I quit reading CJ’s blog over a year ago, but with the start of the Winter Olympics, I was looking for some advice, ala CJ’s annual “tips for watching the Superbowl”.
No such luck, but I did find a recent post by Dave Harvey, that included the following statement:
The function fulfilled by men following in Paul’s (and Timothy’s, and Silas’s, and Epaphras’s, etc.) footsteps is primarily missiological, not ecclesiological. The accent rests on gospel mission, not church maintenance. And the specific expression of that mission is church planting. “[Paul’s] more functional understanding of apostleship,” says Gordon Fee, “would certainly have its modern counterparts in those who found and lead churches in unevangelized areas.”
Is this a new view, or have I not been paying attention?
A beautiful thing happened at the SGC in San Diego yesterday.
Mark Lauterbach, the senior pastor who was de-gifted and then re-gifted, shared his heart with the congregation after his Sunday morning sermon. There was another meeting last night, but I haven’t received any details yet.
I’m told that after his sermon, Mark asked the congregation to forgive him. He publicly confessed to the sins of pride and control, specifically, that he had refused input from the congregation, and confessed that was wrong for the pastors to decide in major issues themselves, and then inform the congregation.
Mark also stated that he had confused control for good leadership, and had sought to run things himself, instead of seeing others gifts and letting them walk in their gifting. He said that he had assumed too much authority.
The other pastor on staff confessed to ignoring input from the congregation regarding his responsibilities.
As an aside, here’s Mark’s latest blog post:
“In my readings today, a wonderful word from Tozer on introspection and joylessness:
While we are looking at God we do not see ourselves — blessed riddance. The man who has struggled to purify himself and has had nothing but repeated failures will experience real relief when he stops tinkering with his soul and looks away to the Perfect One. (Pursuit of God)
Now that, in a few words, is what I have been trying to say in many.”
AMEN!
There are pastors in every denomination, including SGM, who are very concerned with job security. I know pastors who need SGM, as they would be unemployable if their relationship with SGM ended.
I also know pastors within SGM who don’t need them. Some would have larger congregations if they were unencumbered with SGM’s baggage.
I’ve thought for years that Mark was in the latter category, and for what it’s worth, believe that Mark was speaking from his heart, and was under no compulsion from SGM HQ to address the congregation.
Bless you Mark! May your tribe increase.
If anyone from San Diego would like to weigh in, I’d be grateful if you would flesh out my sketchy details.
This is a repost from Feb of last year. Some links are dead, because I’m nicer than I used to be. Hard to believe, I know…
I feel that this is timely because MCL’s issues are polity issues. The members are waiting to see what actions the leaders will take. It doesn’t seem very “joint heir-like” to me. MCL is not their church. You are not their people. It is clear that pastors in SGM have more authority than is granted by Scripture. This extra Biblical view of pastoral authority informs their polity. “Don’t talk to each other, talk to us”. When did Paul ever make such a statement? To whom were the epistles written to? The churches. Elders are rarely mentioned in the letters to the churches.
In the the next “we have decided” statement statement delivered to MLC, the “we” should refer to all of you. You are not children.
_______________________
We have a lot of new readers. It’s obviously impossible to read every post written since June of 08, so many new guests might form an opinion of this blog based on the topic at hand.
I left SGM in June of 06 because of their polity. I started this blog in June of 08 because of their polity.
POLITY IS IMPORTANT. ALL of SGM’s problems flow from their unorthodox, unique-to-SGM polity. It informs their Eccesiology, Missiology, and is the reason for their truncated Gospel, as their polity only allows them to hear their own voice. Their polity has placed them on the outer fringe of orthodoxy, forcing them to use out of context or partial quotes to give the impression that Biblical scholars support their fringe view.
In the recent SGC Chesapeake fiasco, both Keith and Gene appealed to SGM’s polity statement, rather than to Scripture. Very Roman, if you ask me.
By all means, read the SGM polity statement. Then, with the statement in hand, please read what we’ve had to say about SGM’s polity, and our lengthy review of their polity statement.
I’ve tried to find everything we’ve said about SGM polity and link to it in this post.
This gets a little tricky. Click on the words in green below to read a post, then click on the home tab to return here to click on the next post.
Enjoy!
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/06/14/jerry-bridges-on-the-controller/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/06/20/responding-to-leadership-in-sgm/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/06/28/trust-your-leaders/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/06/26/they-stand-in-the-very-stead-of-god/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/07/01/more-responsibilities-of-the-sheep/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/07/10/jesus-on-leadership/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/07/15/sgm-polity/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/07/19/mick-jagger-and-cj-mahaney-on-leadership/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/07/21/under-their-thumb/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/08/06/the-fruit-of-good-pastoring/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/08/24/advice-to-the-lone-ranger/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/08/26/more-recommendations-for-cj/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/08/28/bible-doctrine-tastes-great-less-filling-burp/
The good stuff starts here….
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/09/02/polity-episode-1-an-introduction-to-dave-harveys-phantom-menace/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/09/04/sovereign-grace-ministries-on-elders/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/09/08/sovereign-grace-ministries-on-elders-2/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/09/10/polity-episode-2-dave-harveys-quote-in-the-cloned-quote-wars/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/09/19/more-grudem-on-polity-and-apostles/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/10/01/missiology-part-1-entering-the-minefield-of-the-world/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/10/08/missiology-part-2-apostles-epistles-and-missions-oh-my/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/12/12/uh-oh-steve-shank-is-here/
http://sgmrefuge.com/2009/01/11/what-to-expect/Polity Scholity Revisited
You’ve received Danny’s email. Read points 5 and 6 very carefully. Notice what the evaluation team will and will not address.
“There are several issues in the list above that the rest of the leadership team would agree needs to be pursued…”
“However, there is significant disagreement with the other points listed…”
If the members I’ve communicated with are in any way indicative of the general feeling among the membership, it seems that “there is significant disagreement” between the leadership team and the members of MLC.