It seems that the thread here is where the action is. With 662 comments, it’s taking far too long to load on many user’s PCs.
Please continue the conversation here.
It seems that the thread here is where the action is. With 662 comments, it’s taking far too long to load on many user’s PCs.
Please continue the conversation here.
June 27th, 2009 at 10:26 am
SGM has a better PR crew than some of the politicians in Washington. But the time will come when all will be exposed.
June 27th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
I do have a copy of Larry T’s letter, and the letter from the Cleveland church. I could fax it to Jim, if I already haven’t.
June 27th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Okay, Jim. I have to wait til my hubby gets home, because…duh…um…I don’t know how to fax something. Big sigh. I don’t think I will ever catch up with current technology! Should be about an hour til he gets home…
June 27th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Steve240,
I was unaware that Larry T. moved to the Fairfax area. When we left Fairfax for a church plant with Brent D. (we came last in 1992), Larry was not there. Never heard of him going there. We left PDI in 1997, sometime after Larry went through his thing. We visited him and Doris in Atlanta in ‘98 or ‘99 after they began their non-PDI church, Christ the King church.
There was an earlier church split in ‘82 – ‘83 after Brent D. arrived on the scene in Fairfax. Was there another one in the early 1990’s?
June 27th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Canary,
I can relate. I don’t text message from my phone. All of my adult children do, and my AIM account goes to my phone when it’s offline.
If I have to respond to a text message, it takes me about 10 minutes to send two or three words.
June 27th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Canary
Thanks providing copies of the two letters. Hopefully Jim can either email me copies or post them here on his blog.
I am sure that Tomczak was stationed at the Fairfax Church in 93. By this I mean he was still on the leadership staff of PDI (not a Fairfax Church pastor) but was based at Fairfax after he left MD. When he was home, he would sometimes speak to the Fairfax Church. I am not sure when Tomczak moved to Atlanta. It had to be between 93 and 97.
Fairfax and Gaithersburg aren’t that far apart (less than an hour non rush hour Google maps says 37 minutes which might be true at 3 AM). With that short of distance and Tomczak being on PDI leadership staff, I wonder what the reasoning was for him moving to the Fairfax Church?
June 27th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
keepinstep said:
“I read both of these stories (Set Free’s story is at http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=843; Noel’s Story is at http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=276), and it doesn’t seem to me that the perp is the same person. Set Free says the molestor was the sr. pastor’s son, whereas Noel says the molestor in her story was the son of a friend of her’s; the friend was separated from her husband and was not identified as a pastor’s wife.
Am I missing something? What in the two stories leads you to say the molestor was the same person?”
When I read Noel’s story, I specifically remember it being stated that the 15 year old boy that molested Noel’s 3 year old girl was still at the Fairfax Church and was now married. People asked on the blog if his wife knew about this boy’s checkered past before she agreed to marry this former child molester. I never heard an answer.
Thus I don’t think they are talking about the same people in both of these stories.
June 27th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Hee-hee! Me, too! And after spending about forty minutes trying to leave an answer message on my cell phone, I had to ask my daughter for help. Major blow to my self esteem! I joke about needing to get the Jitter Bug phone that has all the big numbers on it, where you call an operator just to add a new contact to your list. That’s about my pace.
I’m going to fax some other letters with the Larry T. ones, just for fyi. My husband has a file that he, for some reason, felt the need to keep over the years that hold these letters. He thought they might be useful someday in sifting out the truth about what really happened…
June 27th, 2009 at 2:21 pm
Jim,
I just realized that I do NOT have an official letter from CJ. I have two from Larry T., one in which he explains to the churches about his “discipline”, and another where he explains why he is leaving. I have a letter from Dave Harvey speaking of the North Coast Church leaving PDI, and a letter from the North Coast Church to its members, explaining why they were separating from PDI. Do you want me to fax them?
June 27th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Canary-sure, if you don’t mind. Please write down the fax #, as I need to take it down.
June 27th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Steve,
It’s clearly not the same person. I’d like to encourage everyone not to play fast and loose with the facts.
The truth is bad enough.
June 27th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Steve240,
Thanks for clarifying. Before our Faifax church became a part of PDI in ‘81 or ‘82 (when Brent came to take over temporarily), Benny Phillips (the pastor) got to be good friends with Larry. They were good friends for many years after, and Larry would occassionally visit Fairfax to speak. Doris would also come and there would be leaders’ meetings in the Phillips’ basement.
Brent was the overseeing “apostle” in Fairfax, at least until he left for his church plant to NC in 1991, I think it was. He traveled around to other churches during that time, as well. I left before the Phillips’ discipline, only hearing about it later.
The letter I have from Larry T., explaining why he was leaving PDI, is dated October 22, 1997. In the letter, he states that the inaugural meeting of City Church of Atlanta was in October of 1994. Hope that helps.
June 27th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Canary-sure, if you don’t mind. Please write the #, as I need to take it down.
Jim, could you clarify, please?
June 27th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Steve 240 said…………
……..”From all that I have read here and SGM Survivors many of the SGM leaders are uncomfortable and even are threatened by those who question. ”
So…………….why would these men be threatened? Could it be that they…………….
A) Are poorly trained and have no real answers?
B) Lack maturity and wisdom?
C) Believe that they should never to be questioned?
D) Believe they stand in the very stead of GOD?
E) All of the above
N.S.L.B.
June 27th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
JIm, I gettcha. I wrote the fax # down.
June 27th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Jim said:
“Steve,
It’s clearly not the same person. I’d like to encourage everyone not to play fast and loose with the facts.
The truth is bad enough.”
I agree and that was why I trying to clarify these were two separate persons. If someone does “play fast and loose” with facts and posts items that aren’t true etc. then it can stand to discredit all that is being posted on this blog and SGMSurvivors.
June 27th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
I don’t personally know any details of alleged “payola” and money trails, but I did personally know former PDI financial guy Dick W. I will say that he was very discerning. One time I was telling the truth, but not the WHOLE truth, to a PDI employee. He was the only one at the time who noticed and called me on it!
It would make sense that he was so honest he could have resigned for integrity reasons.
BTW I think many of us current SGM members would appreciate an SGM leadership reponse to the sexual abuse / coverup / payola allegations. Silence on this issue may result in an even further drop in donations. Silence seems to imply that the actual truth is so bad SGM leaders prefer the current decline in donations to what would happen if the truth were admitted.
June 27th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Canary:
I never knew there was a letter distributed regarding the North Coast departure. It must have gone only to a limited group of people because I assumed that this was one of these matters that SGM quickly swept under the carpet.
Jim:
I do have a copy of CJ’s original letter regarding Larry’s discipline. If you want a copy I can scan it or fax it to you. Also, the interesting thing about this letter is that when I first received I noticed that it was written language that a “reformed” person would use and was very unlike Larry’s own speaking style and personality. It left wondering whether or not this letter was ghost written for him.
June 27th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Canary:
I was at fairfax during the early 1990’s. There was no church split per se during that time as occurred shortly after Brent arrived although I did hear that not all of the reasons for Brent relocating to Charlotte were rosy.
June 27th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Steve:
If memory serves me correctly Larry left for Atlanta sometime in 1994 because one of the last actions he took while still based in Fairfax was to introduce the church to the “holy laughter” phenomana which was just beginning to manifest itself at that time. I remember it well because Larry introduced it to the church by showing a video that was taken at a Rodney Howard Browne meeting.
June 27th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Thanks, formersgmer!
As to the North Coast Church letter, we were given it, along with Larry’s letter when we asked for information on what was happening. The Dave Harvey letter was filled with reasons why PDI did NOT think the church had the “authority” to leave the group. Of course, North Coast disagreed. It was all written very politely. I don’t know how it played out in reality.
June 27th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Betrayed and NW:
I wanted to come back to your comments about a biblical justification for total depravity.
NW:
I believe you nicely summarized the issue from a macro perspective with your comments about SGM leaders picking and choosing which of the doctrines of grace to emphasis and of those how deeply they choose to emphasis. If we totally honest SGM has never been know for Biblical scholarship because even during the period when the denomination had a more pronounced charismatic/pentacostal emphasis almost everything that was taught was borrowed from other leaders or groups.
Betrayed:
To your question about a Biblical foundation for total depravity, the easiest place to start is Jeremiah 17:9 because this text makes clear that there is a bottomless depth to human sinfulness which only God himself can comprehend.
From there you can look to Ephesians 2:4-6 and, in particular verse 5, where the emphasis is on the fact that we are dead in our trespasses and that God has made us alive in Christ. Here is something from Matthew Henry’s commentary on this text. The emphasis is mine own.
“Our faith, our conversion, and our eternal salvation, are not the mere product of any natural abilities, nor of any merit of our own: Not of works, lest any man should boast, v. 9. These things are not brought to pass by any thing done by us, and therefore all boasting is excluded”
Finally, there are many commentators who write about the conflict described in Romans 7 and say that this conflict could only occur in someone who was been genuinely converted because the unconverted person would be unable to even execute a righeteous act since they are dead in the sin.
I think this reading of Romans 7 is also borne out when you look back at Romans 3:12.
However, I beleive that the importance of the doctrine of total depravity does not lie in trying to convince all of us that we are hopeless and doomed worms but rather to provide a juxtaposition to the magnificent grace of God. Ephs 2:5 must be read in light of the immediately preceding verse because it puts the proper emphasis and Glory on God’s inititation of the work of redemption.
For further study, I would recommend that you purchase either the CD or MP3 set on the “Doctrines of Grace” from the Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology. My wife and I attended this conference in 2006 and found this series of messages by Phil Ryken, Sinclair Ferguson, Eric Alexander and Richard Phillips to be extremely helpful in providing a good exposition of the Biblical foundations for the five pillars of the reformed faith commonly referred to as the TULIP.
June 27th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
formersgmer said:
“Steve:
If memory serves me correctly Larry left for Atlanta sometime in 1994 because one of the last actions he took while still based in Fairfax was to introduce the church to the “holy laughter” phenomana which was just beginning to manifest itself at that time. I remember it well because Larry introduced it to the church by showing a video that was taken at a Rodney Howard Browne meeting.”
Thanks for this information.
Well Larry Tomczac certainly wasn’t locted at the Fairfax Church that long. Of course, when he moved to Fairfax no one knew that he would be needed in Atlanta due the church split that was going to happen there a few years later.
June 27th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Canary:
Thanks for the information. I find it interesting that for an organization which goes to considerable length to assert that it is not a denomination and does not have rigid authority structures would suddenly attempt to “pull rank” and to force an individual church to remain affiliated because the church does not have the authority to leave the association. Another example of SGM trying to have it both ways or could it simply be that at the time (I believe) North Coast was the second largest church within SGM and probably a large contributor to the national organization’s budget and obviously a departure by North Coast creates a gap in SGM”s budget.
In other words, could it be that SGM’s attempt to force NCC to stay was solely about money?
June 27th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
SGM Single said:
“BTW I think many of us current SGM members would appreciate an SGM leadership reponse to the sexual abuse / coverup / payola allegations. Silence on this issue may result in an even further drop in donations. Silence seems to imply that the actual truth is so bad SGM leaders prefer the current decline in donations to what would happen if the truth were admitted.”
SGM Single
Has there been a significant drop in donations within SGM? How large of a drop has there been?
You raise a good point about the silence. Hopefully they will say someting.
June 28th, 2009 at 2:18 am
Steve240,
I know that at least 3 very long-time loyal SGM headquarters employees have been laid off recently, presumably because of lower donations. My own SGM church has announced that donations are down. I can’t remember the exact percent, but it was huge.
June 28th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Hi…I’ve been away on vacation for the past week so sorry that I don’t want to read through 600+ comments if this has been discussed…..
*Keith Breault and pastors in Chesapeake plan to announce new doctrine on separation to the congregation after imposing this doctrine on 3 women in the church and teaching it in the New Members’ class.
What is a doctrine on separation? Is this just new terminology for Matt 18 church discipline or something else? Just curious, thanks.
June 28th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
SGM Single
I wonder how much of the decrease in contributions is due to the economy vs. something else including what is being reported on these blogs and other concerns people have within SGM. Only God really knows that.
I hate to say this, but many think SGM is more like a business than a church that has a number of franchises. Maybe this decrease in revenue contributions is the only thing that will get the attention of leadership.
You indicate that “3 very long-time loyal SGM headquarters employees have been laid off recently, presumably because of lower donations.” That is interesting news. One would think that rather than doing this, some of the SGM employees, like C.J. Mahaney, that could afford to take paycuts or to temporarily take no salary would do so so that these employees could remain.
As someone shared on both this blog and the survivors blog, tax records that showed that Mahaney had the personal money to give his daughter and son in law his current house (worth around $500K) and then buy a $675K house without a mortgage . They also showed a document that showed Mahaney had given over $100K to the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Thus one would think Mahaney has the personal resources (book royalties, speaking fees etc) that would would him to take a pay cut or take no salary vs. letting these people go. Of course maybe SGM already did this.
Thanks again for this information.
June 28th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
5 Years:
A doctrine on separation would be the Biblical grounds for a wife to leave her husband.
June 28th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
It’s been a while since I’ve been here, just checking in from time to time. I hope everyone is good and growing in the grace of our savior!
SGMsingle, I agree with you on the silence issue, but I wonder what that would look like? I have asked my pastor about these issues and he was very open about them, maybe it would be good for anyone who had questions to do the same?
June 28th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
former..thanks. Makes sense. But ” new” ? There is the classic position that it is Ok for adultery, desertion, or abuse……was that new to SGM , or did they have something new different from the classic position?
June 28th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Uhmmmm guys… I am all for full discloser on tyranny and abuse… but I must say something does not track here in Setfree’s story to place Larry (or his son) at the center. I have browsed through the progression both here and survivors and I see some profound leaps of logic that are not substantiated by much more than assertion from sources that are ‘private’ or anonymous. This in my mind is a horrifically shaky ground.
June 28th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
5 years:
I think the pastors in Chesepeake found themselves trapped in a policy regarding how to pastorally handle abusive marriages which was entirely indefensible Biblically so they probably spun the policy as “new” as a face saving measure.
Jim knows much more about the situation in Cheseapeake as well as other here so it would be much better if one of these folks attempted to differentiate the old policy from the new.
June 28th, 2009 at 11:37 pm
http://www.cafepress.com/theological
http://www.joshharris.com/2007/07/cj_tshirt.php
From our friends at Survivors. I actually think the shirts are pretty funny.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:01 am
[I'm just bringing Steve's comment over from the other thread since it was the very last one and people might not see it.]
Defended said:
“oh for goodness’ sake, NO we don’t have a copy! lol.
But from my memory it said that Larry was in a 6-month reform program after leaving MD and that at the end of 6 months he thought he was finished with the current course of correction and the other leaders (CJ) disagreed. So they had to part company, or something like that.”
So the handout didn’t say much more than this about Tomczak? I have read where Tomczak wrote in his book Reckless Abandon:
Then Steve said:
“Tomczak declared that this time “…seemed like an unbelievable nightmare” during which he, his wife Doris, and their son Justin “were threatened in various ways if we did not cooperate with the ministry that we were leaving… A letter was circulated in an attempt to discredit me and to distort the events surrounding my departure. Our own family members were divided.”
My understanding is that Tomczak first left CLC and moved for a short time period to what at the time was the Fairfax PDI Church. He then moved to Atlanta to help pick up the pieces after the founding pastor of the Atlanta PDI Church left PDI.
Tomczak moved from CLC to Fairfax in the approximate 92/93 time frame.
It is interesting that Tomczak first went down there to heal a church split and then lead one a few years later (approx 97).
Does anyone know the date Tomczak move from Fairfax to Atlanta?
June 29th, 2009 at 8:44 am
Ellie said:
“Does anyone know the date Tomczak move from Fairfax to Atlanta?”
Just for clarification, a lot of what you are quoting me is actual a quote from one of Tomczak’s books
I have a copy of a letter Larry Tomczak sent out explaining his decision to leave PDI It indicates the innaugural meeting of City Church of Atlanta was on 10/22/1994. (This is how he opened his explanation letter dated 10/22/1997 explaining his leaving PDI.) I just noticed someone else also posted this information above.
Thus Tomczak apparently moved down to Atlanta in the fall of 1994. He sure wasn’t at the Fairfax Church for very long but again, when he moved from CLC to Fairfax I am sure no one knew he would be needing to move to Atlanta.
Again, I do find it perplexing that Tomczak moved from CLC to Fairfax when the two locations are so close and Tomczak was on PDI staff but who knows.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:41 am
formersgmer
I am sorting out all the legalities with things that I have.
The most powerful options are for the victims to come forward.
I need to catch up on the blog, and post the citations I mentioned.
I have a few attorneys working with me right now.
Pray that the victims come forward.
I should have some contact info by Tue or Wed for MD, VA, and GA for those
that need a starting place.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
I want to apologize for making a connection that does not exist.
The perp in set Free’s story is not the one in Noel’s.
Sometimes information get’s thrown at me pretty fast, and I did
not take the time to sort the two out.
I have to rest on my source for the whom, but should have taken more time to fit the pieces together.
Suffice to say, I will be meeting with the appropriate authorities this week
as it is not my Job or place to try and investigate matters of Law Enforcement.
This includes how things were swept under the rug as well.
Failure to report, or conspiring to conceal, are both crimes in themselves.
My responsibility is to report what I know to those that can look into these matters.
By weeks end I should have points of contact for any victims that wish to come forward.
To let matters of abuse go unchecked is to leave future opportunities open for the abusers.
For those that think it does not matter or that too much time has passed-
http://www.wusa9.com/news/heal.....ryid=69993
Please note this man has no ties to SGM that I am aware of.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:00 am
A new day but the same ole, same ole: CJ do the right thing and step down from SGM.
June 30th, 2009 at 10:24 am
PFR,
In the state of VA, clergy is protected under the “clergy/penitent privilege”
they are not required to report abuse.
They do not notify families within the church either, for fear of lawsuit from the perpetrator.
The perpetrators in Noel’s and Set Free’s stories are also not the one’s involved in Happymom’s story either. Totaling 4 (that we know of) out of the Fairfax church.
June 30th, 2009 at 10:35 am
PFR:
Thanks for doing the right thing here. If victims do come forward we should pray that this could be an impetus for reform in SGM as well as to provide greater healing for all victims.
June 30th, 2009 at 11:29 am
PFR,
If you are comfortable, would you ask the moderator of this blog to send you my email address? I apologize for not know who is moderating this right now. Life has been very busy and I had been away from the blogs, it’s hard to catch up again.
Thanks,
Noel
June 30th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Noel,
Will do.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
I am looking for Happymom’s story.
Does anyone have a link? ….I have been looking for awhile.
Thanks.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Old Timer-
It’s on sgmsurvivors.
June 30th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Chesapeake Update: ABSOLUTELY NO CHANGE AT SGC CHESAPEAKE! (Surprise? Surprise?); in fact, by some reports, its getting worse. Here is what is happening: Each week more families are leaving Sovereign Grace Church Chesapeake. Most families are attending another church in the area (so it is evident to many at both churches: SGCC which is quickly dwindling in numbers, and the other church, which is increasing), a church that is not only full of life, but one which encourages and exhorts the true freedom of the Gospel and the True Movement of the Holy Spirit. This is but evidence of the fact that the exile of Keith Breault and the coronation of Eric Hughes, has done little to squelch the movement of the Holy Spirit to bring His people out of Egypt and into the Promised Land! Bravo to those families who are continuing to wake up to the travesty of the SGC experience and are now being able to enjoy the true glory of God. For those still left behind, those who are hurting, but are hanging in there to see some glimmer of hope; WE ARE PRAYING FOR YOU!
June 30th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
In keeping with the spirit of “Have it”. here is a quote from one of the SGM churches in Wales. As far as I know this is the only SGM church which publically rejects congregational government and cites scripture to do so. Contrast this view with that of Mark Dever in “Nine Marks of healthy church” or John Piper’s view or even within the PCA which has a limited form of congregational government in that decisions of the Session are submitted to the congregation for a vote (at least in our PCA church). I do not believe that all of this groups can be wrong in their polity.
“SSGCM is an elder governed church, not a Congregational/Membership governed church. It is our view that the scripture does not call for the church to be run by the members in a democratic fashion but that it clearly teaches that the elders are directors, managers and overseers of the church (1 Timothy 3:1-7; 5:17; Titus 1:7-9; Heb. 13:17; 1 Thes. 5:12-13; Acts 20:17-38).
This does not mean that the elders do not seek input from the members when making decisioGCM is an elder governed church, not a Congregational/Membership governed church. “
June 30th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
cardinal
You said………….”In the state of VA, clergy is protected under the “clergy/penitent privilege”
they are not required to report abuse”.
It appears that there is little hope of protection by the church down in Virginia. Here’s a link to enable research of the current law.
But………….were all those involved in the cover-up actually clergy?
Were the non-clergy members obligated to report the instances of abuse?
Were they accomplices to a crime after the fact?
so many questions………….so little time.
N.S.L.B.
June 30th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Greener Pastures
Do you know what happened to the mysteriously missing Sunday messages from the SGCC Web site?
Is there a cover-up going on down there?
or………..is it just a clumsy attempt to rewrite history?
N.S.L.B.
July 1st, 2009 at 8:28 am
Quizzler,
From what I can tell, it appears that according to the VIRGINIA STATE STATUTES ON CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT MANDATORY REPORTING OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT, under the code of PRIVILEDGED COMMUNICATION, Citation # 63.2-1509;63.2-1519, there is NO husband/wife communication priviledge. Therefore, it would seem to me that those pastor’s wives and CG leaders wives that participated in any way, being aware of any abuse situation, are liable under the above referenced info to report what they knew/know. They are NOT protected by their husband’s position from their liability. Also, according to how I am reading it (not a pro here, so could be wrong), but the CG leaders themselves appear to be required by law to report ,as they are not legally, nor professionally considered “clergy”.
This is a situation very close to our hearts, as one of our own daughters experienced this thirty years ago in our own church (not SGM).
Please let me know if I am reading this correctly.
MiMi
July 1st, 2009 at 10:41 am
I believe another question is whether or not the pastors allowed the members of the church to be in a potentially harmful situation at church functions (church picnics? conferences? homegroup-which is manditory?). Also in situations that involved pastors, were they deliberately moved to another location without notifying the other members of the team that the pastor in question (or his children as the case may be) had been implicated in a crime.
July 1st, 2009 at 10:55 am
The thing is, in Virginia, unlike most other states, there is not a mandatory reporting law. The only people required to report are :
Persons licensed to practice medicine or any of the healing arts
Hospital residents, interns, or nurses
Social workers or probation officers
Teachers or other persons employed in a public or private school, kindergarten, or nursery school
Persons providing full-time or part-time child care for pay on a regularly planned basis
Mental health professionals
Law enforcement officers or mediators
Any professional staff person, not previously enumerated, employed by a private or State-operated hospital, institution, or facility to which children have been committed or where children have been placed for care and treatment
Any person associated with or employed by any private organization responsible for the care, custody, or control of children
Court-appointed special advocates
Any person, over age 18, who has received training approved by the Department of Social Services for the purposes of recognizing and reporting child abuse and neglect
Any person employed by a local department who determines eligibility for public assistance
So unless the wife is one of these, there would be no fault. If you want info on reporting laws go to :
http://www.childwelfare.gov/sy.....ies/state/
July 1st, 2009 at 11:05 am
Quizzler,
I’d like to make a comment about the “missing” sermons issue.
The audio files are still on the website, they have just been removed from the Sunday Messages webpage. If a SGCC member (or anyone for that matter if the note at the bottom of the Sermon Archive page is taken at face value) wants one, they can get a copy of the file. Nothing has been deleted, they have just been removed from the public sermon list.
As an additional note, given his integrity, I recently sent Jim links for the sermons you’ve specifically mentioned previously. I also indicated that I was hesitant to release them publicly. Although I believe he would let you know if he was able to access the files, if asked.
Matt. 10:16
July 1st, 2009 at 1:26 pm
What is sad is that a person who says he/she is a Christian should need no law to compel them to report child abuse.
July 1st, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Presbyterian, that’s true that, as “pastors” they are not required legally in Va to report. I guess I am wondering if there is another “crime” here. Looking beyond the issue of the report filed to the police/social services etc.
July 1st, 2009 at 4:10 pm
So the pastors in Virginia do not need to report abuse.
But the pastor’s in Maryland do (right?).
So, if pastors in Maryland are made aware of abuse occurring in Virginia, are they obligated legally to report the abuse to Virginia authorities?
July 1st, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Here is a good legal question -
Privileged Communications
Citation: Ann. Code §§ 63.2-1509; 63.2-1519
[The requirement to report] shall not apply to any regular minister, priest, rabbi, imam, or duly accredited practitioner of any religious organization or denomination usually referred to as a church as it relates to information required by the doctrine of the religious organization or denomination to be kept in a confidential manner.
Question # 1 - how is “duly accredited practitioner” defined in the state of Virginia? Is the 9 months of SGM PC recognized by the good state of VA?)
Question # 2 – “as it relates to information required by the doctrine of the religious organization or denomination to be kept in a confidential manner.”
In the SGM Counseling and membership documents, they make it clear that privilege is at the Pastors discretion, and when there is an issue of safety, privilege does not apply.
Thoughts??
July 1st, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Standing By: On June 1st you stated:
The audio files are still on the website, they have just been removed from the Sunday Messages webpage. If a SGCC member (or anyone for that matter if the note at the bottom of the Sermon Archive page is taken at face value) wants one, they can get a copy of the file. Nothing has been deleted, they have just been removed from the public sermon list.
I’m sure we can always get a copy of a file somewhere on the net, however, the folks and powers that be at the Chesapeake Church have decided to make it more difficult and not as readily available.
HERE IS MY QUESTIONFOR YOU: WHY HAS IT BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PUBLIC SERMON LIST? The question isn’t, can we still get a copy, the question is MOTIVE!!! What was the motive of SGCC to remove this message from the Public Sermon List? Very unusual it is, that the April messages prior to th 29th, and all messages after this date are on the Public Sermon List.
My friend, I believe the MOTIVE for deleting this message from the first place one would go to to get a prior sermon is what is at question here.
July 1st, 2009 at 4:23 pm
STANDING BY: FYI: In order to get the April 29th message one must first call the church office??? So much for freedom of information!
July 1st, 2009 at 6:34 pm
GP…April 29th was a Thursday.
July 1st, 2009 at 7:48 pm
For those of you just joining us, the now-infamous message in question was from March 29, 2009.
See if you can figure out the true timeline of events leading up to the leadership swap-a-roo in Chesapeake. The three speakers (Breault, Hughes and Emerson) don’t seem to be able to.
WARNING….listening to this message may cause a brain cramp!
N.S.L.B.
July 1st, 2009 at 7:58 pm
MiMi
As for your reading of the law………………sounds like you have a good point. Maybe certain wives and care group leaders should be seeking their own legal advice in this matter.
It’s never too late to do the right thing……………..
N.S.L.B.
July 1st, 2009 at 8:54 pm
PFR:
Check the beginning of the statute you cite for defined terms. Most statutes begin with a set of definitions of terms used later in the statute. Virginia may have provided a definition of the term “Duly Accredited Practitioner”. However, I suspect that Virginia may provide for a broad definition of this term because each denomination probably has its own practices as to how a clergy member becomes accredited and Virginia would probably show deference to each denominations own practices.
Regarding the issue of privilege, it is probably best to consult legal counsel to determine if the issues at hand constituted circumstances in which privilege may have been waived.
July 2nd, 2009 at 7:34 am
Okay, as far as i understand it, and look at the website i sited for details, here is the deal
In Va there is no mandatory reporting for regular people, only the aforementioned people are required to report & pastors are specifically protected (so they are double protected essentially)
In Md there is mandatory reporting for everyone, but pastors are protected in some ways. it states “A minister of the gospel, clergyman, or priest of an established church of any denomination is not required to provide notice [when they have reason to believe that a child has been subjected to abuse or neglect] if the notice would disclose matter in relation to any communication that is protected by the clergy-penitent privilege and:
The communication was made to the minister, clergyman, or priest in a professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister, clergyman, or priest belongs.
The minister, clergyman, or priest is bound to maintain the confidentiality of that communication under canon law, church doctrine, or practice.
to define clergy pentinent privelege it is as follows: “A minister of the gospel, clergyman, or priest of an established church of any denomination may not be compelled to testify on any matter in relation to any confession or communication made to him in confidence by a person seeking his spiritual advice or consolation.” §9–111.
So wether the md pastors who hear of it occuring in va have to report is more murky.
July 2nd, 2009 at 8:23 am
Greener Pastures
I have to admit to a little confusion on my part. Why are we looking for a message from April 29 (a Wednesday)? I admit that there is a missing message from April 11 (a Sunday) which I believe was caused by the old recording device that had been nursed along for months finally dying but, as far as I know, there was no message from April 29.
Looking back over the ‘A Closer Look at Chesapeake’ topic I’m guessing, based on the Quizzler’s June 23rd, 2009 at 11:55 pm post, the issue is the March 29, 2009 sermon which is (now) on the website in the Sunday Message Archive page under the ‘2008-2009 Misc Messages’ section.
Matt. 10:16
July 2nd, 2009 at 12:12 pm
For all those interested: My Mistake: The Message is March 29th, not April. I stand corrected. (Though, this is the missing sermon). Blessings!!
July 2nd, 2009 at 1:34 pm
“Any denomination may not be compelled to testify on any matter in relation to any confession or communication made to him in confidence by a person seeking his spiritual advice or consolation.”
It is not as murky in Maryland as one would think.
The statute only provides for denominational churches.
CLC is non-denominational.
CLC’s lawyers have already tried to argue this privilege in MD and lost. (Dec 2008)
The lack of meaningful confidentiality in their member documents did not help their case.
They only had “scholastic opinion” in their argument, and went down the path that the privilege exist for the sake of, and protection of the church/pastor
July 2nd, 2009 at 1:39 pm
“The minister, clergyman, or priest is bound to maintain the confidentiality of that communication under canon law, church doctrine, or practice.”
The standard here would be what the membership documents state as the “doctrine” or “practice” of the church.
As the privilege is discretionary, one would simply have to show that the Pastoral discursion was to share with another person who was not present.
Care group leaders are not covered BTW
July 2nd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Mimi – Quizzler
Burke v. Burke, Case No. HN-1326-1, CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, VIRGINIA, May 1, 2002, Decided
Overview: Where a minister did not provide counseling as a minister but as a counselor for compensation, and the husband shared the information with another, there was no clergy privilege and the wife could discover the minister’s records.
Still, the privilege is decided by the organizations policies.
July 2nd, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Noel-
I’m no legal expert-but it seems to me that many Catholic Bishops have been held liable for knowingly moving a known sexual predator to other churches, without the full disclosure of this person’s past (which often times led to further abuse, cover up, and more church shuffling). Seems to me that any church leader who knew of a persons sexual assualts, but then willingly encouraged a move without disclosure to the new church may be held liable.
Again, just my own speculation…..
peace-mm
July 2nd, 2009 at 7:11 pm
PFR:
Is the December 2008 decision you refer to a publically cited case?
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:31 am
Former -
It is not; it appears that CLC had some documents (exonerating in the defense’s opinion) that CLC was refusing to turn over due to privilege. The defendant in the case had waved his “privilege”, and yet they still tried to stonewall. I have the audio, and have put a deposit down to have a transcript made of the hearing.
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:53 am
I was listening to a talk this am and the guy said something profound.
He said that church can not provide what God gives freely.
But most people use the church in a co-dependent relationship way instead of striking out to find the Holy Spirit and God for themselves.
So I think that helped me to understand why we was so willing to check our brains at the door when we were so wrapped up in PDI. We craved the comraderie, the feeling of belonging to a group, the feeling of being a part of a church that was so up-to-date and had the right doctrine. Of knowing that our group was so special and we were fortunate to have found it.
I am just so thankful that we are free to pursue what God does give freely.
July 3rd, 2009 at 11:55 am
Old timer,
AMEN!
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:04 pm
old timer –
Exactly!!!
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Oldtimer said: “We craved the comraderie, the feeling of belonging to a group, the feeling of being a part of a church that was so up-to-date and had the right doctrine. Of knowing that our group was so special and we were fortunate to have found it. ”
How right you are. God refused to “release” me from PDI until he showed me a number of important things. One of the most important was the extent of my hidden pride and arrogance at being a member not only of PDI, but of CLC – and a long-time member at that!
No matter how many times Mahaney talked about his “view from the cheap seats” of Christendom, the truth is that out of the other side of his mouth he (and all the other pastors) talked repeatedly about how wonderful the movement was, how many Sunday-message tapes were going out all over the world, etc.
For years I believed and agreed with it all. I was so embarrassed, when God let me see that my reluctance to leaving CLC was based largely on how proud I was to be part of that church (able to hear CJ speak every Sunday!). God gently showed me that my allegiance was primarily to CLC/PDI, and not to Jesus Christ.
July 5th, 2009 at 9:10 am
New International Version (©1984)
It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.
International Standard Version (©2008)
The Messiah has set us free so that we may enjoy the benefits of freedom. So keep on standing firm in it, and stop putting yourselves under the yoke of slavery again.
GOD’S WORD® Translation (©1995)
Christ has freed us so that we may enjoy the benefits of freedom. Therefore, be firm [in this freedom], and don’t become slaves again.
King James Bible
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Let us glorify our Lord and Savior, Messiah and King, Jesus Christ by walking in the freedom for which He died for. May we never again walk in bondage, in deception, and in slavery to any man nor to the enemy of God, satan. May we stand firm, speak the truth in love, expose evil and protect our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. God bless all as we journey together.
July 5th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
In our church this morning the pastor spoke on being set free. He said:
“If we all dress the same, act the same, look the same, do the same things we are not set free”. Of course his point was that if we do that, we are following a set of man made rules. Guess what that reminded me of?
July 6th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Here’s the link to the Peacemakers Conference, which is all excited about having Dave Harvey as their keynote speaker:
http://bookstore.peacemaker.net/blog/?p=225
I just left a comment to that post, which is in the moderation queue. I doubt it will be posted, of course. However, if enough people post comments asking them to inquire of Dave Harvey why SGM has such a dismal record of applying the peacemaking process, they might even ask him (even if they never allow any of these comments to see daylight).
Here’s the comment I left:
“I find it ironic that you’re having Dave Harvey speak at your conference, when his Sovereign Grace Ministries ‘family of churches’ does so poorly at peacemaking within their own organization. Their leaders have a dismal record of following your peacemaking principles, when church members ask leaders to deal with problems.
“These difficulties have been well-documented at several blogs, including http://www.sgmrefuge.com and http://www.sgmsurvivors.com.
“I hope you’ll ask Dave Harvey some pointed questions about SGM’s allegiance to your peacemaking principles — and perhaps do some ‘due diligence’ digging of your own??”
July 6th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Keep in Step,
I went to the Peacemaker link you provided, and here’s the only comment so far:
“Walking Wounded on 06 Jul 2009 at 2:59 pm
Please reconsider having Dave Harvey speak. If you do a minimal search on Sovereign Grace ministries (including their Wiki) you will see there a serious problem with their ministry and with Dave Harvey. Seeing my wife wrongfully victimized by the “Matthew 18 process” at SGM, it is clear that though they promote Peacemaking they do not implement it in practice.”
Way to go Walking Wounded!!! Hope they don’t delete your comment.
July 8th, 2009 at 8:42 am
To Keepinstep
My husband and I also left our PDI church because it seemed too heavy handed and controlling. What we discovered in the years after was our own pride and arrogance based on being a part of this “special” church. We have since come to realize that there are many local churches who are not part of PDI and yet are following hard after God.
About the many cases of sexual abuse that have taken place in PDI churches – it isn’t surprising. I know of Noel’s case because it took place in our church. I also know personally of another case of incest in our church. The family involved were given scant counseling and then allowed to move with a church plant where there was little or no follow-up. This family is now completely broken – the wife left her husband for questionable reasons (as if the incest wasn’t enough) and the children have pretty much gone their own way. It’s heartbreaking.
July 8th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Mack:
did you go to the fairfax church?
July 9th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
mack,
. So refreshing to find all of you guys here. I used to be a Mormon and so much of this controlling and incompetent leadership is the same! Not only that, but for those of you who haven’t been to Fairfax in awhile, the other college kids were telling me that they have a new “members” contract where you are strongly encouraged to sign a statement of membership thing, basically saying that you will be there and support your church. We had a discussion about it at care group and someone asked if I would have signed it ( I wasn’t there when it was first implemented). Praise God that I said no.
At least you were able to recognize the controlling aspect. I was a blind little follower. I have been attending church at Fairfax since March 2009. I hadn’t heard of ANY of this before I accidentally discovered all these posts on google just a few days ago. Ahh, the power of the internet
I was already idolizing this church and planning my life around courtship and “living happily ever after”- in the church. You all have given me strength to pull away and really seek God. If it means breaking ties with my best friends (who grew up in Sov Grace and will probably never leave), then I guess we were never really “friends” in Christ to begin with. I have to stop turning a blind eye and fear God and not man.
(first time posting!)
July 9th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
road not taken, thank you for posting. You just made every minute that I have ever spent on this blog worthwhile. You see, if this blog helps even one person, then it is a huge success. Yes, definitely, seek God and what He has for you. You must, however, count the cost. The cost for leaving an SGM church is usually the loss of most, if not all of your friends. Finding the truth, worshipping God and God alone, and walking on the path that He has for you, is far more precious than any earthly thing. I have had to look at the sad fact that many were never really friends but you know what? That is ok. Yes it is sad but God has given me so much more since I left the SGM I attended – more of Himself – Floods of Living Water being poured into my soul, freedom in Christ like I have never tasted before, new intimacy with Him, and a new depth of learning how much He loves me. I will never, never regret leaving. I thank God that He removed the blinders from my eyes and that I could see the deception, abuse, wrong doctrine, etc within SGM. The deception had covered my heart, mind, eyes like a veil. I am free and living in the abundance of Jesus Christ. I pray that all will see the truth. God bless you, road not taken as you seek God for the rest of your life, finding your destiny in Him – not in any man or any movement.
July 9th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Road Not Taken:
We went to the fairfax church for many years and sadly I am afraid that you will find that if and when you leave unfortunately you will find many who you though were your friends will cease contact with you. It is very insular church. They have been trying for many years to become more evangelistic and outreach oriented but they always seem to focus on trying to find the right program rather than just loving people.
July 9th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Road Not Taken:
You refer to the leadership as incompetent. I suspect that I would agree with you but I am curious but if you do not mind sharing a bit can I ask why you say that?
July 9th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
fred:
thank you for your encouraging words. God has been so gracious. Not only did I find this post when I did, but I am young and have few really close “friends” in the church. I am not married or anything either and no one in my family is Christian (I became a believer in late April this year). So I am glad that leaving will be easier!
formersgmer:
I don’t mind sharing at all. However, I see that it was wrong of me to say that the leadership is incompetent. I have not attended the church long. I guess what I meant to say is that I read Noel’s and Esther’s stories (one occurred in Fairfax Church). The way in which those situations were handled in my own personal opinion is incompetence. I also read on this site that 3 beloved pastors at Chespeake Church after years of pastoring were forced to step down because they “lost” their pastoring gift. So although I haven’t seen anything firsthand, I have read too many stories about inadequate couseling and leadership. formersgmer, did you attend fairfax church?, if you don’t mind my asking.
July 10th, 2009 at 12:29 am
Road Not Taken:
Yes I did attend for a number of years.
July 11th, 2009 at 1:04 am
“road not taken, thank you for posting. You just made every minute that I have ever spent on this blog worthwhile. You see, if this blog helps even one person, then it is a huge success. Yes, definitely, seek God and what He has for you. You must, however, count the cost. The cost for leaving an SGM church is usually the loss of most, if not all of your friends. Finding the truth, worshipping God and God alone, and walking on the path that He has for you, is far more precious than any earthly thing. I have had to look at the sad fact that many were never really friends but you know what? That is ok. Yes it is sad but God has given me so much more since I left the SGM I attended – more of Himself – Floods of Living Water being poured into my soul, freedom in Christ like I have never tasted before, new intimacy with Him, and a new depth of learning how much He loves me. I will never, never regret leaving. I thank God that He removed the blinders from my eyes and that I could see the deception, abuse, wrong doctrine, etc within SGM. The deception had covered my heart, mind, eyes like a veil. I am free and living in the abundance of Jesus Christ. I pray that all will see the truth. God bless you, road not taken as you seek God for the rest of your life, finding your destiny in Him – not in any man or any movement.”
rnt,
I’m with Fred – it’s so wonderful to see someone who “has ears to hear” and who is heeding the experiences of those who have gone before them.
Jesus loves you SO much, keep trusting in Him!!
July 17th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Hello All,
I am new here. I was wondering if anyone knows the circumstances surounding the Jacksonville pastor leaving or “stepping down” or whatever they called it? thanks.
July 18th, 2009 at 7:52 am
So totally Done,
I’m sorry. I know nothing of the Jacksonville goings-on, but I wanted to say hello and welcome you!
July 18th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
So totally Done,
Me too! (what Gracie said) Welcome!
July 18th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Recently found out that teens at Sovereign Grace Church Chesapeake who had accepted Christ, wanted to be baptized, their parents believed that they were ready for baptism had to go through what sounds to be a theological/doctrinal, verbal examination by a pastor. Many of these teens were told by the pastor that they were not ready for baptism. Seems they couldn’t explain/define theological terms such as justification, sanctification, etc. to the pastor’s satisfaction……
Now my question is this? Isn’t baptism a command by God and that in obedience to God we are baptized?? Is baptism a demonstration of head knowledge or is it a demonstration of our heart’s posture toward God??
Why has SGC turned baptism into a demonstration of head/intellectual knowledge???
Another evidence of how far off SGC has gotten from the Spirit of God and the heart of Jesus Christ. Maybe this is why so many former SGC teens were baptized through another church last Sunday.
July 18th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
Fred,
That is so distressing to hear! I wanna hit something! That those young teens should be turned away from being baptized into the faith (which is done by faith and not knowledge) makes my blood boil! John the Baptist would never haved turned a young person away, nor would Jesus! This is a travesty.
July 18th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Just another demonstration of evangelical “Christianity,” and SGM in particular, seeing the need to “Christianize” the flesh. The flesh cannot be changed! Religion always attempts to work on flesh modification. Never worked, never will. The flesh produces death; the Spirit is LIFE, HIS LIFE.
These tender hearts denied this outward sign of an inward miraculous work of LIFE, HIS SPIRIT (LIFE) because they cannot parrot SGM’s theology to satisfy the “holy” men in leadership saddens me. What a missed opportunity to celebrate the wonderful love a God extended to us, the simplest of us, even the ones who cannot fully explain the details. “I am not really sure what happened; all I know is that once I was blind and now I see!” Thankfully even I get that.
July 18th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Fred:
I think the reason for the SGM pastors’s inquisition of these particular teens theological soundness lies in the fact that SGM is, in my view, almost manicial about attempting to make sure that there are no false conversions. (i.e, people who who are not genuinely converted). I definately support their goal of seeking to avoid giving fale hope to believes but on the other hand there is no Biblical requirement that believers must be able to define theological terms as an evidence of their conversion. Scripture itself only requires that believers place their faith in Jesus Christ. Look at the man who was crucified with Jesus. Jesus responded only to his faith and nothing else.
Finally, one of the principal tenets of the reformation is Sola Fide (by Faith Alone). This is more evidence that SGM is not reformed.
July 18th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Yes, we know them by their fruit but truly can man determine who is regenerated and who is not? What about the parents place in all this? We are not talking here about parents who just walked in off the street. We are talking about parents who had been in SGC for MANY years, much longer than most of the current pastors on staff. If the parents believe that their children are ready for baptism, shouldn’t that be an important part of this process? One pastor was so intimidating to the children that they left the office crying after their baptismal interview. Once again, evidence that there is a lack of spiritual discernment, a lack of trusting Holy Spirit in these pastors at SGCC and no heart of love and compassion.
July 18th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
PS Because these pastors are taught at Pastors’ college and by CJ that they stand in the very stead of God, then it all makes sense and we know why they do not listen to the parents.
July 19th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Fred:
Interesting comments in your 4:20 because SGM will also say that parents are the persons primarily responsible for the children’s spiritual nurturing and in fact if the father happens to be in any type of leadership position I am sure the pastors would not hesitate to deploy this fact against the father if they felt he was falling short in training his children.
So I think once again you have situation where SGM tries to have it both ways in that when it suits their purposes they will determine when and where a parent is fit to make spiritually informed decision about their children.
The only time I might tend to agree that a pastor should overrule a parents decision about a child’s baptism is if the parents are so fundamentally immature in Christ that is clear that they do not understand what Biblical conversion should look like. But than if you look at my favorite passage in Scripture concerning the conversion of the Geresene Demonic that when a person shows a clear evidence of a changed heart and changed lifestyle as a result of encountering Christ, there should be great weight given to that person’s confession and they should be allowed to be baptized.
Finally, can someone please share from reputable source such as a commentary or a sermon where this whole idea “of standing in the very stead of God came from” because it is certainly is not a direct New Testament idea.
July 19th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
This is an excellent article on “Churchianity” vs. living in Jesus. A great read!!
July 19th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Another great article !
July 19th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
formersgmer:
Here is a message from CJ prefacing a message from Jeff Purswell on Standing in the stead of God
http://www.sovgracemin.org/Blo.....f-God.aspx
July 19th, 2009 at 8:58 pm
From Standing in the stead of God by Jeff Purswell
“Just as in the ancient Near East a king, in vast provinces he cannot travel to, would set up huge statues of himself which represented his presence and authority, in the same way God has set up an image of himself to represent and reflect himself. And that is man. And this impacts the way God communicates, as he speaks through divinely appointed messengers. After man was ejected from the Garden, God has communicated to his people by mediating his word through someone. Even the Scriptures were mediated from God through someone. ”
Does this paragraph strike anyone else as rather odd? Maybe false teaching abounding? Did God make man in His image because He cannot travel to His vast provinces in this world? I don’t think so…. Man’s purpose: to worship God and to enjoy Him forever. What Scriptures is Purswell using here? As far as God communicating to His people……according to the New Testament, Holy Spirit and the Word of God were given to communicate to God’s people.
July 19th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/06/2.....ad-of-god/
July 20th, 2009 at 11:18 am
This is how the reference from The Preacher and Preaching (Why Preach? JI Packer,) appears in the SG article from the link above:
Listen to this quote from a classic essay on preaching by J.I. Packer in The Preacher and Preaching. Packer writes,
God’s standard way of securing and maintaining His person-to-person communication with us His human creatures is through the agency of persons whom He sends to us as His messengers.…Such were the prophets and apostles, and such supremely was Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son.…That is the succession in which preachers today are called to stand.
This is the entire section of that which was referenced from the book (text in bold was omitted from the quote) :
Listen to this quote from a classic essay on preaching by J.I. Packer in The Preacher and Preaching. Packer writes,
Now the Bible makes it appear that God’s standard way of securing and maintaining His person-to-person communication with us His human creatures is through the agency of persons whom He sends to us as His messengers by being made God’s spokesmen and mouthpieces for His message, the messengers become emblems, models and embodiments of God’s personal address to each of their hearers, and by their own commitment to the message they bring, they become models also of personal response to that address. Such were the prophets and apostles, and such supremely was Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son who has been well described as being both God for man and man for God. That is the succession in which preachers today are called to stand.
July 20th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
If I am not mistaken, after reading Purswell’s commentary, there seems to be NO room at all for the Holy Spirit in a believers life. His references (not biblically but historically) in his “speech” refer to the “ancient” times. There seems to be little reference, if any at all, to the desires of JESUS for us to seek the Comforter in our lives. The Holy Spirit was given to us by JESUS himself to be that “voice” to us to teach us and guide us.
If what Purswell states is true…what a fickle god we serve. His meanings and instruction seems to change from generation to generation; from denomination to denomination.
NO thank you.. I will continue to follow the true voice in the “stead of GOD”. For me that is GOD HIMSELF in the form of the HOLY SPIRIT…..
July 20th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Hope,
Well done! Thank you for bringing us the original context and including the portions edited out by SGM.
It’s important to remember context as we read CJ’s blog as well. I stopped reading months ago, but here are a couple of highlights.
More responsibilities of the sheep.
The fruit of good pastoring.
It’s not hard to see CJ’s focus.
July 20th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
The entire premise of “Standing in the stead of God” is man-centered and arrogant.
This is at the very heart of SGM’s view of man’s relationship with God, and explains their belief concerning the inability of others (the Sheep) to hear directly from God.
Instead of seeking man’s view of what God says, we need to go to God’s word directly to discover what He has to say; then rely on the Holy Spirit to guide us in understanding His Word.
“God speaks primarily through the Scriptures (Ps. 119:105; 2 Tim. 3:16-17).
Jesus’ point of reference was always the Word of God (Mt. 4:1-11; 9:13; 22:29;
Lk. 10:26). The apostles and the early church continually looked to Scripture for
guidance and understanding (Acts 1:20; 2:16-21; 4:11, 24-26; 15:15-19)”. *
Here are a couple of examples in which Scripture is very specific as to whom we should be listening:
Jeremiah 7:23 But this thing I did command them: Listen to and obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you will be my people; and walk in the whole way that I command you, that it may be well with you.
Deuteronomy 28:1 If you will listen diligently to the voice of the Lord your God, being watchful to do all His commandments which I command you this day the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth.
In addition, Scripture attests that…………….
God can speak to us through dreams
God can speak to us through visions
God can speak to us through angels
God can speak to us through an audible voice
God can speak to us through a still, small voice
God can speak to us through direct personal revelation
And yes, God can speak to us through others; but there are certain things we must keep in mind when others communicate their view of the mind of God to us. Here’s a “litmus test” for us all to apply to any message we hear proclaimed by man as it relates to God’s mind or will:
“1. Does the message agree with the truths of the Word and the principles of the
Scriptures? (Is. 8:19-20)
2. Does the word exalt Jesus? (1 Cor. 12:3; 1 Jn. 4:1-3; Rev. 19:10)
3. Does the Spirit bear witness within you? (1 Jn. 2:26-27)
4. Does the message draw you into a deeper relationship with the Lord? (Deut.
13:1-4; Rev. 22:8-9)
5. Is the message given in a good spirit – out of care and concern? (1 Cor. 13:2)
6. Does the message have a healthy effect/impact on you? Are you edified,
exhorted, and comforted or do you end up confused, condemned,
frightened, distressed, and uncertain? (1 Cor. 14:3-4)
7. Do other godly believers agree with it? (1 Cor. 14:29; 2 Cor. 13:1)
8. Does the speaker lead a godly life? (Jer. 23:14; Mt. 7:15-16)” *
*From the article “Hearing God’s Voice”
No man stands in the stead of God.
No man stands between other men and God.
N.S.L.B.
July 21st, 2009 at 7:40 am
Amen, Quizzler! What a wonderful article. Never again will I allow a mere man, no matter how “gifted” or “doctrinally sound,” to stand between my Lord and me. Jesus paid too high a price so I could have personal dignity and value and an intimate relationship with Him. I will not insult Him by turning it over to anyone else. This is where I get really riled up. CLEARLY, this “stead of God” concept, as SGM has incorporated it, is not New Testament Christianity.
July 21st, 2009 at 8:34 am
Quizzler and Gracie, Great posts! Thanks Quizzler for the great Scripture references. Jeff Puswell and CJ have gotten it really wrong and they have sent these pastors down the wrong road. Sadly, these young men (pastors) have chosen to believe tht they are standing in the very place of God.
July 21st, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Hi guys,
I don’t know what I would do without the Holy Spirit. He is my comforter and advocate. With Him, I am never alone. Jesus knew when He sent His Spirit that we would need that comfort and guidance. I am very sorry for the sgm folks who are being taught to rely on men for something only God can give.
July 22nd, 2009 at 8:09 am
Fred:
I have a question about your July 18th, 2009 at 1:57 pm post: I gather from your statement that more than one pastor was involved in the interviews but I’m wondering if the pastor overseeing the youth ministry at SGCC was the primary interviewer. Possibly even the one who was much harsher than necessary. Do you have any idea?
July 22nd, 2009 at 8:41 am
Just as an FYI: The interviews were not limited to Chesapeake. Our church did them as well. I don’t know of anyone who was rejected though.
July 22nd, 2009 at 10:08 am
Standing By,
I cannot tell you if every pastor was involved or not. I can tell you that the youth pastor (over the 316 ministry) walked in more grace and more of the Spirit than any of the other pastors there. Was he involved in this type of harsh interview? I do not know but if you are “standing by” in SGCC, ask him.
I wonder, do the pastors in SGM have a “script” which they now follow in these interviews since this is not just in SGCC?
July 22nd, 2009 at 11:09 am
Fred:
Thanks for the additional information. I was hoping for an answer similar to what you gave. The 316 (youth) pastor at SGCC is now the only pastor there that hasn’t attended the SGM PC (he graduated from Regent Univ.). I’ll do what I can to find out more.
July 22nd, 2009 at 11:22 am
HMM…Standing By, the 316 pastor that I am talking about who has walked in more grace and the Spirit is definitely not the one who graduated from Regent. The one I am talking about is now the Sr. Pastor at SGCC, EH who used to be over the 316 ministry. He just finished the PC. The only pastor left at SGCC that has not attended Pastors’ College and who graduated from Regent IS definitely known for harsh, abusive counsel and not walking in the Spirit, not having godly wisdom and discernment and was very involved with the abusive treatment of women and the whole fiasco that happened last Dec. Standing By, I say this to you in love: Glad to hear that you will ask questions! Please become informed and ask lots of questions because it appears from your comment that you know very little of what has really been going on in SGCC and that possibly you don’t know your pastors well. This is a dangerous place to be for yourself and if you have a family, for them as well.
July 22nd, 2009 at 11:29 am
Standing By: To find out the whole truth and more of a complete picture of what is going on within SGCC I encourage you to talk with your friends who have left SGCC in the last 6-7 mos. Find out why they left. You may be quite amazed. I believe that you will find much insight and truth into what is really going on within SGCC. Don’t limit yourself to only talking with those still in SGCC including pastors. Talking to the ones still in SGCC may not give you the whole picture.
July 22nd, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Fred:
Since EH hasn’t been involved with the 316 ministry since he went to the PC I didn’t even consider him as one of the pastors involved in the incidents described.
I have heard from people, both still at SGCC and some who have left, that the 316 pastor for the past year has mellowed some from the experience, especially since the events at the end of last year. This has not my experience with him at all but, since I rarely talk to him, I took their statements at face value until I had more information (which I now have, it appears).
I had first thought that he was probably the source of the original issue but held out hope that the reports I had received that he was more gracious were true. Since, as I said, I hadn’t included EH in the group, I was thrown off by your use of the phrase “the youth pastor (over the 316 ministry)” in your 10:08 am post as I thought maybe, just maybe, there was a measurable heart change in at least one of the pastors – alas, this is not to be.
As for talking to people who have left, I am trying to talk to as many as I can. Unfortunately, my available time has not been enough to keep up with those exiting. But I will continue to press on.
As a final note, I have been reading this blog regularly, and occationally at Survivor, since the events at SGCC at the end of last year and have only recently decided to post. I’ve sent a few emails to Jim on occasion before this but haven’t added any to the ongoing discussions.
Matt. 10:16
July 22nd, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Standing By, Please know that I will be praying for you. This is all very hard on everyone – those who have left and those who are left behind. Everyone has been wounded by all of the events of the last year. (Actually because of the wrong doctrine, abuse, control, etc. people have been wounded for a very long time.) I do believe with all my heart that God does not want us to stick our head in the sand but He wants His people to walk in truth, in the light and in understanding. Sometimes that means we have to ask questions of many different people and even learn things that are not pleasant. Certainly we must walk closely with God, trusting Holy Spirit to give us discernment and truth. If we allow God to work in our lives through this it will all lead us closer to Him. Remember, this has been God revealing things that have been hidden within SGCC and SGM for a long time. This is His work but He does choose to use His people in the battle.
You say that this particular pastor is mellowing out? My hope would be to hear that he is a broken and contrite man, visibly repentant and changed, realizing the depth of his deception, sin and abusive pastoring, counseling, shepherding. There are soooo many who have been abused by this man over many years. Some have even told me that they thought they were going crazy because of the counsel that he gave them. I would guess that he is scared out of his wits that he might still lose his job. Recently I was told by reliable sources that he is still very controlling and not walking in grace and trusting God. My question is really, why is he still a pastor in SGCC and why is he still counseling?? Why would he be over the 316 ministry with those precious children???
Know though that he is not the only pastor who has walked in abuse, control, deception, wrong doctrine, etc. The others have as well.
July 31st, 2009 at 5:47 am
I’ve been reading your posts for the past two days, and there’s much I’d like to say, but not quite yet. One thing I would like to address is the discussion regarding Virginia law for reporting abuse. In the mid to late 90’s, there were three separate incidences of criminal sexual behavior within the membership of a Virginia PDI church, although they did not happen on church property or in church activities. All 3 were discovered by church members and/or leadership through reports from victims or confession by the criminal. The leadership immediately contacted authorites, then contacted the congregation, and I remember the pastor explaining that once the crime/sin was confessed, “but of course” he had to report to authorities. Whether he just thought he was required to, or if the law actually required it, I do not know, but I do know that he wanted to do the right thing. One perpetrator went to jail for several months; his family moved to a different church immediately for the sake of the injured child. The other two perpetrators are in prison for lengthy sentences, twenty years or more; one is likely to die there. There was never ANY implication of guilt or sin on the part of the victims, and it breaks my heart to read the accounts of those who were abused not just by sexual predators, but by leaders who should have served them with humility, love, and grace.
At the time, aghast that such unthinkable things had happened among Christians, not just once, but three times, I talked at length with a dear friend from a PCA church who was a Christian counselor and had a professional connection to one of the situations. What she told me was an absolute shock — that these horrific crimes are happening in churches of every persuasion at alarming rates. “The difference is that YOUR church chose to handle it in the right way. Most churches sweep it under the rug and the membership never knows it happened.”
So, my disillusionment with SGM is with other issues, and I am thankful that at least in these 3 heartbreaking situations, the senior pastor and SGM handled things as well as could be expected at the time. I hesitated to make these comments, wishing not to fan flames, but the incidents described are a matter of public record.
I no longer attend an SGM church, for mostly personal and a few theological reasons, though I absolutely love the stated concepts and vision for the church. The last time I went to Celebration, the women of our “cell group” (a ridiculous name, along with many other strange terms and SGM jargon) agreed to wear nothing shorter than Capri pants due to the new modesty rules. I wore short-shorts in the 98-degree 4th of July heat, made hotter by my sadness and anger that as we exercised the fabulous gift of freedom of religion, the Independence Day holiday was never even mentioned.
And when hearing of pastors removed from their positions because of the rebellion of a child, I’m mystified. How do you measure rebellion? If a third of heaven’s angels, who had the PERFECT FATHER, rebelled against Him, how can we expect an earthly father to do better?
Thank you -
From a square peg in the round hole of SGM, a sinner saved by Grace, and a recipient of many great things from every flawed church I’ve been privileged to attend.
July 31st, 2009 at 9:37 am
Square Peg
Welcome to the sight.
You might want to go over to SGMSurvivors.com and read Noel’s story.
Noel (not her real name) indicates that the 15 year old boy that molested her 3 year old daughter was observed working in children’s ministry. Allowing someone with that heinous of a past to work in children’s ministry certainly isn’t what I would call handling the situation properly.
Also, if you read her account you will find where the 15 year old boy was never truly remorseful for what he did to this girl. Partially due to this lack of remorse, Noel and her husband filed some type of brief to not allow this boy’s record of being a molester hidden or purged (whatever it was called). Noel indicated that the SGM pastors wanted this boy’s record purged and were mad at Noel and her husband for opposing this.
Reading Noel’s account, it sure doesn’t look like the pastors at the Fairfax Sovereign Grace Church handled this situation very well.
I would suggest you read her stories again.
http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=276
http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=312
There is one other entry that talks about how bad a recent meeting with with Noel, her husband and SGM Fairfax pastors that I can’t find.
Hope this helps you see what is going on.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:05 am
Square peg,
That was good to hear, sadly, that is not the way this issue is handled currently.
There is another abuse story out of Fairfax, besides Noel’s…..abuse….cover-up….
horrific treatment of the victim and family…..which continues today…..
July 31st, 2009 at 12:35 pm
My comment was not meant in any way to minimize the horrific nature of Noel’s situation or similar ones, just to explain that the “powers that be” did not seem to have a cover-up mentality when these problems happened in another church. I cannot fathom why these issues were handled in such an illegal, immoral fashion, because it seems that after what our church went through, there might have been a policy put in place within PDI to outline how such things should be handled in accordance with law and scripture.
Though I’m geographically far removed from the situation, and know nothing personally about the specific churches involved, I will continually pray. A year or so ago, another ex-SGM’er and I talked cathartically at length about our own experiences, which are nowhere near the extremes I’ve read about on this site, but sad and painful in many ways. It’s comforting, yet sad, to know that I’m not the only square peg. Perhaps if folks at SGM remove the plastic masks and get real with each other in non-controlling ways, real reform will happen. Let’s pray for it.
Thanks.
January 13th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
I still keep in contact with some friends who currently attend Chesapeak.
They follow the rule of making excuses for their leaders mistakes.
When inquired about what happened over the last year, I was told “Young leaders tend to be heavy handed. So its to be expected.”
Sorry but I don’t see that in the Bible !!!!!
A couple of years ago the wife made a statement of disagreement with the “release” of a pastor. (This pastor was very loved by many I am told) The husband looked concerned. I said “Don’t worry I won’t turn you in”. The wife laughed, but the husband was not amused. She knew what I was getting at, but submitted to her husband’s desire to stay at Chesapeak.
I wish “heavy handed” attitudes were limited to Chesepeak but that is not the case. I have heard of it from friends in MD/VA and FL affiliates