Not Talking…But Talking About Talking
February 23, 2012 in Sovereign Grace Ministries
Yesterday, a reader posted the following in a comment:
Observation 1: Since the reinstatement announcement on 25 January, there have been *no* denominational updates over at Plant and Build blog. We’re going on nearly a month.
Observation 2: In the same period, multiple SGM congregations across the country have been on the receiving end of unity-related and godly speech/slander/gossip-related sermons.
Earlier, when people had been discussing the recent barrage of “Don’t Talk” messages flowing out of SGM pulpits, I wrote this:
I haven’t had an opportunity to listen to any of the messages that have come down the pike about gossip, slander, and “passing along bad reports,” but I think it’s tremendously revealing that this particular topic is what some SGM pastors have chosen to focus on at this time.
I mean, if you consider the amazingly wonderful scope of the Bible, with its pretty much endless store of sermon fodder, and if you consider how the “Gossip & Slander” meme has already been so thoroughly beaten into the SGM culture, to where a significant cause of SGM’s present issues has actually been SGM’s code of silence, where nobody dared speak up, it seems pretty obvious that yet another teaching about “Gossip & Slander” is the very last thing your average SGMer needs.
Yes, godly speech is important. Christians ought to be mindful about what they say. They ought to make every effort to avoid mean-spirited conversations where the goal is to tear others down.
But in my experience, SGMers are already hyper-sensitive about this. They have already been taught frequently about the pitfalls of “Gossip & Slander.” They are very careful in their attempts to honor God, even to the point of trying to steer clear of “Gossip & Slander” according to SGM’s expanded definition, where “Gossip & Slander” no longer means what the Bible or the dictionary would tell us, but instead has come to mean, “Anything one might say that would show one is questioning one’s pastors.”
So, why hammer away on a well-worn subject yet again, when SGMers have already proven themselves to be almost paranoid about avoiding “Gossip & Slander”? Why not just crack open the Bible to some Psalm that celebrates God’s goodness…or focus on our identity as new creatures in Christ…or talk about the glories of the resurrection…or any of a thousand other topics that SGM pastors have tended to neglect over the past decades? Why revisit “Gossip & Slander” now?
(Especially since such messages would seem to be more topical in nature and not the sort of preaching that would be characterized as expository…which is the type of preaching SGM claims its pastors do?)
Sometimes SGM pastors are pathetically obvious, and to me, this is one of those times. Carting out the old “Gossip & Slander” chestnuts at this point in SGM’s history is a desperate attempt to do damage control by controlling the flow of information by controlling what people feel they can say to one another…and even what people can READ. These pastors ought to step back and realize how bad a choice this is. The church members who will listen to them unsuspiciously and eagerly imbibe their directives to not discuss church problems are the very same people who are already so drunk on the SGM Kool-Aid that the pastors have nothing to worry about with them anyway.
But those who have had their eyes opened even just a little bit almost can’t help but see how utterly self-serving yet another sermon about “Gossip & Slander” is…and what a desperate attempt it is to try and put the rain back into the storm clouds.
SGM pastors who are trotting out your “Gossip & Slander” sermons, you might want to rethink that idea. Honestly, I know this line has been mentioned many times here, to the point where it’s become something of a cliché, but you’re so obviously like the little man in Wizzard Of Oz, desperately trying to get people to “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.”
Talking about SGM’s problems, and objecting to CJ’s reinstatement, and rising up and demanding that church leaders make themselves formally accountable to the people whom they supposedly serve – none of that is sinful. None of that is “Gossip & Slander.” It’s just a much-needed dose of honesty, a much-needed reality check, from other members of the Body of Christ. If SGM’s pastors don’t accept this honesty and respond correctly to the reality check, they are going to lose the very kingdoms they are trying so hard to preserve.
© 2012, Kris. All rights reserved.
Link to the CLC letter: http://www.covlife.org/newsletters/2012_02_23/
77 – 98 – 99 –
Does SGM’s attitude about the issues indicate a sense of “spiritual superiority complex?”
Anoher thiught is that if a group “talks” about humulity SO much, are they actually humble? To me, anyway, if you talk about it as much as they talked about it, then it’s no longer humility . . . it’s now “pride” about how humble you are :scratch Or, pride about how humble your leader is . . .
I know I sound like a broken record on some themes, but that’s OK…I guess… :D There are enough new people cruising through here that it probably doesn’t matter if I repeat myself…
I was always taught that true humility is self-forgetfulness. NOT self-denigration, but self-forgetfulness, where one loses oneself in the greatness of Jesus and in serving Him, to the point where one is consumed with much greater thoughts, focused upon Jesus and others.
At the point where one reaches self-forgetfulness, one is truly humble…and one doesn’t have the mental space to even be thinking about humility, let alone talking about it.
What passes for humility within SGM – phrasing things precisely right, so that you don’t come across as too sure of yourself in the face of your superiors up the leadership food chain, engaging in the appropriate amount of flattery with your superiors, groveling the right amount, even forcing oneself to get all beat up by thoughts of the cross – that is all by definition such a self-conscious exercise that I don’t think it can be true humility.
I’m doing this from a phone, so I didn’t read everything carefully, and I won’t get real specific here, but I used the (yeah, now that you mention it, weird) word movement because we aren’t a denomination. I just dont know what else to call it. I agree that there has been an over arching feeling with “the movement” being of spiritual superiority. This was most strongly felt at and among CLC and it’s pastors. The further away you are from rock star churches and pastors, the less that superiority thing exists. But I must say this, the feelings of superiority ( that I have since repented of, and been humbled by all of this crap hitting the fan,) are over as far as I can tell. We are a humbled and hurting “family of churches”.
Just out of curiosity, what do the other groups like acts 29 refer to themselves as? Organizations? Just an honest question. I need to get “movement” out of my sgmese vocab.
Uriah Heep to David Copperfield on maliciously using “umbleness” to get ahead:
“‘When I was quite a young boy,’ said Uriah, ‘I got to know what umbleness did, and I took to it. I ate umble pie with an appetite. I stopped at the umble point of my learning, and says I, “Hard hard!” When you offered to teach me Latin, I knew better. “People like to be above you,” says father, “keep yourself down.” I am very umble to the present moment, Master Copperfield, but I’ve got a little power!'”
Bridget-
You nailed it-talking about humility is just that, talk….true humility does not need a preamble, an audience, and the band to come up during the last 5 minutes in order to be humble. Humility on parade is arrogance in a party dress…
I’m so sick of those that say so and so was so humble, makes me want to :barf: . If CJ was so humble, then yes I would say he would have stopped the parade.
In CLC’s statement:
As I have said before, we these men on these three committees that constrained that they couldn’t have gone beyond answering the question put before them? I am not so sure you can say the men on these panels had true “integrity” if they failed to point out other issues. I am sure they could have gone beyond answering the question had they chose to do so.
Hello Just A Girl- #104: “what do the other groups like acts 29 refer to themselves as? Organizations? Just an honest question. I need to get “movement” out of my sgmese vocab.”
I hear your question. I was confused when I was in my SG church. This is what God taught me after I left….if you are part of the “church,” you will refer to yourself as the “church.” Why would we rename what God has already named? Ephesians 5:23 – “…Christ is the head of the church.”
God bless.
But, “just a girl”–SGM is a denomination.
It has an authority structure. It has distinctive beliefs and practices. It has a financial dimension (sorry for the vague term).
It is a denomination.
They don’t like to call it that, because back in the 80’s they scorned the idea of being like all those “traditional” churches. But they are one.
They used the word “movement” because they had this feeling that they were part of some amazing new thing God was doing, and they were going along with God’s sweeping through the world more than those staid old fuddy-duddies. And I guess there was an element of moving and shaking and changing things, not keeping it the way it had been. “Movement” sounds more Significant and Awesome.
But there is no reason not to call PDI/SGM a denomination. Denomination just means a particular kind. It doesn’t mean “stuffy old pompous hidebound group of churches that hasn’t felt the Spirit move since 1882, if then.” (Sorry, got carried away there. Hee hee.)
Steve @ 108 –
I don’t know about them being able to go beyond the scope of the question. It is quite possible that they were instructed to consider the question at hand “only” and not go beyond the scope of the “specific question.”
That being said, they could have ignored the instruction they might have been given and done what they believed to be good and appropriate in the sight of God. It is also possible that they were asked beforehand to answer the “specific” question only, and if they didn’t feel they could do that in good conscience, then they may have been asked to excuse themselves from the panel.
We really don’t know in what manner they were asked to participate or what instruction they might have been given in regards to their response. They could have been given a great deal of “biblical” instruction so as to feel guilty if they didn’t have the desired outcome. It was all done behind closed doors as is the custom of the leaders of SGM.
I am aware that an AoR representative was involved with the panels, but again, to what extent. From what I understand, after reading at Brent’s blog, AoR was involved, but did not instruct SGM as to HOW they should carry out the process. AoR may not have been involved with any instruction to the panels either.
When we attempt to predict the future of the sgm church ‘movement’ we need to ponder what the biggest issue is for each senior pastor. I think their biggest concern is first, how to retain the most pastors in his stable and second, how to retain the greatest amount of members in their church.
In other words, they will make choices that effect the least amount of attrition of all people involved. Sadly, I do NOT believe moral questions about CJ and SG are central to the equation for them. Although, I would have to say, that is the #1 issue for the membership.
And, if I had to guess what the central issue for CJ and Co. is right now, I believe it is the preservation of the ‘movement’ known as, SGM.
I agree with Lee that the use of ‘movement’ is a substitute for the word ‘denomination’ in the way SGM uses it.
But, because so many ‘movements’ arose in the 70’s, I would say the G.O.B. was only one of MANY that emerged in the midst of the rebellion of the baby-boom generation. The conceit of that generation was that they could make a better world than their parents.
KMD #64
So refreshing to read of an SGM church that actually took the time to think and pray about the panel’s findings. I’m sure CLC isn’t perfect but at least they didn’t do what my former SGM church did (Bristol Grace church) which was to instantly send an email out regurgitating what the Board had written and declaring the problem solved and over.
I wonder how much of the churches response has to do with their notion of whether they could survive without SGM? I mean somewhere like CLC probably has at least some educated, capable, God-fearing leaders but little Grace Church Bristol has a congregation of around 80, has no building and is lead by a pastor not much older than me who has never even been to university, let alone seminary.
Back to the G&S sermons- what a joke! G&S was one of the biggest problems at Bristol Grace church BUT it didn’t start with the ordinary members, it would always start with one of the leaders/pastors knowing something private about someone and then ‘warning’ others that so-and-so was not to be trusted or not a good influence and best avoided. What hypocrits to preach that the congregation should not gossip or slander.
So many good comments. I wonder how many people write something profound and wonder if anybody notices it. Well, I do, I bet loads of lurkers do, and I suppose I should give compliments more often. (But if I did I’d be quoting and sticking in emoticons all the time! Although that is OK since I am a female and can be effeminate :roll: ) At any rate, if you post something really funny or insightful or emotional, I think we do notice it. What an intelligent and thoughtful crowd. To think we are all evil and worth shunning :scratch .
mm 99, excellent.
nick 98: Profoundly put: “I view it much like a wife who has been abused in her marriage. She knows it is bad but the thought of leaving and being completely on her own is just too scary. She is afraid to make the change and hopes some therapy (new board)and church counseling (new polity) will help “him” to change enough so that there can be a peaceful co-existence. Not that there will ever be the true love that once existed. And not that there will even be a mutual respect. Just that the beatings and abuse will stop enough to allow regular life to go on.”
Kris 97: “Sure, SGM proclaims itself to be both “Charismatic” and “Reformed,” but – well, even how they define those terms is pretty mixed up.”
I am convinced that almost all, if not all, of the spititual superiority does come from having a national reputation and self identity of being Reformed and charismatic (even if they are truly neither on many points). The Reformed community as a general rule believes in the cessation of 1 Cor 14 gifts like tongues, prophecy, and miracles, and the charismatic/Pentecostal camp almost entirely is Arminian. Calvary Chapels are into dispensational pre trib rapture.
So, to be fair, SGM did try to merge something that is not commonly merged. In the earlier 90s I think there did seem to be a nice combination of Calvinism and desire for the power and presence of the Holy Spirit. They were, as a denomination, unique in that respect so far as I know, with some exceptions in New Frontiers as Virgo is a Calvinist Charismatic.
I think the following things killed it:
1. Failure to admit from the heart that all we have received is by grace, and we are not superior even if our doctrine is better. I cannot feel superior even to a Muslim or Mormon, even if I think they are wrong, but must give God the glory for opening my eyes to truth that I think another is lacking.
2. Lack of dependency on God in prayer.
3. Lack of concern for the poor in the church (well, it sure seemed that way in mine, and I don’t mean us, we were giving money away to desperate people)and lack of concern for the poor and missions in general.
4. Shepherding errors- man in the place of God, loss of the priesthood of all believers and body ministry.
#4 pretty much killed off being Reformed and took them back to Roman Catholicism and a Pope and an unbiblical clery-laity distinction. The others pretty much helped axe the Holy Spirit I think.
And the Muckraker Award for Best Literary Analogy goes to….
Just Deb @105 :D :D :D
It’s not a movement… It’s not a denomination…
It’s a mob run family of franchises.
This level of conformity and “unity” comes with a price.
If that doesn’t get the attention of the “sin police”, I don’t know what will.
Roadwork # 116 –
I’m wondering, when they mark you as divisive, what will they use? (this could be a poll)
1. Chalk
2. Pencil
3. Red Sharpie Marker
:)
#3 Red Sharpie fo’ shizzle :D
I’m thinking a sharpie. :mrgreen:
They could use a branding iron. That’s what they used to brand us so it won’t wash-off :)
FF #117 — I think they would use chalk or a pencil, in case they decide to re-mark you as indivisive. (new word, like re-gift)
I allowed them to set me aside, lead me away from who I am in Christ, allowed our gifts to wane and I let them silence my opinion for 20 years…
We woke up one day and asked, “Hey, anybody seen the Holy Spirit around here lately?”
More seriously, the wife and I looked at each other after reading about Chesapeake and Richmond and asked ourselves, “If we stay, do we possibly subject our children to the same abuse we see written here in these stories?” It was an absolute no brainer decision. See ya SGM. You’re not going to turn my daughters into slaves to men and my boys into abusers of women.
After we made the decision, I wrote 11 pages describing what we’d seen and questioned over the years. (Things like, “Elders” shouldn’t still be using Clearasil.) At the time, I thought some of my insights were unique. And after some time of reviewing stories here and on then Refuge, I discovered that many had already reached the same conclusions before me and at times used the same analogies. SGM’s issues are consistent and follow the same pattern over and over.
And now they say they’re “changing”. But what is real change? It begins with repentance and a pattern of changed behavior. Even their paid pastors will tell you that. They want you to buy into the idea that they’ll let the congregation in on things (Lay elders! Deacons!) but they still wield all the power. They haven’t even managed to get to first base (repentance) yet.
They can’t even figure out that they’re a denomination. Why hang around stupid people?
I no longer “believe the best”. I believe the evidence. If it quacks like a duck…
Roadwork 122, You ROCK! This would make a great bumper sticker
“… what is real change? It begins with repentance and a pattern of changed behavior.”
Roadwork in #122——–Excellent!
I think today’s bumper sticker should be from musicman in 106:
Ouch!
Roadwork 122 –
Humor aside, praying for you and your family – praying more for anyone who will willingly allow these patterns of leadership behavior in SGM to continue and submit themselves to it. Freedom in Christ does NOT mean slavery to men.
Bridget said (about the panel only specifically answering the question):
I am sure it is a reflection of what some call the “submissive pyramid” that exists in SGM. This is where one moves up based on how submissive and obedient they are to those above them in the pyramid. Thus these men on the committee in all likelihood “submitted” and “obeyed” those giving them instructions if they were in fact instructed. Even if the weren’t given instructions I am sure the mentality of not really thinking for yourself was in force.
I dont think you will see anyone leaving the SGM fold. Everyone, including CLC is too fearful of what being independent means.
But I have a question for you ex pastors out there (or ex admin types). What do the churches receive from SGM that is so valuable?
I heard that 40% of the churches send in 5% or more and 15% are giving a full 10%. But I asked the question before…what do they get for their money?
First and foremost you can say the Pastor’s college. But you pay through the nose for that option and it is NOT covered with your church’s regular giving. It costs the church $70K. Now that is a full four year degree at most state universities so that nine month education/indoctrination is not cheap.
You get to BUY they music and books, but then anyone can without becoming a member. You can attend their conferences, but again anyone can attend most of them. And now the big Kahuna CJ is doing the group thing whenever possible so there goes the need to become a card carrying SGM member.
They can offer mediation services or help with your problems. Well, in reality so will most of the other churches in your area, AND they will likely give godly advice and not try lording over you or pushing a warped view of the gospel onto your pastors.
They don’t offer hospitalization or dental, that is taken care of by each different church. They dont have a retirement system. They dont have a discount system. Just what the heck does SGM provide?
I know…you get to partner with them in evangelizing the world. You get to pony up money for their pet projects around the globe and down the street. But you dont need SGM to do that. You can donate to any number of good mission organizations. You can start something of your own in your neighborhood. Most of us could get out of our white bread suburbs and do some mission work in the less fortunate areas of the city/county.
I really can not see the value added part of being a member of SGM. I dont understand the worry of our pastors when I suggest winging it alone.
Someone help me…what do we get by associating with SGM that I am missing?
Nick 128 It’s not what you GET from SGM that counts it what they do to you if you leave that scares them. SGM has honed the cold shoulder treatment and you can be smeared the whole world over…look what they did to Larry. And look again at the list of things they want reformed in SGMville. The bulk of their concerns have to do with how SGM treats past and present pastors.
Nick –
You have articulated the very thing I was trying to get at in my #16.
I’m with you in that I don’t understand what “local” churches get out of being part of the SGM brand, especially these days.
AoR told SGM to hold the panels. They said pick 20 Pastors from all over SGM. They should have been a pastor for at least 8 years I think. When that list is created Detwiler or someone in his camp could object to 3 and Harvey could object to three. (Just like legal juries are seated) Then all names go into a bowl and three names were pulled to be on each committee. The same was to be done with the board members (any old board members were prohibited from sitting).
But that didnt happen.
HARVEY picked 3 guys he has worked with for over 20 years (and put them all in their present positions), 4 guys with extensive SGM pedigrees who will bleed kool-aid if you cut them, and two men who appear to have no ill reputation or shady association with SGM. Josh pointed this out when his recent letter to CLC congregants said they hoped for a “selection process that avoided any appearance of partiality”.
The questions were worded by Harvey and were wordsmithed and tweaked so that there was very little chance anyone would be able to come to a decision against CJ/SGM. (Interesting how question 1 was …is it biblical but the other two questions had nothing in them about being biblical) Josh mentioned this in his recent letter to the CLC faithful by saying he “wished the questions had been broader in scope”.
So when you hear that AoR did the panels, that just isnt true. Harvey didnt do it like AoR suggested. Josh also mentioned that in the recent CLC letter to members when he lamented the “hope of having a completely independent, outside organization review and adjudicate” never materializing. AoR did provide their own man to sit in on the proceedings to answer questions and monitor the process and weigh in on any procedural questions.
Just so you know.
And as this post is already long I would also state that I thought it was a stretch when Josh said these men on the panels acted with integrity. I posted a while back, on a different blog, that if my grandpa drove Fords, and my daddy drove Fords and owned a Ford dealership, and I went to business school and did an internship with Ford, and drove a Ford Mustang myself, and my two kids drove old Fords, and one day I was asked to sit on a panel that was going to decide what the best car was, I might come to a conclusion with integrity but is there any doubt what kind of car I would think is the best? That is what Harvey put together. So yea, maybe the guys had integrity but then again, if they had REAL integrity they would have recused themselves. “Thanks for asking me to sit on the committee Dave, but since you sent me to Pastor’s College and then you sent me on a church plant and then you brought me back and made me a head pastor over several other more qualified and older pastors and since you also gave my dad a job, maybe I’m not the best guy to sit on your panel…But I am honored and humbled that you would ask me.” THAT WOULD BE REAL INTEGRITY ! ! !
In the Nick – excellent points as always
I have been in contact w/ a CFC member recently about the 3 panels – boy – are they sold out!~ “these men have integrity, are you calling them liars?”… and “AOR oversaw the whole thing.. etc..”
People,especially those raised in the church, just LOVE Cj… he can do no wrong… No one seems to read their bible these days… This is not a popularity contest – we are talking about, as one moron puts it – “ministers of the gospel” – and Ceej has definitely, w/o a doubt been disqualified from being one – how can people be so blind!!
Roadwork: “We woke up one day and asked, “Hey, anybody seen the Holy Spirit around here lately?”
This is what i experienced… Once we had altar calls, healing services, holy spirit baptising meetings, and i am not just talking about the toronto blessing era… We had all of that and more… and then a few years went by – took me a while to notice.. – just stopped… Holy Spirit of the most HIGH GOd was disfellowshipped…
Current SGM members – are you nuts!!!!!????? yes, i am afraid you are,.
Just wondering if CJ is bound by what Dave said. Dave said the AoR report would be released. But CJ is back in cahrge now. So is CJ bound by what Dave said? If the report is totally unflattering and truly blasts him would he release it in its entirety or just some selected edits? We already know what he considers integrity…
Just wondering if CJ is bound by what Dave said. Dave said the AoR report would be released. But CJ is back in cahrge now. So is CJ bound by what Dave said? If the report is totally unflattering and truly blasts him would he release it in its entirety or just some selected edits? We already know what he considers integrity… :bang
glad i am out(132): I have been in contact w/ a CFC member recently about the 3 panels – boy – are they sold out!~ “these men have integrity, are you calling them liars?”… and “AOR oversaw the whole thing.. etc..”
And Mickey C. said that the men on the panels and the SGM board are “men of impeccable integrity” and “have the inability to be biased or unjust”. Yes, he actually said that.
Nick asked……Someone help me…what do we get by associating with SGM that I am missing?
They get a man(king) to rule over them that’s what!
The question of “what benefits do local congregations derive from the relationship” has tangible and intangible aspects. First, I don’t want to dismiss out of hand the very real situation that, for many SGM churches, the relationship is a multi-decade one; hence, there is bound to be hesitancy about walking away precipitously. There are also bound to be painful feelings of “sunk costs” — that is, We’ve been part of this for so long, invested so much time, and now we’re just going to walk away? IntheNickofTime’s post (#128) questions a lot of the tangibles, but I wonder if the conversation that we’ve also been having here on the blog re: the use of the term movement sheds some light on the intangibles. If a local congregation leaves the movement, is there a fear that it becomes “just” another local congregation — no “different” from Community Bible Church X down the street. Right now, as part of a movement that is closely tied with the resurgent Reformed, that local congregation has a brand. And that intangible (“brand”) has tangible implications: built-in advertising, “quality control” assumptions by “co-religionists” in the resurgent Reformed world.
Moniker said:
I really wonder how Mickey could believe or say this. Two of the board members Dave Harvey and Steve Shenk participated in the blackmail and conspired to cover it up. CLC’s statement said ” We regard the panel’s report to be a rebuke of the men involved in this action.” This statement was referring to Mahaney, Harvey and Shenk.
It is baffling that Mickey could say this about these men when their actions show otherwise.
# 135/138 –
Sounds like a sort of hyper- Wesleyan view of Entire Sanctification – totally incompatible with the SGM theology regarding indwelling sin, unless there is one theology for normal people and another for pastors and board members. I’d love to hear an SGM’er explain this without waffling or making excuses.
Bear with me in a little folly… :)
From the Roman Catholic Catechism:
Would that SGM were more Catholic in their understanding of the priesthood of believers and the role of the “ministerial priesthood”.
Roadwork #122
Spot on.
Oaay #137 –
That is why I compared a church leaving SGM to a marriage where the wife has been abused. There are lots of intangibles there as well. And most women in that situation know the love is gone and the respect is gone. The real issue is they dont know anything else.
As you pointed out some of these churches have been inSGM since the start so there is that sense of tradition and belonging. But if they really were introspective they would see there is no benefit to staying and there MIGHT BE BENEFITS IF THEY LEFT.
To follow my bad marriage example, the woman knows things will not get good and only hopes for a little room to let life move on without too much injury and destruction. But if she left she might find a spouse that would respect her and cherish her. But that can never happen until she leaves the abusive relationship.
So all these churches holding on to long time relationships are cutting off any possibility of finding something better. And the abuse they endure is a heavy price for remembering good ‘ol times with CJ. (I never heard of anyone who had good times with Harvey)
Ozymandias said:
I think you’re on to something – “The just shall live by their brand.”
Very little faith is exercised when you allow yourself to be paralyzed by fear.
Fear or faith? Pick one.
I can help you out, Steve.
Mickey C. is JUST LIKE THEM…he’s ONE OF THEM!
Everyone reading needs to understand that when you read Mickey C.’s name, think Mahaney, Harvey, etc. I’ve often wondered why Mickey stays in Charlotte as CrossWay’s senior pastor when he could be farther north running things with Harvey and the rest of the gang. Maybe it’s an “undercover” type thing, looking like “one of the boys (pastors).” Actually, I think it’s simply that he enjoys the admiration that typically comes with pastoring; and let’s face it, in SGM, pastoring is a “good life”.
Mickey’s a “bad guy”…a REALLY bad guy…the worst kind of bad guy – the kind with a particular cunning charm and the ability to manipulate others.
I personally think Mickey exemplifies everything that CJ would say makes a “good SGM pastor.”
intheNick 142 –
Maybe Mrs. Harvey?
Hum….interesting perspective and one I had not thought of, but yes, CJ does not need to abide by what Dave or anybody else under him in the pyramid says.
I’d say the AoR full disclosure gets more unlikely all the time…..hope to be wrong, but CJ would never publish gossip and slander…..
Fried Fish #145 – that is humorous but perhaps a cheap shot.
I think that A.K.S in #144 hits on something. Mickey stays where he is because the SGM machine wants him or needs him there. I cannot imagine that it has anything to do with loving the flock there. He would probably pack his bags in no time if that was what he was told to do.
That is one of the big problems I have with SGM’s “polity” (not that they have one)…. the way that SGM is set up totally removes the element of the Holy Spirit directing a man to really serve, really love, and really shepherd his flock. The system forces a pastor to view his congregation as customers or consumers, rather than God’s people. Over time, the pastor that started out even with the most Biblical intentions, ends up viewing himself as a “sales manager”, doing his best to keep the customers engaged and coming back for more.
Who are the exceptions? I would say guys like Don Shorey may have been an exception, or perhaps his brother Tim Shorey. I know enough about those guys to know that they never totally lost that original calling.
@Persona 112:
:word :goodpost
Spot on!
Can SGM change?
http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4227405/k.55B6/Abusive_Churches_Leaving_Them_Behind.htm
SWW 147 –
You’re probably right, regardless of whether I thought of it that way at the time. I’m sorry,all, including the Harvey family.
I’m sure Dave doesn’t need any cheap shots distracting him from strategizing how to spin the AoR report.