition to their salary these pastors get to voucher a number of expenses including meals and an allowance for books. Pastors also get honorariums when they speak at another SGM church despite the pastor being able to voucher all travel expenses and not being docked salary at his home church. Those who write books while being employed by SGM (using “company time”) get to keep all book royalties. Thus again it can be deceptive what pastors make.
With all the money the Mahaney family has come up with to finance his 3 son in laws quitting pastor positions and the $60K to finance an adoption it is quite obvious that Mahaney didn’t “give till it hurt.” It has been reported that Mahaney’s annual salary is $250K. With that kind of a salary it is easier to have spare money.
Blackmail?!
So, prosecute it.
Send them to jail, NOW!
Send Chuck Colson to visit them.
It just may be the best, most kind thing to happen to them.
It could be a “Means of Grace.”
I don’t mean to sound like chicken little, But I see some similarities between what CJ is doing and what happened with Jim Jones in the 70’s, although not quite as severe. But as I recall, when Jones started to get some bad press he would move from one part of the country to another attempting to in some ways reinvent himself. Now, while I am not implying that cj is another Jim jones, I do think it interesting that cj, having built up this ministry from the ground up is so quick to leave it to “become a pastor again”. From a critical eye, it sounds like cj is trying to reinvent himself to exert control over the people he may pastor at this new church, I mean after all, if someone follows cj to his new church, they obviously really believe in him and that he is still a hero…sounds like a good flock for him to lead…
AKS #40 (and others) — I think we should refrain from gloating, and just pray for God to have His way in all of this. Gloating shows a lack of humility and makes it seem as if there has been a man-made victory. God won’t allow that to happen. He WILL be Glorified.
Clearly CJ is not above reproach!
On a completely different note, Larry’s response was written in normal English and was easy to read. This stands in contrast to all the writings of SGM!
And a leftover tithing comment——–I am a member of CLC who stopped tithing there last July. My pastor knows how I feel and we have had no pressure/cooercion to fork over the dough.
If CLC calls us on our lack of giving, it would confirm for us that CLC is NOT a place for us and we’d simply leave. We are sticking around in the hope of …..a miracle, I suppose!
One line that stood out to me from Larry’s letter was —————“The number one problem with many of the Sovereign Grace Ministry leaders is their propensity for self-vindication.”
Wow.
I feel so sobered and glad to see this letter.
Amen Oswald, amen. Please everyone, let’s not forget Galations 6:1 (look to yourselves). I understand your pain, hurt, sense of betrayal & frustration but we have to leave room for God to work, and He WILL work.
The comments on tithing always interest me. Within evangelical Christianity, I’d be willing to bet that tithing is taught more often than not. Most churches I’ve been in, independent, PCA, Baptist, & SGM have all taught tithing as a basic. The Methodists I know did not teach tithing, but they like the idea :D
However, the big difference between SGM and the other churches is that elsewhere, the pastor generally has no idea who tithes and who doesn’t. The pastor is not privy to the giving records of the members. And they don’t ask the question on “scholarship applications” to conferences, “Do you tithe?” as they did in my SGM church. Note also, that in Brent’s documents, there was some kind of back & forth over whether or not a care group/leadership team member had tithed the year before. It became a moot point when it was determined that the man had, indeed, tithed the previous year. All I could think is, “And why is this their business?” In other words, if you don’t give the gold, you have no business making the rules.
It makes me so sad that we gave money to our particular church, then at Celebration, succumbed to the appeal from Headquarters to pledge an extra amount to SGM every month. I dutifully sent that check off — and helped support blackmailers in their never-ending quest for more power. Where can I write for a refund?
Every time something happens, I wonder how many more bombshells are gonna drop. Who else has been blackmailed? Who else was coerced? We know that 100 pastors were somehow fired. We know that others were misled and mistaught and are in need of detox.
SGM needs to shut down. Poison has poured from the headwaters for far too long. SGM is not the church. The Church is the one the gates of hell shall not prevail against. The entire board should resign. Shut down the offices. Put the basketballs in the closet. Donate their assets to the families who’ve suffered blackmail & sexual abuse mishandling so the victims can receive first-rate Christian psychiatric treatment if needed.
People often cite the biblical prohibition against Christians suing Christians. The idea is that such lawsuits should be settled within the church. But SGM is a corporate entity, not an individual. SGM has failed to allow the church to work out these problems. SGM as an entity acts as if it is above the church and above the law of the land — the individuals who make up the SGM entity allowed and enabled blackmail. Can any pastors or lawyers among us comment on whether or not it would be biblically correct to press charges or bring lawsuits in these situations?
What’s the statute of limitations on blackmail in Maryland/Georgia, wherever this occurred?
I appreciate the Tomzcak’s coming forward with this letter. I hope that every last one of the hundred-plus pastors, including Larry, are seeing their own vindication and realizing that the Good Lord did them a huge favor by removing them from the influence of such toxic, sinful, corruption. And if that sounds like gloating, please believe me, it is not. My heart is overwhelmed with grief and pain for the men who have been entangled in this snare, and for their families and friends. Oh, Lord we need your cleansing power, the power of your blood, and the love that covers a multitude of sins. I pray that You would rule and overrule in the hearts of these men.
I’m not a “gloater”, guys…far from it.
Jesus called the Pharisees “wolves” and worse, and went into a tirade turning over tables.
That’s where I’m at with these guys.
Shame on everyone of them! A lot of people (including me once) put a LOT of stock in what these men say. Kris says she kept squelching her concerns about her SGM church because these guys endorsed them and spoke so highly of them. It’s time to hold them accountable.
With the blogs, Brent’s documents, and Larry and Doris’s contributions…they know what’s going on. Shame on them! These guys obviously aren’t too concerned about the “millstone” verse or about standing before God to give an account.
I’ve had enough, guys. In fact, I’m downright pissed. And trust me, God knows it. I pour my heart out to Him about it on a daily basis.