Purswell’s notes are long, and may take some time to load. I thought it best to start a new thread for comments.
Addendum 4/27.
I haven’t read any of the comments, so I’m not addressing anyone-just saying what should have said when we posted the notes.
Please know that Purswell’s lecture notes are not a replacement of Harvey’s polity doc, nor is this SGM’s new polity statement. The conversation within SGM is continuing. Pastors present at T4G were asked to submit questions and opinions. Every single pastor in SGM has since received an email, again asking for input, so please know this is not the final statement.
Having said that, it is clear that one thing will not change: SGM’s view of pastoral authority and their extreme clergy/laity distinction. If Purswell drove any point home, it was that all authority in SGM resides in the leadership, with the congregation having zero authority.
I mean, there’s a lot one could say about it, but I think it boils down to “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.” And that section on congregational recourse is just pathetic.
Ok…just read the notes. A couple of things strike me as I read this document. For one, it seems to be an apologetic for what is already in place at SG, not an honest look into some of the nuances scripture presents when it speaks of elders.
I find it odd that SG insists on an interpretation of Matthew 18 referring to elders and the process of ex-communication. He says that for Jesus to mention elders would have been assumed by his audience of the day, stating that the reference to 2 or 3 certifies that Jesus is speaking of elders. Yet Jesus, uses the phrase brothers, a common phrase in the NT that refers to all people (Men & Women) who are believers. The reference to 2 or 3 other people is a clear allusion to the OT principle that no one accused of a crime is convicted on the testimony of just one person (the old He said, she said)-our modern courts reflect this tendency to this very day. Jesus borrows and expands this principle to include personal offenses and not just criminal, for the purpose of winning over your fellow believer so that unity and love might reign…at least that’s my reading of the scripture. I see no reason to insist that elders are the assumption, unless you come to this process, a priori, believing that all decisions in the church are ultimately up to elders and none others.
The other thing that bothers me is the rather brief but dismissive attitude towards non-teaching elders and lay elders. Without really defining what he means by these terms and the distinction he’s making, he implies or states, that lay elders may be possible, but is a dangerous decision that will be very hard to undo once established. With this pandora box warning, and very little scriptural discussion, one can assume that he allows for the practice in theory, but does not believe it a worthy option for SG.
His dismissal of Acts 6 and other “ad-hoc” writings of Paul is a nice way of sticking your fingers in your ears and not really dealing with those scriptures and their implications.
Does anyone else find it ironic that he has a section on the un-biblical phrase “First Among Equals” a phrase that
” The term is used with reference to the Roman Emperors‘ way of reducing the appearance of dictatorship (which was particularly important during the early Roman Empire to appease those who may have longed for a return to the old Roman Republic; “)
He then makes the case that the Senior Pastor in the “first among equals” because he has more teaching prominence than other elders. I find this confusing since he has already argued that all elders are teaching elders.
Lastly, I find very little in this document to that affirms SG’s past use of the office of Apostle…interesting since many of Dave Harvey’s puff pieces on polity are basically an apologetic for their usage of this biblical title and office. Jeff states that apostles are church planters, but scripture certainly records others who are not apostles preaching the gospel (Philip and Stephen come to mind) in un-churched areas…even more interesting since SG’s 2 big apostles have never actually planted a church on their own (Dave Harvey and CJ) forgive me if I’m wrong, but I’m not aware of any church plants that these 2 apostles have ever led. Yes-I know, they’ve sent out church planters….but that’s like saying the elders in Antioch were Apostles too….by this definition, the new pastors at Brandywine Grace would be elders AND Apostles, because they’re planting a church. But I doubt this is his point….I’m wondering why such lack of definition on the Apostolic role, since in the past, this has been their main criticism of other church planters and missions, the lack of Apostolic oversight to the local church.
I’ll stop know and let someone else jump in…..
peace-mm
Musicman: For one, it seems to be an apologetic for what is already in place at SG, not an honest look into some of the nuances scripture presents when it speaks of elders.
My thoughts exactly. I’d like to ask those of you who are well-versed in theological writings– are there respected theologians out there who agree with Purswell’s conclusions? I know there are many who do not — otherwise, there’d be great numbers of long-established churches who follow such polity. I do not know Purswell. Is there some reason he believes he has greater illumination into this matter than other, more tested theologians? What are the reasons for SGM’s complete trust of his conclusions? Did they ask other respected theologians to review this work and give educated opinions on his research and conclusions?
I read eagerly, hoping to find a real return to the priesthood of all believers, the tearing down of the unbiblical wall between clergy and laity — but am disappointed to find that it’s another authority-happy defense of the iron-fisted rule.
Carole: Thank you for transcribing this! Many of us would never have seen it otherwise!
My opinion after a first reading of this document:
This is nothing but a defense of what is already in place at SGM. It is a paraphrase and maybe a slight expansion and polishing of Harvey’s work on Polity. Grossly disappointing. I’ll go back over the notes line by line again, but my nutshell criticism is that re-visiting polity and making profound expressions about it does not mean there is one inch of change in that polity whatsoever. Purswell particularly digs in on the separation between leaders and sheep, and goes to bat once again for the office of Apostle. Putting on a humble face or stubborn one (take your pick) doesn’t correct the course on general errors made. All you are doing is reaffirming error at that point.
A few points:
1) As Jim has succinclty said before: SGM’s polity informs their theology and worldview, when the reverse should be taking place. That is evident in this document, and albeit a general statement, it still holds true in this case.
2) Many of these notes are phrased like a legal document where it can say what a leader’s subjective view wants it to say. More on this later.
3) SGM is still hung up on “first among equals,” as it appears again in Purswell’s notes. This term, “primus inter pares,” or “first among equals,” is a term created by and for the Roman empire, the Emperors’ way of reducing the appearance of dictatorship, and it is a term that belongs nowhere in the church.
4) There is still use of Alexander Strauch quotes when convenient; that is, even though the theme of Strauch’s work (Biblical Eldership) is actually sharply critical of both the role and title “senior pastor.”
4) The notes seem to directly contradict statements made in Grudem’s Systematic Theology regarding the Congregational Plural Local Elders model that Grudem believed was at least a head above the rest of church polity structures. Is this why Grudem’s ST has been all but absent in recent years on the SGM blogosphere? Are they going to keep fishing until they find a theologian that will back their heterodox view of polity? Be looking for a theology book by Purswell…you can bank on it, and it will be the new playbook.
5) You should be able to draw a simple diagram of the polity you have in place. Period. End of story. If you can’t, and the leaders are reticent to do so, there’s a problem on the level of needing to completely re-examine your polity. You should be able to explain it in elementary illustrations. I have yet to see this from SGM. It doesn’t need Triginometry in your outlines to explain polity.
Enough already, I need Maalox.
–jw
Just read musicman’s post, and he picked up as well on PRIMUS INTER PARES. Great minds think alike, mm?
–jw
John-
Aw shucks…but in all seriousness, I find it amazing that a group that claims deep roots in the Reformed tradition could even consider the phrase at all! (?)
Has there ever been any major branch of the Reformed church that has retained this understanding of it’s elders?
Anyway…
peace to you-mm
Out of the gate when first talking about the congregation, under “VI. The Role of the Congregation in NT Polity,” the first words we see are “A. Congregational Submission.” This makes very clear the direction Purswell is heading.
After this, there’s patronizing language under number 1 when the lack of distinction between believers is brought up, and then just when you thought the leaders might be your equals, number 2 drives it home: “2. Yet, God orders and gives leaders to His church. The congregation’s submissionto Christ finds expression in its submission to godly elders (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13; Hebrews 13:17 ; 1 Peter 5:5 ).”
It’s interesting that the three references used have cross-references in the NASB (and I’m sure they do in the ESV as well) that offer more of a systematic study of submission.
You will never see the words “congregational authority” in any printed material by SGM painted in any kind of positive light. The yets buts whereases and howevers will start flying, and once again what should be a systematic study on the subject will turn into a subjective one where the congregation, as a whole, is castrated in terms of polity. For crying out loud, the notes don’t get ONE page into talking about the congregation before we see buzzwords hammered home:
Elders rule/govern/manage/lead/exercise oversight
The congregation respects/esteems/obeys/submits/imitates
After this, Matthew 18 is interpreted for us entirely in the context of that Elders rule/govern/manage/lead/exercise oversight.
I also may be nitpicking, but I find it interesting in this section that Purswell bends over backwards to begin sentences/bullet points with “Elders,” rather “The elders,” while bullet points regarding the congregation always begin “the congregation” rather than “Congregation[s].” It’s a tactic I used to see in retail management meetings back in the 1990s. Make sure that capital E smashes the little c to drive your point home. The letters may have been different in those meetings and presentations I attended, but the same stinking corpse principle was there: Know your place.
This is the same old crap, and I don’t know why I twist myself into knots over it.
Suffice it to say I wasn’t sleeping the day I read passages like Exodus 4:29-31 , 1 Samuel 7:5-6 , 1 Samuel 10:24 , 2 Samuel 2:4 , 1 Kings 1:39-40 , 1 Kings 12:1, 1 Kings 12:15 , Matthew 18:17, Acts 1:15 , Acts 1:23 , Acts 6:3 , Acts 6:6 , Acts 15:22 , Romans 1:7 , 1 Cor. 1:2 , 1 Cor. 5:4 , 2 Cor. 8:19 , 2 Cor. 1:1, 2 Cor. 1:13 , Colossians 4:16 , 1 Timothy 4:13 , 1 Timothy 5:19 , and that’s just the authority the church congregation has in regard to its leadership as well as many examples of it being best to bring issues to the congregation.
The leaders of Sovereign Grace Ministries would do well to dust off Grudem’s ST, and read Chapter 46, “The Power of the Church,” but something tells me they would only treat in the manner they treat scripture: Hierarchy. Know Your Place. Respect.
Esteem.
Obey.
Submit.
Imitate.
–jw
VI A 4 c. (2) [Bullet #4]: “Paul addresses this entire letter to the congregation. If we deny elders a leadership role in church discipline on the basis of 1 Cor 5, then we must also deny them a role in the Lord’s Supper (ch. 11), the church’s gatherings in general (chs. 12-14), etc.”
My thoughts:
• It’s not a matter of denying them any role whatsoever (as the elders are also part of the congregation [cf. VI B i: "elders are fundamentally a part of the congregation themselves"]), but rather a matter of denying them the singular, decisive role in the matter.
• In light of that, where’s the problem with doing the same in regard to “the Lord’s Supper [and] the church’s gatherings in general”?
Oh, right: their polity informs their theology, not vice-versa. Silly me, I must have forgotten.
Travis said, “It’s not a matter of denying them any role whatsoever (as the elders are also part of the congregation [cf. VI B i: "elders are fundamentally a part of the congregation themselves"]), but rather a matter of denying them the singular, decisive role in the matter.”
Here in lies part of the problem within SGM: the pastors who are the only elders DO NOT view themselves as part of the congregation. They are separate and above the congregation and stand alone. You see, because they view themselves as standing in the very stead of God, they cannot in any way be part of the congregation. They may speak words that say they view themselves as part of the congregation but their actions/their lives speak something very, very different. Which is more powerful and speaks of the real truth – words or actions?
“Here in lies part of the problem within SGM: the pastors who are the only elders DO NOT view themselves as part of the congregation. They are separate and above the congregation and stand alone. You see, because they view themselves as standing in the very stead of God, they cannot in any way be part of the congregation. ”
Ugh. Sadly so very true. How can anyone possibly see that as Biblical? Peter and Paul had another job to earn income! They were certainly not presenting themselves as the “first among equals”. Nor did they see the congregation’s job as submitting to THEM in lieu of submitting to Jesus Christ!
(Where’s that smiley face with his tongue sticking out?) Yuck.
Folks:
See the following from IX Marks Ministries regarding the relationship of the elder to the congregation. It is a significantly different view and shows that Mr Purswell’s document should not be considered the final word on this topic.
How do elders relate to the authority of the congregation?
Elders are installed and removed by the will of the congregation. Even though they should have considerable authority over the congregation, they are finally accountable to the congregation and their continuance in office depends on the consent of the congregation.
Congregation should trust and follow their elders in matters of Christian discipleship. The New Testament commands church members to obey and submit to those in authority over them (Heb. 13:17, 1 Thess. 5:12).
Elders have the “authority of counsel,” to use an old phrase. That is, they lead the congregation by teaching the Word. Their authority is ministerial and declarative. They teach the Word of God and so authoritatively instruct and lead the people. Their authority depends on their faithful teaching of Scripture and obedience to Scripture as they lead the church.
Congregations have the “authority of command.” That is, the elders’ authority is finally advisory in matters of membership, discipline, and even doctrine. They cannot effectually unite Christians to the church, or discipline them from it. They cannot give themselves office. The elders teach, but the church is ultimately accountable to God for what they believe and who they listen to (Gal. 1:6-9). The elders oversee people’s lives and lead the church in dealing with sin, but the congregation finally decides whom to accept into membership and whom to exclude (Matt. 18:17; 1 Cor. 5:12). While the church recognizes its elders precisely so that they can lead them by teaching the Word to them and watching over their lives, God holds the church finally accountable for its membership, discipline, and doctrine.
Excellent point….elder does actually refer to age, not just an”office” 1Peter 5:5 implies this with it’s previous instructions to elders and then contrasts this with instructions to “you who are young, submit yourselves to the elders”.
Having lived some of my life out west, when you encounter Native American culture, they put a lot of emphasis on the wisdom of elders (meaning older people, full of life long wisdom) and the need for the young to a least hear them out and their teaching. It seems to me that this is more akin to what Paul is alluding to when he speaks of elders in the church….those who are not young in the Lord. But older and full of experienced and tested wisdom.
I’d argue that a leader would have to be completely done raising his children in order to fulfill the scriptural requirement of having children of the faith. But I’m diverging….
Anyway…..
peace-mm
So…….. sgm ‘pastors’ continue to take their stance as “standing in the very stead of God” in the midst of the congregation; while ruling as “FIRST among equals” (a description as PK reminded us,derives from the Roman Empires CREATED term to enable emperors to rule in such a manner to reduce the APPEARANCE OF DICTATORSHIP); focusing on the congregations requirements toward pastors: esteem obey submit imitate
Firstly, we (Redeemed Christians) are called to esteem, obey,submit to, and imitate Jesus Christ. We are indwelt by Him and He has sent Holy Spirit to guide us and bring us into Truth.—Men who create a polity which thrives on man-rule is frightening. “Heterodox”?
I recall last year when friends in Chesapeake received clear direction from the Lord in regards to leaving SGM—it was to “FLEE”.— Interesting word, flee, “take off at a run”…. “don’t contemplate staying”… “possible danger if one remains”…….and in our heart we heard the Lord saying …” fleeing…because it (the evil workings in sgm) will now become insidious.”— I know, that sounds intense and maybe dramatic. But it was and is to us, Gods instruction. Reading the definitions of the word ‘insidious’: lie in wait for; characterized by treachery or slyness; operating in a slow or not easily apparent manner; more dangerous than seems evident.
When no repentance has occurred from CJ and leaders — this obviously means they donot see anything they have established,walked in, perpetuated…as wrong/sin. Therefore polity and church “mission statements” will continue to be polluted with dictatorship, masked in trumpeted humility and whitewashed to facilitate their overall rule. As Fred stated, “which is more powerful and speaks of real truth – words or actions”?
There are a few things that draw my attention in the notes. It was not an easy read from the standpoint that I was reading with the goal to find ‘things’ rather than catch the heart of what they are wanting to accomplish. I was able to discipline my mind to do so but I would have to say that I was unable to do so from an unbiased view. My comments are therefore made more from a gut reaction than a proof text one.
To tell you the truth, I don’t see there is anything different in this than 25 years ago. Some of the names have changed to protect the guilty, but there isn’t anything that would tell me that they have changed the practice of what they are doing and have been doing. There certainly does seem to be a change (or changing) heart. This is my first pass!
Elders vs Lay Elders:
The Bible has made no distinctions. Elders were chosen by their gifts, maturity and specific character requirements not their availability to work for the church. Their arguments against non paid elders are weak but sound convincing i.e. 1) efficient eldership is an assumption and a cloak for convenient eldership. 2) Having a connected eldership sounds good but each elder has personal responsibilities on a day to day that may or may not connect them. 3) An undistracted eldership is a misnomer as they have the same distractions as everyone else, but they do have the flexibility to take care of things “on the clock” that other wouldn’t.
Here is what is missed. They miss the benefit of great leaders in the marketplace, etc. that are every bit anointed and grace to shepherd or rule. It is also my contention that elders spend their life within the “four walls” lose touch with the reality of the day to day that most of the congregation face. I would conclude that working with paid only elders reinforces the superiority of themselves and their gifting.
Senior Pastor – “elder greater among equals”
If he is greater among equals then he becomes the boss/CEO. He is the one who basically signs the paycheck. He who signs the paycheck rules a greater rod – so much for team. No need to go any further with this one – I am sure every gets it!!
I also feel that there is an assumption here for a Senior Pastor model that because James spoke for the group that he was the greater among equals and is therefore the Senior Pastor. For me that doesn’t work very well because there are certainly more instances of no names mentioned in regard to elders but mentioned they are addressed as a group or plurality. And there is no evidence that the elders were ‘paid staff’. Teaching Elders and men who gave themselves to the advancing the gospel of His kingdom received support.
U.S. State Law – state requirements
.
Render unto Caesar what is Caesar and rend unto God what is His. The church of Jesus Christ is sovereign and is not subject to human governments. The submission to the 501c3 requirements is far from Biblical. This is really not an issue with respects to the subject matter so I will say no more. I debated with myself to even mention and you all lost
Extra-local ministry
Primary authority in the local church does not reside with the local eldership, it resides with Jesus Christ Himself. The church does not belong to SGM the church is a possession of God that His church might proclaim His Excellencies.
From what I have seen and experienced the elders are more beholden to the “apostles” or “extra-local authority than the Lord Himself. The result: everyone wants to be CJ
. Ministry is a nice word but it really means authority. Paul released the church (including elders) to the word of His grace, which is able . . . Acts 20:32.
The relationship with Paul to the churches was one more of a father rather than an overseeing authority – by his practice. (1 Cor 4:15) Their unity was one of relationship not government.
“The churches in the NT might best be characterized as possessing a qualified independence within a network of interdependence.”
Sounds nice but I don’t get it!! What this produced in PDI was an elitist mentality in the 80s and 90s. I really can’t speak to that issue beyond that. There are few cities in America that are not blanketed by local churches. No church has to have a “network of interdependence” exclusive to itself. I still get the feeling it has to do with authority rather than interdependence – but that is just me.
The document states SGM desires to emulate this pattern which communicates to me that they will continue to do the same things expecting different results.
There are several things missing in this exercise which SGM may be already talking about that bear some discussion along the way. (Eldership Methodology, Purpose and Function). Perhaps that can be a future blog at some point. It isn’t what they say it is what they do!!!!
I find Purswell’s technique very interesting.
1) His exegesis is structural in nature, depending on instructions for specific occasions. I question the legitimacy of that approach
2) It minimizes theology, specifically the nature of the priesthood of believers
3) It is not historical in that it glosses over the organic and flexible nature of the relationships between Paul, his team, leadership in Antioch, local church leaders and other extra local leaders which developed over time. It conveniently leaves out passages that show congregational involvement in decision making.
Among his errors are:
1) Ocassional instructions are not theology and not always the basis of precedent
2) Selective use of historical accounts
3) Arguing out of silence
4) Ignoring passages that may contradict his position
This approach allows him to
1) Eliminate all distinction between various leadership roles mentioned in scripture
2) Thus create an exclusive class of paid leaders. (of which Paul was not one)
3) Create the “First Among Equals” role which is not in scripture
4) Relegate all other believers exclusively to submission to the leadership class
This may sound harsh, but it is a non-theological attempt at revisionist history designed to legitimize the cult of personality around SGM pastors.
First among equals? Seriously? I have always thought that this was a tragic yet succinct way that someone here in SGM Refuge or at SGM Survivors came up to describe the way these men see themselves. (I also thought it was somewhat scathing to say that someone beleived as no human being alive since the end of the Roman Empire would ever actually have the gall to claim such a thing about themselves or any other human being. It is just too ridiculous to fathom.) So to realize they not only was it an accusation someone used against them, but something they themselves CLAIM? (And claiming it without heads bowed low in humiliation of their utter arrogance???? Beyond belief.) So JP claimed this from a pulpit somewhere and all those in attendance didn’t rise up in complete astonishment and horror that anyone would ever preach such a thing nor laugh that individual off the stage? Come on leaders at T4G- where were you when this was being said? Who of you stood up for righteousness and shouted this down as complete evil? Surely, anyone who sat still for this and didn’t stand for truth is not worthy of fortune of living in a land, in a country where people lived and died for others and the sureness of equality among men and women.
Sorry Jim, I know you like to keep it unemotional and intellectual here, but my intellect is insulted to know that there are actually people out there who believes and openly states such malarky and no one among “leaders’ would stand up and publically challenge such insanity. Where are the brains of the people sitting there, recognizing that this goes contrary to so many of the values we hold in a democracy. (Sorry, I live in the birthplace of our nation, and spend a great deal of time teaching on these values. It’s hard not to consider “first among equals” an offense.)
Stunned-no worries
Stunned— “First among equals” is a phrase we first heard several years ago —men in caregroup would chuckle over ceej identifying he and leadership (apostles) as such. I cringe to think I didnot follow my gut instinct and decry such pompousness.
As you can see, leadership continues to view themselves in this manner. Therefore, when church upheavals occur due to pastoral abuses,the area ‘apostle’ can come riding in and “commend” the wonderful pastor, reminding the congregants that he is “just a flawed sinner like us all” and…because the pastors “stand in the very stead of God “AND are the “first among equals”…..the congregants are then chargd with being unsubmissive,slanderous,prideful,enemies of the church,………. and the sgm machine continues. Amazingly UNChristlike, isn’t it?
WOW! Well said Stunned and Waters!
As most of you are already saying – this lecture represents a reaffirmation and defense of the exact same policy and practice that has been implemented in SGM church plants, pressed for in church adoptions, and emphatically taught at the Pastor’s College for many years.
I have been in pastoral and personal contexts with central SGM leaders, where it was made clear that this view of church government would not be changing and where churches with different views and applications of elder/congregation life were openly and flippantly dismissed.
It won’t surprise you that I am no longer in meetings like those
(nor am I any longer in SGM). One of the 2-3 primary issues that brought about our departure (after active questions, Biblical counterpoints, etc.) was the assurance that the practice of this vision of church governance would not be reconsidered or meaningfully altered.
A few externals were altered soon after these events. Unprecedented references to the “elders” and the “eldership” started appearing – and anecdotal stories about the equal input and authority of all the elders on the pastoral team. There was no evidence that the hierarchical reality had changed at all, and it does not appear that anything resembling Biblically shared leadership or congregational engagement has emerged.
Power is too intoxicating to give up. As long as they continue to receive financial support, they will continue to conduct “business as usual!” Pull the plug on the financial flow if you want change. Money is the currency of the flesh.
I like how “first among equals” is now a term that SGM scooped from the Roman Empire…Jim (well, and Protestant Knight) you at least know Purswell isn’t even close to being the first reformed theologian to use that phraseology as the best way to sum up what 1 Timothy is saying.
I am convinced that men can make scriptures fit and justify whatever they are doing. The fruit will reveal the tree. The issue of spiritual authority is a slippery slope and it is an issue that is difficult to win one way or the other. According to the Francis Shaeffer Institute of Church Leadership Development in America 2.7 million Christians leave their church because they are hurting wounded victims of some kind of abuse, disillusionment, or just plain neglect. Couple that with the statistic that 50% of high school youth leave the church after they graduate we have some serious problems.
If you check the history books – the reformations in Europe and England were directly related with abusive church authority. Faith in Christ alone brought freedom!
The church does need a new reformation it would seem. Leaders need to return to equipping the saints for the work of the ministry (bringing the message and impact of the gospel of the kingdom to nations) not trying to make sinners into saints. If I read and understand correctly Jesus has already accomplished that through His sacrifice and death on the cross. It is time for leaders to make it something else besides them and serve the holy nation of God. Jesus didn’t come to be served but to serve. Church isn’t about the leader’s ministry but serving – laying down their lives for the sheep!
Could it be that shepherds have been replaced by hirelings?
Be sure you know the condition of your flocks, give careful attention to your herds – Prov 27:23
Icabod.
Irv,
Hirelings abound, in all denominations. When ministry becomes a career choice, the water gets murky.
There’s a pastor I know who said to enough people for it to make it to my ears from multiple sources, “what am I supposed to go, go back to _______?” Such men sear their consciences daily. I fear for them.
The fact that Paul’s instructions to the Ephesian elders at the end of Acts 20 is left out of the conversation is very telling.
I just posted this on another thread here (“So, Metro…) but felt that I should post it on this thread as well…
This document was never supposed to be viewed by the laity!!
That fact speaks volumes, doesn’t it???!!! It reveals the self-serving mindset of SGM “elders”…
UGH!
Lawrence! Was just thinking about you the other day, wondering where you had wandered off to! (And in the middle of our conversation, too… kinda rude!)
Jim -
No question this is a HUGE problem in the church. I have seen statistics that 50% of pastors in America would leave the ministry if they could, but they have no other way of making a living. Less that 10% of pastors today believe they have leadership gifts.
I would also add to Acts 20 the following – 2 Cor 4:7-11, 2 Cor 6:4-10, 2 Cor 11:23-33
A ‘professional’ pastor or hireling will be first and foremost protective of himself and what he considered to be his.
To create a polity statement affirming and confirming the authority and position of elders without talking about serving, laying down their lives, availability and vulnerability to their congregation etc. etc. does reveal something absent in their hearts and minds.
Our thanks to Carol for typing Purswell’s note!!
Lawrence,
Strauch says that it was “scooped up” from the Roman Empire. Biblical Eldership, page 45
Your statement begs the question, who outside of your little world considers Purswell to be a reformed theologian?
Moreso it begs the question in my mind, “Are we more concerned about what a reformed theologian thinks than what is right?”
I’m not saying it’s “right”, I’m just pointing out that it’s not a phrase that SGM (or Purswell) scooped up from the Roman Empire (not that it didn’t come from the Roman Empire, it did, and actually it was quite a genius term that the Romans came up with…sorry, I’m a history major, don’t get me started lol)…As Jim pointed out, Staunch is one of the guys who have used the term way before Purswell…my little world is all that matters, you know that Jim
. I was using the two terms as seperate descriptives. He’s reformed, and he’s a theologian.
.
Carole,
I’m sorry! Actually, leaving in the middle of a conversation with you is one of the reasons I haven’t commented in a while. It’s very hard to carry on a conversation, because many other people start chiming in (not that that’s a bad thing, it’s the nature of the forum.) I didn’t know I had ignored you. I’d love to carry it on, if you want to get my email from Jim, or have Jim give me your email
Just kidding with you, Lawrence!
I’m really not miffed! (But I did miss our little sparring match…) 
Lawrence, so I’m a complete and utter dork when it comes to being interested in history. What was your favorite area of study?
Carole,
I always thought they were fun too, not going to lie
Stunned,
Ironically, one of my two favorite time periods would be the whole Greek/Roman time period, along with southern American history, pre and post Civil War. Those are probably my favorites, although I also love early church history, and seeing how all the creeds and councils came to be and worked themselves out. Pretty fascinating.
Lawrence-
So are you agreeing with the use of the phrase, given that you understand the sneaky, underhanded use of the phrase in the Roman Empire,and then the Roman Catholic usage for the Pope (Bishop of Rome)?
SGM may be unaware of the phrase origin in history, but it doesn’t change the meaning of the phrase, which contradicts Jesus’ teaching to the Apostles to not Lord over their followers, to serve others like a servant, and that the First must be Last. Wouldn’t the phrase “Last among those who are more worthy than I…” be a better definition of The Saviour’s teaching on leadership?
OK, so Lawrence, get yourself to Turkey one of these days and hang out in the field (didn’t used to be a field) where the early church elders met to debate which books of the bible were…. ah,…. to be in the bible. So cool. When you do, contact me and I’ll give you some tips.
When you say you were into southern American history pre & post Civil War, at first I thought you were referencing the history of a specific country in South America that had such a significant Civil War that those in the know would, well, know which country you were referencing. (Which I couldn’t figure out.) But I’m guessing you mean the US Civil War?
Lawrence,
Do you really think Purswell is a theologian? OK, he worked with Gruden, but he has not published any theological work of note. I find his work in Polity to be one-sided, incomplete, and not up to scholarly standards. There is a big difference between justifying SGM dogma and doing orignal work. IMHO
The pastor who passed along those notes betrayed the trust given him.
Jim, you had no problem publishing an unfinished, classified document? More love and care in the public square? And that addendum “disclaimer” - you were hoping folks would refrain from commenting until the finished product was published?
30 years… I thought you had left us all high and dry here at the Refuge! Oh, but wait!… I remember now… you have threatened us before with removing yourself from this site. :sigh: ( I guess you don’t really mean what you say…)
And “a classified document”? Really? Is SGM now a part of the FBI? Or just (still) in the business of withholding important information from the flock that will be affected by said information?
Hmmm… bet I can guess which answer is correct.
21 years of trying to follow a “constant change is here to stay” dance as it flits from one Biblical truth to another totally contradictory now this is really the Biblical truth to a third, fourth, fifth, . . .
21 years of “believing the best” and “giving up rights” and believing that asking questions is “gossip and slander” and that the pastors know best, and the little sheepies just need to obey right away, in a happy way, all the way.
I know way back in 1986 when I first joined CLC that when godly folks suggested that this looked alot like shepherding and I bleated out my obedience to the pastors, and I bleated along when CJ poked fun at those poor churches whose congregations gum up the works with business meetings.
I so regret every moment I spent in and every dime I gave to CLC/PDI/SGM–and yet I know that God uses even these years for my good and ultimately for His glory.
It all comes down to polity–and a refusal to recognize the priesthood of ALL believers, male and female, paid and laity.
30- goodbye is never really goodbye with you I see…
I had no problem whatsoever. At least one of your denomination’s pastors wanted it posted. I missed the “classified’ stamp, and I have an original copy. I did not want people to refrain from commenting, but wanted to be accurate in describing what was posted.
Amazing that this is the first time you’ve criticized a SGM pastor on the forum. All the carnage is cool, because your experience is different, but you are bugged by this?
It speaks volumes, bro.
Hey 30!
(In my best Yvonne Elliman voice)
Hello Stranger!
It seems so good to see you back again, how long has it been?
(Whoooo…… It seems like a mighty long time, ….Shebopp Shebopp, my baby Whoooo, It seems like a mighty long time…..)
I figured I’d sing to ya this time, maybe you’ll stay away longer.
But then as long as you’re here, rather than discussing the expose’, what do YOU, 30, think about how you are viewed in the eyes of your “masters”?
Are you comforted?
Do you enjoy being under the thumb of people who think so lowly of you?
Did you know that you can be free?
(Or are you secretly one of the “masters”? C’mon 30, I’ll keep your secret. NO ONE WILL EVER KNOW.)
Jim –
It might be that 30 only knows how to take orders. This sight gives him too much freedom to make his own decisions so he can’t fully decide what to do. I bet his care group leader could help him out with this one.
Just kidding 30!!
But a comment concerning your statement ”pastor betrayed the trust given him” — It didn’t sound like you were kidding but you are kidding aren’t you???
How many SGM pastors have betrayed the trust of the Lord and His congregation with their heavy handed authority, unbiblical intrusiveness, manipulation and decieving (and lying to) people?
Where is your outcry?
Defender — You bring up an interesting question — could it be that 30 isn’t who he portrays himself to be??
Inquiring minds would like to know!!!
Yes Irv.
I was just discussing (gossiping) this with Defended. She’s wondering, and I ask:
Hey 30, Are you “In the family??”
I mean really, 30+ years of “bliss?”
After all, inquiring minds……..
(I got that Yvonne Elliman song in my head now and can’t get it out. Shebopp Shebopp…)
D –
I am intrigued with the idea — By simple attrition rates in PDI/SGM, 30 would have to be in leadership at some higher level or he is family unless he is brainless which I doubt. I could be wrong but I don’t think so. He does seem to have the inner mind of SGM. Anyway I think he should come clean!! The question is who should ask him?
Sorry about the song!!! I feel your pain!
Did I see the weather correctly the high’s are going to be in the 40′s in CO. I think my granddaughter and I are going into the pool tomorrow.
One more thing — any chance of talking off line with you?
Blessings!!
30 years has said that he knows my story (and name beyond my initials) but hasn’t yet revealed who he is–despite his stated disdain for anonymous handles. Most of the lifers have had some leadership experience–ministry teams, care group leadership–even I went to leadership banquets in the late 80s and early 90s. It was sweet–for a while . . .
If 30 years truly goes back 30 years then at least his original roots would have been at the “mother ship” since I believe that was all that was existence back then maybe with the exception of the Cleveland Church that left PDI the same time Tomczak left.
I am sure there are some that have been in for 30 years that have no leadership experience.
Not to intrude too much on our current romancing of 30 years, but…
Lawrence (and everyone for that matter), in addressing your first among equals comments (and while you cleared up some of what you meant, please indulge me on this exercise):
This is where ”first among equals,” or “primus/primi inter pares” appears as a theological concept, model, term or even a polity-based concept, model or term in the following works (and if you want to accuse me of cherry picking, simply google the phrase yourself and feel free to pick those cherries as well):
1) Biblical Eldership by Alexander Strauch: pp. 45-50, 60, 132, 175
a) Number of times Strauch attributes the origin of “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” to a Reformed or Calvinism and/or Arminian perspective, or any particular Christian theologian in any era of the church, or any Christian body, movement or tradition: zero
b) As Jim stated earlier, Strauch attributes the concept’s origin with the Romans (as in the Romans who fed the early Christians to the lions, and not the Romans who were the beloved in Christ in their namesake’s NT Pauline epistle), and Strauch does establish this Roman origin-very clearly-on page 45.
The above item’s link will take you to amazon.com
2) Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms by Donald R. McKim (310 pages): p. 221
a) The exact entry reads: “primus inter pares (Lat. “first among equals”) Term used of a bishop, and also for the pope by those who would seek church union who are willing to designate the bishop of Rome in this way.”
b) The number of times McKim attributes this concept to the Protestant, Reformed, Calvinism or Arminian tradition: zero.
The above item’s link will take you to Ligonier.org’s bookstore
3) Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem (1264 pages)
a) The number of times the phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear between the covers of this book in any type of usage whatsoever: zero
The above item’s link will take you to Monergismbooks.com
4) Systematic Theology (New Combined Edition) by Louis Berkhof (984 pages)
a) The number of times the phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear between the covers of this book in any type of usage whatsoever: zero
The above item’s link will take you to Monergismbooks.com
5) Finney’s Systematic Theology by Charles Grandison Finney (602 pages)
a) The number of times the phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear between the covers of this book in any type of usage whatsoever: zero
The above item’s link will take you to christianbook.com
6) Systematic Theology by Augustus H. Strong (1166 pages)
a) The number of times the phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear between the covers of this book in any type of usage whatsoever: zero
The above item’s link will take you to amazon.com’s resellers
7) The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology by Walter A. Elwell (Ed.) (1204 pages by over 250 contributors covering an array of theological backgrounds, primarily Protestant)
a) The number of times the phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear as entries or even as a term within an entry between the covers of this book in any type of usage whatsoever: zero
The above item’s link will take you to half.com’s bookstore
a) The number of times the exact phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear as terms between the covers of this book: zero
b) The closest Calvin comes to dealing with the subject and/or concept is a compelling section titled “Of the Primacy of the Roman See” in IV.vi.1-17 (pp. 731-740). Calvin delivers a blatant criticism and condemnation of Roman Catholicism’s assertion of Peter’s Primacy (and the Papal line), based on Rome’s wrenching passages like these out of context, or ignoring them altogether:
Matthew 6:18
John 10:23
John 21:15
2 Corinthians 5:18
2 Corinthians 10:16
1 Peter 5:2
The above item’s link will take you to amazon.com
9) The Reformation Study Bible, English Standard Version by R.C. Sproul (Gen. ed.) (1948 pages with notes and commentary by over 55 contributors covering an array of thought within Protestant Reformed Theology)
a) The number of times the phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear as entries, subject headings or even as a term within an entry between the covers of this book (and notably the entry titled “Church Government”): zero
The above item’s link will take you to ligonier.org’s bookstore
10) A Survey of Bible Doctrine by Charles C. Ryrie (191pages)
a) The number of times the phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear between the covers of this book in any type of usage whatsoever: zero
The above item’s link will take you to amazon.com
This little exercise is not an advertisement for books; the links are simply there to provide substance that I am not speaking from subjective silence, irrational noise, or one of my nasal passages on the matter: The books exist, in other words. I own the books, among many others, and can speak from personal experience in having read them over the years. No, do not be impressed with my small section here from my small library (by comparison to others). I simply believe in studying many systems of theological thought so as to better equip myself. While I tend to lean toward the Calvinism/Reformed end of theology, I have no axe to grind here other than to say once and for all-in my opinion-that FIRST AMONG EQUALS/PRIMUS INTER PARES is alien to the bulk of Protestant Christianity. When it is ever used in Protestantism, at best it is a formal title given to moderator-type roles that need filling at session meetings, and almost never in the sense of distinguishing one among several church elders/pastors/teachers.
Where it is most often found is in Roman History and politics and Roman Catholic history and theology. SGM needs to leave this in Rome, and remove it from Gaithersburg.
–jw
PK – You do amaze me my brother!! Much has taken place in your life since we last experienced fellowship together and it is all good. Kudos on your post!! Irv
“30″ has never had the courage, or humility to share anything with us about his position or status, yet of course he is very free to tell us what we need to learn from him.
A leader or a frustrated leader? Hey 30, did you grow up Catholic? or Mennonite?
“Lawrence” has had more transparency than 30 yrs.
Irv:
Thank you.
I have missed you and am thrilled beyond words you are here.
–jw
Hi Irv,
I’m back.
Defended set up a gmail account we both use.
Write me at: defended1 at gmail dot com.
We can talk of this board at least.
Defender
30 said, “The pastor who passed along those notes betrayed the trust given him.”
30, I don’t believe that just because someone tells you to do something, you are obligated to do it, nor if you have not done it, it is a breaking of a trust. However, if I am wrong, and that is the case, then I am asking you to pay all my bills from now until the 30th of December, 2011.
Thank you. I trust you’;ll do it. ;-)
Wow, PK, that was thorough. You clearly have the gift of teaching. Thank you for sharing that gift with us.
Stunned
PK – Excellent, clear and concise.
So why is it that SGM would adopt such a structure? They are very purposeful in what they do and encourage a biblical basis for ones life. On the face of it, their position seems to stand at odds with what you would normally think they would do, doesn’t it? So why would they take such a position? I think 30 years gives us a glimpse above with his classified document reference. It makes no sense for a church to have classified documents. Why would they have a classified document? For the same reason anyone does…fear that people will find out what is going on and try to have a say in it. In turn, isn’t the reason for this non-biblical position that CJ is afraid of relinquishing control. Isn’t it a fear of man? Just as the Sr pastor is the first among equals, he is the first among all of the first. It’s stunning, isn’t it? He knows that God is in control and there is nothing he can do, but in this area he is refusing to relinquish control to the Lord. The result, just like when we do this in our own lives is tragic.
Walking Wounded (soon to be healed, I am in faith!):
I realize your questions were mostly rhetorical, and I think you answered them yourself (and blessed me in the process). There should be no secret meetings, no secret documents, no cardinalization of men above the flock in the trickle down-economical Catholic manner in which it takes place. There should be no Bishoprical councils and meetings should be church-wide. The corporate America nonsense needs to be expunged as well, but that’s a different post.
That’s the ideal, what you said, and I am simply joining you in your burden and concern in good way. Pray for those sheep WW! Pray for me! I am praying for ALL of you here.
We are the church. All of us. Feels good to be in agreement with you, WW, a common goal of shedding the fear of man. And it should. We are slaves to a risen Christ only, and the empty tomb’s glory gets rid of that corpsish stink we once had!
Bloodied lambs Do stand up again. Jesus, what an example you are to your flock!
–jw
Thank you WW and stunned for those generous words!
–jw
My students and I are studying Dr. King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” written in response to an open letter published by 8 Birmingham clergymen. This part resonated with me in thinking about the polity in SGM. The pastors–the paid elders–are a priviledged group–and while individuals like FSGP and Irv and others have seen the light, it will take more to get SGM to see it.
“Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.
We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”
I’m in the moderation queue.
WONDERFUL POSTS!
PK says: We are the church. All of us. Feels good to be in agreement with you, WW, a common goal of shedding the fear of man. And it should. We are slaves to a risen Christ only, and the empty tomb’s glory gets rid of that corpsish stink we once had!
to that, I say HALLELUJAH! What a Savior!
Acme, your wonderful quote from Dr. King is very inspiring, insiteful (and out of moderation).
PK – I continue to admire and respect you for your thorough teaching and explanation of the unbiblical nature of SGM’s polity. So ironic, isn’t it? If we all had a nickel for every time we heard the term “biblical” in reference to life inside sgm… sigh.
Ya know…this is just me thinking…but the Bible says that the Church belongs to JESUS, his precious Bride. I long for the day that He comforts and protects and sets aright all those who love him so much inside such an unloving system.
I have a question. In defense of the existence and roll of SGM hierarchy, does there appear to be a shift from “apostolic authority” to “first among equals” of elders. Is so, why?
Defended,
The fact that the system is “unloving” should be a huge sign to folks, as the bible tells us we will know Christians by their love.
Acme, quoting Dr. King, said, “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”
Here, here! And here, again! Excellent words. Excellent.
Greg,
Nothing new regarding first among equals. If you compare Purswell’s lecture notes with Harvey’s document, it appears that role of the apostle has changed. Even Harvey’s doc contained a modified view of the apostles. I don’t know much about Shank, but it seems that Brent was the last of a dying breed. SGM churches are more autonomous than back in the day.
Section 8 of Purswell’s piece hits local, self governing pretty hard.
Can I ask what is shank’s job description then? (seriously)
any ideas?
I would like to point something out that I think is very important, but often goes unnoticed. SGM makes claims to having adopted Reformed theology, and to some degree uses the “Reformed” tag, name-dropping Puritans, etc., as a marketing technique to a certain segment of evangelical Calvinism, and to smooth their entry into these circles. “Elder rule”, while not exclusive to Reformed churches, certainly hails from Reformed origins. There is just one critical problem. The SGM version of this doctrine is not only not the Reformed doctrine, it is not even a Protestant doctrine.
I must confess, as an outsider, that I was quite stunned to read the notes and discover that local church elders in SGM are not chosen by the congregation, but are instead appointed by the exisiting leadership hierarchy. In fact, they openly deny the right of the church to select its officers in V. and VI. – a practice which they erroneously call ”congregationalism”. All Reformed churches, whether presbyterial or congregational in structure, have defended the right of the congregation to have only officers chosen by free election.
This was no small controversy in the history of the Reformed church, esp. in Scotland, where lairds frequently sought to impose ministers of their own choosing on local churches within their properties. In William Cunningham’s Discussion on Church Principles, over half the book (nearly 300 pages) deals only with this issue, under the heading “Rights of the Christian People.” Part of this includes an extensive historical narrative in which he essentially demonstrates that every Reformed church held to the position that congregations have an absolute right to select their own officers, and further, that a ministry which was obtruded upon a congregation without its approval had no authority at all, and was, at its core, Popish. It is not stretching the case to say that the right of the congregation to select its officers was considered a central distinction between Popery and Protestantism. Ironic that SGM, like the papists, hold to a kind of apostolic succession.
I should point out that all Reformed churches distinguish between ordination and election. That is, a man can be ordained to the ministry (by elders or presbyters), but he has no authority in any particular local church unless that congregation, by member vote, chooses him as their elder or deacon. Likewise, the presbytery or eldership could exercise their own right of conscience and refuse to ordain a candidate to the ministry ( if the man is not already ordained), should the candidate hold to heretical views or have a clear sin problem. This system of checks and balances was considered crucial to sound governance. That SGM considers the first “role” of the congregation to be “submission” is evidence of how aberrant, and indeed sick, their practice is.
Calvin goes so far as to say that without a call from the congregation, there is no lawful ministry. Put that in your pipe and smoke it…
I should mention that congregational election is not a panacea – plenty of Reformed churches have abusive controlling elders who lord it over the flock and fleece or slaughter the sheep they have sworn to protect. But the SGM doctrine is not Reformed, and, I believe, not even close to Biblical. Alone it is disturbing. Coupled with their extreme view of submission, it is dangerous.
That Bad Dog,
I was hoping that someone who is TR, or at least familiar with TR thought and practice would weigh in.
Very helpful and well said. Thank you for joining in!
Jim,
Yes I did notice the shift, at least in word, to self governing. However a closer read shows that, as usual, that they want to have it both ways. VIII.A.2 says that there is no NT basis for a formal hierarchy and that Paul’s authority was unique. Then on the contrary, VIII.B.2, 3 and 4 strongly emphasize “counsel and accountability” to SGM and use Paul as an example. Hmm how does that work?
SGM has a very formal hierarchy and chain of command. Even the scriptures referenced in this section show that Paul’s oversight was relational, not structural . So I am wondering if there will be any real change. From what has happened at Metro, it appears not.
I wonder whether self governance of local churches can ever happen within the command and control culture of SGM. The crux of extra local ministry is not the structure of oversight, but the attitude of oversight. Church planters (or consumers in this case) really have to have the humility and grace to let go and allow pastors and even entire congregations find their own way based on the unique callings and gifts that they have. In this aspect SGM is more like the Borg than the “prime directive”
I did not read all the comments. Please forgive me if this has been discussed here already.
Perhaps this explains the lack of ordained deacons in SGM. It is impossible to avoid the verse in Acts where the congregation chose deacons.
Acts 6:3
Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them
Greg,
My beef has been with the clergy/laity distinction (and ALL that entails), the use of the “a” word, and what I considered to be a dishonest definition of terms. IOW, “your apostles act like episcopal bishops-just call them bishops.”
I honestly think the episcopal bishop model is at the very least, dying.
Metro asked SGM to step in, as did Mooresville.
I’ve personally recently witnessed what looks like a non-episcopal model in action. It looked like what Purswell is describing.
For me, it’s time to put down my “they’re bishops!” rock, and throw more “you view yourself (and the sheep) inaccurately!” rocks.
5 Years-
Purswell’s treatment of Acts 6 (Section 5) is sad.
Ok Jim, I looked for it in sectionV.
The oft-cited example of Acts 6 for the congregational selection of elders cannot bear the weight often placed upon it.
What kind of stupid sentence is that? The congregation was choosing deacons, not elders. He just glossed over the entire subject of deacons without even a blink. I’ll stick to my opinion…..this is why they had “ministry team leaders” back in our PDI days, instead of ordained deacons. Deacons would involve congregational selection.
You are real nice to call it “sad”. Control freaking unbiblical and totally NOT Reformed would be more like it.
I can’t believe we lasted for five whole years……..
Jim,
What is TR?
Ah yes, Jeff — oops, “30years” — breaks his promise once again, and returns! Though the long-timers’ numbers are dwindling, it is very possible to attend CLC for 30 years and not become a pastor or even a CGL. Some toe-the-line guys simply don’t have leadership potential — and goodness knows all those leaders need followers!
Nevertheless, there’s supposed to be some fruit after 3 decades. It’s too bad that after 30 years of “discipleship” by the “pastors,” followership is the most outstanding spiritual gift of which one can boast. Where’s all that “equipping the saints for the work of ministry” that used to be talked about, which justified the “five-fold ministry” offices? What about those stirring lyrics you used to sing: “I have a destiny/And it’s not an empty wish/For I know I was born/For such a time — as this!” When are your “pastors” gonna make good on their commitment to equip you for your destined ministry?
Stunned, “TR” stands for Truly Reformed. Often used in a derisive or pejorative sense, though I’m sure no offense was intended, and none is taken. I’ve been called much worse.
As a young Christian, I spent my early years of discipleship amongst hardcore confessional Presbyterians – men so Reformed and Presbyterian they couldn’t find a denomination in this country with which to affiliate (had to wait for periodic visits from Australians for baptisms!). Unamended WCC types. That’s not where I am today, but they did give me a theological education I wouldn’t trade for anything, and allowed me to supply their pulpit for about 5 years, even though I was quite young. The nature and extent of authority in the church, church power, christian liberty – these have been major topics within Reformed thought from the beginning, and, obviously, are still relevant today.
The refusal to admit the normative aspect of Acts 6 in these Notes is interesting, if predictable. Quite a dance he does to escape its clutches. It would have been news to Calvin that Acts 6 can’t “bear the weight often placed upon it.” In his Commentary on Acts he writes, “As touching this present place, the Church is permitted to choose. For it is tyrannous if any one man appoint or make ministers at his pleasure. Therefore, this is the (most) lawful way, that those be chosen by common voices who are to take upon them any public function in the Church.”
I also cannot allow his citation of John Owen to pass without censure. Clearly he has read Owen, or he wouldn’t be quoting him. And if he has read Owen, he would know that Owen teaches exactly the opposite of what Purswell claims. The very section he quotes is distinguishing the various powers and duties of the congregation and the officers in excommunication. Owen requires the consent of both groups, and the exercise of their differing powers and responsibilities, for the act of discipline to be valid. He states this repeatedly, in very clear terms, even for Owen.
He writes:
4. Where a church is complete and organized with its stated rulers, as the church of Corinth was, yet rules, instructions, and commands, are given expressly unto the fraternity or community of the church, for their duty and acting in the administration of this sentence, and the cutting off of an offender, 1 Cor. v. 1-7; 2 Cor. ii. 7, 8; yea, the …infliction of the sentence, is ascribed unto them [the congregation - TBD], verse 6. All these things do suppose a right and duty thereon to act according to their interest in excommunication to reside in the whole church. Wherefore,—
5. There are some acts belonging hereunto that the church itself, in the body of the fraternity, cannot be excluded from without destroying the nature of the sentence itself and rendering it ineffectual. Such are, the previous cognizance of the cause, without which they cannot be blamed for any neglect about it; preparatory duties unto its execution, in prayer, mourning, and admonition, which are expressly prescribed unto them; and a testification of their consent unto it by their common suffrage. Without these things excommunication is but a name with a noise; it belongs not unto the order appointed by Christ in his church.
8. Wherefore I shall say no more, in answer unto this inquiry, but that excommunication is an act of church-power in its officers and brethren, acting according unto their respective rights, interests, and duties, particularly prescribed unto them….Where either of these is wanting, the whole duty is vitiated, and the sense of the sentence rendered ineffectual.”
Sorry for the long quote, but I think it is important to show just how perverse his citation of Owen is. He quotes from “7.” which lies within the section I gave above. It is simply not possible to read this and misunderstand what Owen is saying. What Purswell does is taken Owen’s words and, by omitting, twist them to endorse a position which Owen himself denies and indeed denounces in the clearest terms possible. That is simply shameful.
That Bad Dog,
Absolutely no offense was intended. I’ve never heard TR used in a derogatory way. When I was in SGM, teaching parts of the pre-membership class, I had a chance to interact with a family who had some disagreements. When I asked what they were, the husband said, “we’ll first of all, we’re TR”. I think that’s my only frame of reference.
Your Owen analysis is excellent! If you read some of the posts found on the “polity” tab (top of page), you’ll find that SGM’s last “official” polity statement contained some very similar snafus. (sp?)
JP said Acts 6 can’t “bear the weight often placed upon it.”
I can’t help but notice that there appears to be more concern for a poor verse than all those people abused by the system that he is preaching. What about the weight placed on the human beings?
Bad Dog-
Thank you for your wonderful history lesson. That is one of the most helpful postings I have seen yet on thse SGM blogs.
When a person spends any length of time in the Reformed community, or reads Reformed blogs and forums, one of the most striking observations is the incredible level of doctrinal debate and intense scholarship. While certain things are uniformly adhered to such as the 5 solas and TULIP, there are strong debates about many other topics. John Frame wrote a essay entitled ” Machens Warrior Children” about 21 of these subjects just in the last century.
http://www.frame-poythress.org.....Machen.htm
What you find in SGM is that such debate appears to be forbidden. It may happen at the pastoral level or the A team level, but for laymen, only the current SGM position is permitted, and to ask questions or think or read and debate, is rebellious and independent. Instead of ” iron sharpening iron” and everyone being encouraged to study and read and think and look long and hard at the bible, one opinion is presented as the true one, and everybody has to fall in line. Whether babies or dating or rogaine or polity, the A team is the word of the Lord. It is almost like the Pope when he speaks ex cathedra ( authoritative and infallible).
I believe this is why there MUST be an SGM pastors college. For young men in their 20s mostly, they could never go to many of the fine Reformed seminaries out there and end up so brainwashed that only one truth exists and SGM is “doing it right”. Seminary is an introduction to the fabulous, mindbending, deeply spiritual pursuit of truth as we examine and debate, and read what Calvin wrote and Owen wrote and Rutherford wrote and Warfield and Murray wrote, and all the many discussions and disagreements among them. Even the writers of the great Westminster Confession did not agree among themselves on everything, and over the years there were revisions. Yet SGM speaks as if they and they alone have the final word.
Tragic.
Very interesting conversation. Sorry I’m chiming in late, I just had the proverbal week from hell at school and now I’m down to a paper and studying for a final so I can opine.
Matthew 18? Last time I knew, they didn’t believe in Matthew 18. I got told I was combattive for mentioning it.
Oh, I’m confused.
That Bad Dog,
I found your comments very helpful. You said, “What Purswell does is taken Owen’s words and, by omitting, twist them to endorse a position which Owen himself denies and indeed denounces in the clearest terms possible. That is simply shameful.”
Another participant here, Protestant Knight, has demonstrated that Purswell has a history of taking words and “by omitting, twist them”. Purswell helped write Bible Doctrine, the condensed version of Grudem’s Systematic Theology. In that rewrite Purswell conveniently omitted Grudem’s discussions of church polity that argued for more congregational input. His rewrite was often found in SGM bookstores while Grudem’s version was hard to find.
I suspect Purswell may indirectly respond to these comments in some way, but I hope he will clearly and directly discuss these strategic omissions and the motives behind them. We need to consider all the Bible says, and not just ignore the parts we don’t like !
That Bad Dog
April 29th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
Dog said “I must confess, as an outsider, that I was quite stunned to read the notes and discover that local church elders in SGM are not chosen by the congregation, but are instead appointed by the existing leadership hierarchy.”
********************************************************
Interesting that That Bad Dog sees a problem with this since it was about 10- 15 years ago when Metro Life had a choice of sending 2 men to pastors college, that had graduated from Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, but the “elders” instead chose a son of a pastor and a son in law of a pastor (who had never set foot in any seminary) instead. When the congregation is not involved, either with lay elders, or a congregational vote, you take the chance of – take a deep breath here -”nepotism”
Paul,
You know that there is no nepotism in Florida. These kids are the most qualified candidates in the state.
One of the early actions taken against Brent in Florida was to take him out of the pre-ordination process, as he was failing offspring. His replacement (who enjoys a “plurality” with his son in law) lowered the bar significantly.
Jim,
Of course there is no nepotism in Florida (or VA, or PA, or MD . . . .)
According to Metrolife’s website:
The local leadership of Metro Life Church is composed of spiritually gifted men who, by the grace of God, have been trained and mentored through years of experience to oversee the life and mission of this fellowship. Those raised up to serve in this capacity have been recognized locally by the “fruit of their labor,” the church itself, and extra-locally by the Sovereign Grace Ministries apostolic team. They have demonstrated the proven character, spiritual maturity, calling, commission and anointing that qualifies them for leadership.
How does that fit with the latest polity statement? Maybe that statement could be simplified as:
We will do as we please – as long as it is OK with the True First Among Equals
We will choose who we want as local church leaders – as long as they are pliable . . . and OK with the true First Among Equals.
We will plant churches in areas that meet our minimum per capita income levels.
We will adopt churches that are in areas that meet our minimum per capita income levels and own sufficient capital resources to make it worth the effort to remove their existing leadership team.
We will change our apparent leadership practices and deeply-held convictions to the extent necessary to stay below the radar of local child protection officials and federal tax officials.
We will work very hard to suppress and ignore the deep soul-pain that intrudes into our consciousness from time to time, when we think of just how far we have now slipped from the original calling and vision that God placed on our hearts.
Effective immediately, the following books have been added to the SGM Prohibited Reading List:
Animal Farm
Brave New World
Fahrenheit 451
Tartuffe
Concerning the “new and improved polity” stand :
I think it is simply a putting on paper what has always existed. There is no repentance here! The very fact that they did have to do such a paper indicates the need to reform. But their product had no reform. Jeff’s treatment of Acts 6 was terrible. He said that this issue of deacons wasn’t normative. But he completely ignored the “normative” establishment of deacons in the local Church by divine authority in 1 Timothy 3. Jeff is grossly guilty of isogesis. ( Isogesis is basically where you read ‘into’ the text what you want the text to say.)
What I do fear is that SGM will now solidify this form of Church government (aka: become more hardened in their view).
Paul said:
” it was about 10- 15 years ago when Metro Life had a choice of sending 2 men to pastors college, that had graduated from Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, but the “elders” instead chose a son of a pastor and a son in law of a pastor (who had never set foot in any seminary) instead.”
This is quite shocking but really isn’t surprising. No wonder why there are so many problems down at Metro Life when nepotism trumps qualifications. This especially sad when this appears to be such an egregious pick of family over qualifications.
I recently had some discussions on another blog with Joey Phillips where he bashed this blog and SGM Survivors. He suggested to people on that blog that others don’t read this blog or the Survivors blog which is ironic since he use to comment on both blogs. I guess just another do as I say vs. do as I do.
This helped remind me that Joey is just protecting his “family business.” For all I know his nepotism may get him or some of his brothers in the PC and their own job in the “family business.”
Steve,
Over 37,000 people visited this blog in April. Survivors’ traffic is probably similar. It’s become clear that it doesn’t matter who says what. People want to see what’s being said.
Thirty-seven THOUSAND people! The county I live in has fewer people. The town I grew up in has fewer people. Wow.
Thirty-seven thousand? Is that unique visitors or hits?
Either way, I think I better start being more careful about what I’m saying…
Nah.
God can protect me if he sees fit.
Stunned-unique visitors.
Stunned said:
Thirty-seven thousand? Is that unique visitors or hits?
Either way, I think I better start being more careful about what I’m saying…
Nah.
God can protect me if he sees fit.
You go girl! (wanna borrow my burka???)
G.D. – for some reason I’m seeing only a few user pics showing up here now. My new pic is a singing Canary who is free! Just isn’t appearing with my posts for some reason. Yes, I got to feeling sorry for the poor kitty in the cage and let him loose. I think Defender may have shot him…:)
Jim,
Your earlier post about mens’ hearts needing to be changed is very appreciated. It was such a demeaning and frustrating experience in sgm to be treated as the sole reason for a man’s lust. Men don’t know what it’s like to be a woman who is dressed modestly, yet still has a guy talking to her chest. I wanna shout “Hey mister, look up here at my eyes!” But, ho-hum, I’m too modest to say anything…
All sin leads back to the need for heart change, which none of us can do on our own, no matter how hard we discipline ourselves. I struggled with fear most of my life, and never was free of it until I left pdi, allowed the Lord to fill me and change me. Now I walk by faith (most of the time!). Fear, lust, gluttony, anger – whatever we struggle with the most can only be overcome by allowing the Holy Spirit to change our hearts. I don’t know how many times I would be counseled by a leader that my fear was sin, and that I should repent. That would make me feel so helpless. It gave me no hope for change because just saying “I’m sorry, Lord” didn’t take away fear. Submission to the Lord instead of men/women put in charge over me is what finally helped to conquer most of the fears I’d lived with for so long. Still growing, but now I have hope!
Whoops – I just put my last post on the wrong forum. It was suppose to be on “Moving On”. Duh…sorry to interrupt the flow!
Canary,
“I think Defender may have shot him…:)”
ROFL!!
Nah, I had an unusual pang of kindness and sang to him, and he ran off.
Last seen heading west past Grand Junction. (With three Cougar right behind.)
Go kitty go!
Defender, Ha! You make me laugh!
Steve 240 – you said:
This helped remind me that Joey is just protecting his “family business.” For all I know his nepotism may get him or some of his brothers in the PC and their own job in the “family business.”
Don’t worry about the Phillips boys getting into PC – their oldest was in the first class opening day, and I’m sure there’s a seat saved for any of his brothers who want to attend. But I agree, I’m sure Joey (Lawrence) is following his loyalty and devotion to his family when he defends the nepotism. He probably doesn’t even know that it is frowned on, outside his life’s bubble.
PS- Canary you got me laughing! Don’t tempt him!
Canary, seriously, I’ve contemplated buying a burka when I was traveling in certain countries. I thought it would help me to disappear in a crowd and not be noticed. Instead I wore unbelievably modest clothes and made a point just to stick to hanging with women.
Do you know what the result of being extremely modestly dressed and behaving very modestly, too? Or should I say, do you know what the result was of being in one of the more conservative and religious countries of the world? One of the country’s where they insist women be treated with modesty and not be sexualized? I was hit on on an average of 6 times a minute as I walked down the street.* It was freaking exhausting to have to keep so many barriers up. Then I flew from there and into an extremely liberal, secular country, got off the plane and guess what- not ONE man spoke to me, looked at me or bothered me. Not at all. It was such a relief. There I wasn’t an object, but a human. How nice. How strange.
Now that I think about it, how SGM.
*Please know I was NOT looking good that week. (I was sick for heaven’s sake!) Nor am I especially beautiful. It is simply how many women are treated there. Men looking at you full of lust. It has NOTHING to do with you or how you look or carry yourself. And no, I’m not exaggerating on the 6 times a minute. All it took was to walk down the street.
Defended said:
“first class opening day, and I’m sure there’s a seat saved for any of his brothers who want to attend. But I agree, I’m sure Joey (Lawrence) is following his loyalty and devotion to his family when he defends the nepotism. ”
I certainly am not “worried.” For clarification, I wasn’t talking about Joey defending Nepotism but something quite close to that. I was talking about his staunch defense of SGM because with all the nepotism it is basically a family business. When something like this is such a potentially good source of income for him and his family it can make it hard to see the problems with SGM.
Where else can Joey and his brothers make the income he will make with just the free schooling he will get at PC? Also being famiy, he and his brothers would have little chance of being forced out of a pastor positon. As we have seen with Mahaney’s family, those pastors related to him by marriage seem to held to different standards than non family and I am sure that would be the case, if necessary, with the Phillips’ boys.
Correction on my April 29th, 2010 at 12:36 am comment regarding the following:
“9) The Reformation Study Bible, English Standard Version by R.C. Sproul (Gen. ed.) (1948 pages with notes and commentary by over 55 contributors covering an array of thought within Protestant Reformed Theology)
a) The number of times the phrases “primus inter pares” or “first among equals” appear as entries, subject headings or even as a term within an entry between the covers of this book (and notably the entry titled “Church Government”): zero
The above item’s link will take you to ligonier.org’s bookstore”
THE CORRECTION: The entry referenced in the Reformation Study Bible is on page 1560, and is titled “The Apostles.” It is NOT titled “Church Government.”
Caught myself on that one, and apologies for the mistake.
–pk
Steve – Agreed.
Let’s be fair. Those of us who don’t go to metro and don’t interact with Joey and Jake have no idea if they have any interest in full time ministry. My understanding is that they are in the workforce and doing well. They’ve both handled themselves well here, considering the subject matter. A lot better than I would have at their age. These are young guys-let’s give them a break, huh?
Jim – and Joey – I have no problem with the Phillips family, or their “kids” (now grown); my point is simply that they do live in the SGM culture where sons are promoted or privileged because they are sons. And they probably know no other way. So please let me say that is not something that Joey or Jake (*or Josh, etc) have done themselves. It is just my observation that a child with the last name of Phillips, Shank, etc. (or married to a Mahaney) have an automatic shot at the PC if they want it. (like a family business)
I’m still “digesting” the statement myself (It’s giving me indigestion so far.)
But from what I’ve read so far, and based on the comments from people who have read more completely, I’d have to echo a comment made earlier, “Meet the new boss, Same as the old boss.”
It looks like SGM is “hardening” in their stance, and that has (at least to me,) a real “evil foreboding” feel to it.
That’s about all I can say at this time.
Hey PK!
I’ve been praying for you about this weekend.
I hope all is turning out well for you & Mrs. PK.
Defender
Defended,
I think I understand what’s being said, and don’t find it offensive. I’ve seen the nepotism and entitlement up close and personal, and I’m not a fan, although some of the offspring or in-laws are qualified and gifted. Some, not so much…
I’m just hoping that we can cut these kids some slack for a while.
Maybe another way to look at it, is that getting a shot at the PC isn’t all than “lucky” after all, so if some go out of privilege alone, others are spared being sucked further into the trap. Hey, just a twisted thought from my humble opinion stockpile.
I know when I flatly turned down the CG leader offer thing, I see God’s “finger prints” all over that decision, although the powers that were in place didn’t appreciate my decline. I am so glad to be free from enslavement to their opinion.
G.D.
My husband feels the same about turning down a CG leader offer. Boy did we dodge the bullet, unknowingly at the time. Our pastor didn’t appreciate my husband’s “no thanks”, either. Guess he didn’t like that God’s plans for us trumped his. Or he thought that his plans were God’s plans because of his authority beliefs. Don’t know for sure, but we were given the shunning treatment after refusing the offer. Sorta like “The Godfather” (hold on while I stuff my mouth with cotton balls…) - “I’m makin’ you’ an offer you can’t refuse.” Well, we refused and were of no further use to the man. But we are free!
“But we are free.” Amen to that Canary!
When I resigned from heading up the CLC hospitality team (although technically “we” were in charge–because of course a woman can’t be in charge) in the midst of great personal difficulties, the pastor in charge at the time Kenneth M turned on his heel and walked away from me, obviously very ticked–again as Canary said “of no further use to the man.”
I’m stuck in moderation again.
This is my first time commenting on this blog. Wow, is this a fascinating conversation! I attended (though never joined) an SGM church in PA for about 7 years, although at many points along the way had serious reservations about a number of things, including church polity. I just could never get my mind around the PDI apostolic team thing, nor the fact that pastors were selected by a seemingly random process with no congregational input. It all seemed to fly in the face of Scripture. Of course, what could one say without be looked upon as an upstart, particularly since I am of the wrong gender to be making such comments? Thankfully, I had been a Christian for many years before my PDI experience, as well as been to seminary, so I wasn’t in as vulnerable a position as many who camp out with PDI/SGM. Am only sorry to hear that the more things “change,” the more they stay the same.
Jim-
This may be a little off topic just a question that has bothered me for 15 years.
When they (SGM) use the term apostle they aren’t using the term in the true sense of calling themselves a apostle?
And if they do view themselves with having true apostolic authority does that mean that the whole tg4 recognized there apostolic authority? Because that would be a truly scary turn of events. I always thought of apostolic authority passing away with the original twelve. But my thinking may be kinda messed up like i said on sgm Survivors. Im a simple man, some of the conversations on here go way beyond my knowledge just wondering what some of your more theologically learned writers on this blog would think. thank you……
SuZQ,
Welcome to the Refuge. Glad you joined us.
Stunned
Quick question: does anyone know what has happened with Brent D. since he was fired? Amazingly enough, there are folks in the Fairfax church (which he led for a while) who know NOTHING ABOUT THE SITUATION. How can that be? My husband knows of a longstanding Fairfax member who didn’t know anything about Brent’s reasons for leaving. Unbelievable. So hubby asked me to ask what has happened to Brent since his leaving? Why the secrecy?
Welcome to the blog, SuZQ.
Canary, I had that same question about Brent, plus one more – what happened to Larry Tomczak – you know – the real story? So it seems you can access his account of it all in his book “Reckless Abandon”. May drop the $3.00 on Amazon and hear what his side is. Always believed the company line “Larry is full of pride” until my eyes were opened to the fact that “You’re full of pride” is the Ace in the back pocket that is pulled whenever you need to take control of a situation. May try it on my wife the next time we have an argument. I will let you know if it yields the same results. (If I’m still alive)
Secrecy? Oh, that’s easy. If you aren’t part of the problem or part of the solution, it’s none of your business what happened to Brent. Sort of like, if somebody dies, if you didn’t kill him, or you aren’t gonna dig the grave, you don’t need to know about it.
An SGM man left his family. The woman remained in SGM. She was NOT ALLOWED to tell anyone that he had left her, because that would be dishonoring to the husband, though he’d already dishonored himself by deserting his family. I didn’t know for two years. Kept asking her where he was — she’d answer he was working, or out of town, or something like that — even after divorce made it a matter of public record. I had NO idea how badly she was hurting. Had NO idea that I could’ve helped her financially. Many people in the church do not know to this day that this woman needs their friendship, their care, their love, their prayer, and some real practical help.
No wonder Chuck says these stories are beyond his SGM experience. Chuck — it’s likely that a story is sitting right beside you in church, but if they’re still there, they’re not allowed to talk.
Regarding the apostle Brent. All I know is that Gene Emerson was under the “care” and “oversight” of the apostle Brent one day. The next day, Gene became the apostle over Brent, giving him “care and “oversight.” Gene’s care and oversight dethroned Brent from being an apostle to becoming a church planter to recieving the left hand of fellowship.
I too would love to know the details. I am interested in seeing what the apostle Gene does with KB there at Kingsway. Ironically, KB went from being a star at the PC, to Sr Pastor, to lacking the gift of administration, according to Gene and his underlings.
GD, I so agree with your 12:03 post. I may roll my eyes and even think “unfair” when I see the evidences of nepotism. But on the flip-side I really do feel for those that get deeper and deeper into the mindset and culture and it becomes harder and harder for them to see the lies and damage that they do.
We were heavily recruited to move to a SGM church with the promise that when we arrived we would be put on the fast track to the PC. We did move, from a frying pan situation to not a fire but the frog in the boiling pot of water situation. Once we arrived in town we were given the obligatory 1 month of love bombing. Then the pastors and present apostle started to have this crisis or that event and just couldn’t get to us or our plan to send us on to the PC. Then after a few years they pulled the prideful and “difficult to lead” card. And it was all my spouses fault we were not going to PC because of this sin. As painful as it was and still is I am SOOOO glad God shut the door and DID NOT send us to the PC.
So even though I really do feel they toyed with our lives, were cruel in their assessments and didn’t care at all about our giftings I am grateful for the experience as it has revealed what true humility is and opened my heart to hunger for true freedom in Christ.
I am truly ashamed of who I became while I was there and immersed. I was self righteous and blind. I was not the fragrance of Christ to the world. I became offensive with my underlying belief that I was doing it right and everyone’s problem was their sin issues.
God has brought many beautiful and challenging people into our lives since we left and I would not have been able to love and appreciate them as I have if I had remained there.
I am dysfunctional and depressed as I sort through our experience. But I am more real and receptive to Jesus as a result.
All that to say I can’t imagine the untangling mentally and spiritually one has to go through if they have lived a lifetime in the bubble of false humility and lies.
An SGM man left his family. The woman remained in SGM. She was NOT ALLOWED to tell anyone that he had left her, because that would be dishonoring to the husband, though he’d already dishonored himself by deserting his family. I didn’t know for two years. Kept asking her where he was — she’d answer he was working, or out of town, or something like that — even after divorce made it a matter of public record. I had NO idea how badly she was hurting. Had NO idea that I could’ve helped her financially. Many people in the church do not know to this day that this woman needs their friendship, their care, their love, their prayer, and some real practical help.
How utterly tragic.
GD from SGM said, “Gene’s care and oversight dethroned Brent from being an apostle to becoming a church planter to recieving the left hand of fellowship. ”
I prefer the term “the backhand of fellowship”. That’s more what it feels like to me.
I’m no fan of Emerson, although he could fix that by having another family meeting is Chesapeake, thanking the three couples, asking for their forgiveness for his treatment towards the best friends Chesapeake ever had, and identifying his actions as sin.
Having said all of that, I don’t think Gene had much to do with anything concerning Brent.
Fear Not, I’m so sorry you guys went through such a horrible time. So glad you came out of it in the manner you have. He is faithful. Thank you for sharing your story.
All,
As I was rereading posts tonight– I’d like to comment on one written by “Taking Note” on April 27.— A narrative of TN’s meetings is, I believe, particurlarly insightful of what is presently occuring in SGM’s think-tank-leadership.
Some quotes from TN: “I have been in pastoral and personal contexts with central SGM leaders, WHERE IT WAS MADE CLEAR THAT THIS VIEW OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT WOULD NOT BE CHANGING AND WHERE CHURCHES WITH DIFFERING VIEWS AND APPLICATIONS OF ELDER/CONGREGATION LIFE WERE OPENLY AND FLIPPANTLY DISMISSED.”
“………THE ASSURANCE THAT THE PRACTICE OF THIS VISION OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT WOULD NOT BE RECONSIDERED OR MEANINGFULLY ALTERED.”
…….and then……… “A few externals were soon altered after these events . Unprecedented references to the “elders” and the “eldership” started appearing– and anecdotal stories about the equal input and authority of all the elders on the pastoral team. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE HIERARCHIAL REALITY HAD CHANGED AT ALL, AND IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT ANYTHING RESEMBLING BIBLICALLY SHARED LEADERSHIP OR CONGREGATIONAL ENGAGEMENT HAS EMERGED.’”
Does SGM toy with polity issues? Declaring they will NOT reconsider or alter their (erred) polity declarations — and then attempt to APPEAR that they are as they pepper their discussions with references to “elders” and “eldership” and “the authority of all the elders on the pastoral team”? And all this on top of the authentic and documented cases of mauled and broken people at the hands of sgm pastors and apostles. pastors and apostles, who, have for years been taught and affirmed that they are: “the first among equals”; “stand in the very stead of God”; and expect their congregants to fulfill CJs exhortation (?) to be “a joy to your pastor”. — The veil over their spiritual eyes is evident, for they truly believe their own twistings of scripture. Then their own congregants are lulled into believing that sgm really is the “happiest place on earth” .
We remain alarmed for our Brethren.
Hey guys. Thought I would jump in here to clarify a couple of things. First, Defended said the following:
—–start snip—–
Don’t worry about the Phillips boys getting into PC – their oldest was in the first class opening day, and I’m sure there’s a seat saved for any of his brothers who want to attend.
—–end snip—–
What was left out (because of ignorance, I presume) is the fact that, as far as I am aware, I am one of two people (my roommate being the other) to attend the PC and not graduate. Over a decade-worth of names on the wall; mine’s not one of them. As a matter of fact, I’m the sure argument could be made that I’m the reason that 20-something singles are rare these days at the PC. This is not something that I’m not at all proud of, but I do respect CJ and Jeff for how they handled my failures during that first year, and I hope that I’ve grown as a result of that humiliating experience. I’m also quite sure that I eliminated the “automatic shot” (Defended) opportunity at the PC, if it ever existed (which I believe that it never did considering the process that I had to walk through to be accepted to the PC) . On that note, I would be happy to share my story for anyone may be interested to hear how my failures as a 20-year-old have effected my life. Also, on a related point, Steve240 said the following:
—–start snip—–
Where else can Joey and his brothers make the income he will make with just the free schooling he will get at PC? Also being famiy, he and his brothers would have little chance of being forced out of a pastor positon. As we have seen with Mahaney’s family, those pastors related to him by marriage seem to held to different standards than non family and I am sure that would be the case, if necessary, with the Phillips’ boys.
—–end snip—–
Not sure how it works these days, but I was required to pay my way through the PC. Also, Steve240, have you ever looked at how much these pastors actually make (said while winking with a smile on my face)? Not sure I would classify a pastor’s salary as a “good source of income”. Finally, I would suggest that the fact that I was not permitted to graduate from the PC for disciplinary reasons would be evidence that there is no double-standard when it comes to the PC, unless you want to make the argument that I was under added scrutiny (not that I am making this argument, I just think it’s probably an easier argument to make).
Second, Gratefully Disillusioned and Canary of suggested that when each of you turned down an offer to lead a Caregroup (or Homegroup, depending on how far back you go
, that your decline was un-appreciated by the leadership. I would have to say that as someone who has declined various forms of leadership (worship leading, homegroup) at two SGM churches, I never felt that the leadership looked unfavorably on my decision. I felt that in all cases, they respected my decision and were supportive of my sense from the Holy Spirit. It should also be noted that in each of these cases, I was the only member of my family that was a member of those respective churches. In other words, I wasn’t being asked to join in the “family business”. By saying this I am not attempting to discredit your perspective, I’m simply pointing out that my own experience (and potentially the experience of others who made the same decision) was quite different.
Third, just to set the record straight, the total number of family members that are in full-time supported ministry is two. The total number of family members that are in full-time un-supported “ministry” (which is how I view secular business, as a “ministry” that is just as important as being a pastor) is three, plus one part-timer, for a total of three-and-a-half. In my opinion, the “family business” is ProVision IT (http://www.provisionit.com for anyone who cares, but mostly just to be completely transparent, and secondarily to pickup a back-link if it’s permissible to Jim). At this point, I’m pretty sure I’m dad’s retirement plan, considering the amount of money he’s made over the years as pastor
.
Fourth, Jim, no need to cut this “kid” any slack. I’ve been living under the microscope my whole life. I would say after 30-something years, I’m pretty used to it by now. The people who you might want to cut some slack to are our wives, who tend to get offended for us as they aren’t used to the scrutiny.
Finally, I would like to point out that it is a bit difficult to address people who have made direct (by name) suggestions/accusations/statements when I don’t even know who I am talking to. I’m certainly not interested in protecting my reputation (as I hope is evidenced by my disclosure of my own experience at the PC), but I do find it difficult to clarify errors and assumptions when I am not able to the reply to any “person”. I would humbly suggest that if you are going to name someone by name, that you also name yourself by name.
That’s all I’ve got. Now back to my job of “not being a pastor”.
Humbly,
Josh Phillips (the oldest and ugliest Phillips kid, for anyone who’s counting)
all those with a PhD, stand up.
Hi Josh,
I just want you to know you and your roommate are not the only guys not to graduate an SGM PC. Don’t want you to go feeling all lonely.
waitforit265,
I don’t get what you’re point is. Please share?
waitforit-your statement is meaningless.
Josh,
I think that this is your first time here? Hard to keep all the JP’s straight
I was referring to Joey and Jake with the “kids” reference. I’m old-no offense intended.
Thank you for your humility in telling your PC story. I’ve met Jessee (sp?), seen Joey at different events, wouldn’t know Jake if I bumped into him, and don’t think I know you. I know way more inside Florida dope than I’d like to, and have never heard your story.
I am aware of your family business, which is one reason I said that I don’t think that your siblings have aspirations.
I’d like to see more posters use their real name, but understand that many don’t because of fear. It’s something I don’t think you’d understand.
The best way to correct erroneous statements is to come on here and say, “that’s not correct”, as you have done. The second best way is to contact me. If I know something isn’t true, I’ll contact the poster and ask them to amend their statement. I’ve done it a hundred times.
In the Joey/cabin deal, I could not defend him, as I heard the same story from too many people. I also blew it off as teenager stuff that didn’t mean a whole lot. Having said that, I completely dropped the ball in one regard.
Joey wanted to connect with someone who posted the accusation, and I did nothing to make it happen. I was sinfully selfish. I blew it off as “not important”, because I’m “too busy”. I deeply regret this, and have privately asked for Joey’s forgiveness, and he was quick and gracious to express forgiveness.
Anyway, I’m glad you posted to help clear some things up.
Josh -
Thanks for your comments, input and clarification. My children growing up under PDI would more than identify with “under the microscope” and “added scrutiny”.
Glad you are looking out for your wife and family. It is appreciated as I am very fond of her and her family!!
Irv
Josh-
Thanks for stopping by and letting your voice be heard —I don’t know you and didn’t track with the cabin argument, but I’m glad you felt free to post.
peace to you-mm
I’m assuming waitforit posits themselves a Doctored Theologian and that those of us who are not, can not have opinions on Scripture, Polity and the such…..just my guess because he/she comes across as dismissive
Oh, I thought it was because waitforit recognized that people with PhDs probably sit much and don’t get a chance to exercise he/she wanted them to stand up and not sit on their backsides so much.
I think I like my way of thinking about it better. So much sweeter with little birdies singing our heads and tying ribbons on our dresses.
Stunned-
ok…..laughing and now have coffee about to drip down my face…..I guess what strikes me odd about such a question, is that CJ Mahaney does not have a Doctorate. Not even sure he has a college degree, in fact, I can think of at least 2 or 3 other leaders in SG who have not completed college…so the whole stand up if you have a Doctorate strikes me as, well odd, maybe waitforit will stop back to clarify, but I doubt it…..sigh
Josh,
I respect you for posting, clearing up some matters. As for my husband’s treatment after declining cg leadership, it happened just the way I said. G.D. can speak for himself but his experience supports what my husband and I also went through. We didn’t fit in to the pastor’s plans for us, so we were dismissed from his mind. I won’t go into anymore details, but suffice it to say that we were made to feel more like a commodity instead of valued members. That was the awful thing about it.
Glad your experience has been different.
Stunned,
You are too funny (and being yourself as well!)!!!!
Josh said:
“Not sure how it works these days, but I was required to pay my way through the PC. Also, Steve240, have you ever looked at how much these pastors actually make (said while winking with a smile on my face)?”
This certainly is a new information to me. I have never heard of the requirement that PC students “pay their way.” What specifically do you mean by this? Are you saying you had to just pay your living expenses (room/board) while you attended the PC free of charge or are you saying you also had to pay to tuition to the Pastor’s College?
I had always heard that the students attending PC were giving free admission and living expense were paid some way (via salary or something else). Also sometimes it included having to pay the mortgage for the family where they were from. When these figures were added the cost of sending someone to PC was pretty high.
You also said:
“This is not something that I’m not at all proud of, but I do respect CJ and Jeff for how they handled my failures during that first year, and I hope that I’ve grown as a result of that humiliating experience. I’m also quite sure that I eliminated the “automatic shot” (Defended) opportunity at the PC, if it ever existed (which I believe that it never did considering the process that I had to walk through to be accepted to the PC)”
Well sorry to hear that you dropped out but if it was deserved then I am glad to hear that it shows that in at least in this case Nepotism didn’t help your cause. It certainly sounds more than coincidental when an apparently high number of sons and sons in law of bigger name SGM Leaders get into the PC etc. I am sure some are the best candidates, while others are at least qualified (but maybe they weren’t the most qualified) and some really weren’t qualified at all.
Did you have any college or had you already obtained a college degree before you went to the PC? I was shocked to hear at one time that a significant number of the students there had no college or at least no degree. If nothing else, the discipline of learning that college proves in an individual would show one is ready for the PC let alone the maturing and “rounding” one going to college can give someone.
If I didn’t mention this before, I made my remark about Joey “protecting the family business” do to his not suggesting people read this blog or the Survivors blog on another blog. I found that ironic him saying that with the posting he use to do on here and the Survivors blog he spent some time himself reading these blogs. Thanks for clarifying that for now only 2 of your family are working on the SGM payroll. It wouldn’t surprise me if more were on it sooner or later.
Thanks for your clarifications.
Josh Phillips
I guess you aren’t going to respond to my last comment? Iwould have been curious to hear your thoughts.
Steve
Sorry, Steve. Been a bit busy recently. Here are my responses:
—–start snip—–
Are you saying you had to just pay your living expenses (room/board) while you attended the PC free of charge or are you saying you also had to pay to tuition to the Pastor’s College? I had always heard that the students attending PC were giving free admission and living expense were paid some way (via salary or something else). Also sometimes it included having to pay the mortgage for the family where they were from. When these figures were added the cost of sending someone to PC was pretty high.
—–end snip—–
Yes, I paid tuition and living expenses while attending the Pastor’s College (with Dad’s help).
—–start snip—–
Did you have any college or had you already obtained a college degree before you went to the PC? I was shocked to hear at one time that a significant number of the students there had no college or at least no degree. If nothing else, the discipline of learning that college proves in an individual would show one is ready for the PC let alone the maturing and “rounding” one going to college can give someone.
—–end snip—–
Very little college experience, and certainly no college degree. I guess I’m not very “well rounded”.
I do have a wall worth of meaningless technical certification plaques, in case that’s worth something. 
Josh–I really appreciate your tone and straightforward replies.
We’re all going to end up hanging together in the new heavens/new earth, so we might as well get along now, and you are certainly getting a headstart on that.
This will sound snooty, please believe it is not meant as so. Higher education is not for everybody, but I believe it is essential for pastors and other communicators.
Most of the reformed crowd, (I’m PCA, twenty+ years, been on church staff, etc), really value higher education. Not just theological, but advanced education of all sorts. The vast majority of our kids go to college, and many go on for advanced degrees.
I see the exact opposite happening in SGM. The kids are not pursuing college degrees, many will take some community college classes and call it a day, and many of the PC grads have not attended college.
Why is this? We shouldn’t grow in knowledge as well as wisdom? Pastors don’t need to know about Shakespeare or micro-evolution or American history or Calculus or English literature?
All of history is the story of God, not just John Piper’s latest book. (He graduated from Wheaton with a lit/philosophy degree, master’s at Fuller, doctorate from University of Munich.)
Or what about Mark Dever, another theologian held up as a model for SGMers: bachelor’s from Duke, master’s from Gordon-Conwell, another master’s from Southern Baptist Seminary, doctorate from <egads!>Cambridge.)
Or even Driscoll, who holds a bachelor’s from WSU (communications/philosophy) and a master’s from Western Seminary.
Or Ligon Duncan, another big dog (B.A., Furman in history, Masters from Covenant, Doctorate from University of Edinburgh). Or John MacArthu (Azusa, Biola, ……)
Al Mohler? BS from Samford, Master’s and Doctorate from seminary.
Sproul? Do we need to go into it? Puh-leeze.
Higher education does more than teach dates and dead people. It teaches a person to think, to listen to other opinions, to argue a point, to defend a thesis, to engage with the world of ideas. It teaches other languages and cultures. It teaches a person about history and the stories of people who have gone before. It gives a communicator tools to use for comparisons and metaphor.
SGM will only be more and more insular as they continue being led by undereducated men, and as they allow their children to stumble out of high school without going further. The next generation will be homeschooled by poorly educated women. How will this impact the church?
Honest question: why don’t SGMers, in general, value higher education at the same level that other evangelicals/reformeds/charismatics do? Is it fear of the ‘outside?’
PURSWELL!!! WHAT ABOUT PURSWELL!!!! HE HAS A DEGREE!!!!!
Lol just kidding. That was for Jim.
Hi Josh,
Just wanted to first point out that this post is going to be long (not surprisingly) and rambling (not as common, though I am a huge fan of running off in tangents). I’m just not in the mood to make it sound better and I have a dinner in 10 so I won’t edit. It is my rebuttal to RT’s comment. RT knows I respect her tons (but even more importantly in my world- I adore her). She also won’t be surprised by anything I am going to say. I’d imagine I’ve banged this drum so many times, RT, that it will be a boring read for you. I recommend you go get a good book and soak your feet in Epsom’s Salts rather than waste any time on it.
Josh, I don’t agree with her whatsoever on the importance and/or value of formal education. I have a mightly little regard for it over what one can learn without ever having the benefit of a formal education. That’s the problem with people who preach on the value of formal education over informal. (Not that RT has any other problems. Like I said, pretty much adore her.) They themselves have only known one route and look at many of the ignorant people who have had no formal education and often assume that there are onlythese two paths. A man or a woman can have no formal education yet possess a greater amount of knowledge and wisdom than those with their master’s and PhD’s. I think we can all agree there are as many ignorant and dumb as door nail PhDs as there are ignorant and dumb as door nail non-formally educated individuals in the world. (At least proportionately speaking.)
And I’m not just talking about the “common sense” kind of argument many people put out there. (Which I never agree with any way. If it’s common, then everyone oughta have it.)
My own little degree and a very lucky incident of researching at Cambridge University, along with a possible search for a master’s or PhD along with a possible application for some grants to do primary research around the world in a few different fields notwithstanding, I hold very little value for formal education over informal beyond its ability to open up doors or afford an HR person the ability to bump a resume up the line. (RT, I give you my full permission to crow at me the day I do return to school if that is God’s will. In fact, if I do, I’ll buy you your favorite drink to apologize to you for the years I have respectfully – and with full adoration of who you are- disagreed with you on the value of a formal education.)
Yes, I happen to LOVE learning. But, I don’t believe for one cotton pickin’ minute that formal education is a better route to learning knowledge of any kind. It just ain’t. It is merely a different route. Some of the greatest communicators of their time never went past the third grade. (Harriet Tubman? Edison? Sojourner Truth, anyone? That woman changed her world. Find me a preacher that was born in the past century and graduated any seminary that can beat her, “Ain’t I A Woman?” speech with both its brevity and culture changing words.)
RT said, “Higher education does more than teach dates and dead people. It teaches a person to think.” RT, I could not disagree with you more. Or rather, instead of a complete disagreement, may I make it a sideways disagreement. I don’t believe it teaches a person to think. I think it has the ability to teach some people to think. Yet those very same people can be taught to think in any circumstance they find themselves in. And frankly, the vast majority of people do not come out of college knowing how to think. They come out thinking they know how to think because someone has sold them the bill of goods that a formal education teaches them to think.
I have met countless people who have gone to universities and THINK that they know how to think but DON’T know how to think in the least. Who don’t know how to reason, to consider any view points beyond their own (or their professors’), to argue a point using facts or to engage in anything outside of their tiny little world. People with four degrees and counting. Countless. You know why? For some reason someone told them that going to college would teach them HOW to think. Now, it did teach them invaluable lessons like how to play Beer Pong and how to work they system in the dean’s office but not how to think, reason and be logical.
I’d like to offer you one friend of mine in particular. (Or rather, I’d like to keep him as my friend, but offer him as an example.) Member of Mensa. Valedictorian in his first law school. (Before he went on to do that silly little international law stuff at Georgetown.) He is normally considered the smartest man where ever he goes. He is tall and successful and unfortunately for this world and for the sake of truth itself, everyone believes him to be intelligent and to be a leader because he fits what the world thinks of as a leader. But in spite of his near or actual photographic memory, his years and years of formal education and success and experience all over the world, his acquisition of different languages, his worldly tastes (no one can cook or match wine like this guy), this man is often NOT logical in his thinking, nor are his arguments (outside of law) sound. However, no one, NO ONE questions him. No one challenges him.
You know why? They are impressed with the many letters after his name. They are impressed with his academic demeanor. They are impressed with his knowledge and experience. But more so, they have confused education with knowledge and his experience with his having gained wisdom, his success with having some key to the things they, too, want.
I believe this to be a dangerous thing.
We follow fools while tripping over wisemen.
I have to admit that in my arrogance I enjoy slashing and burning my way through his arguements, leaving him with a huge, gaping gash in his mind (and sometimes soul), his old preconceived notions spilling out on to the floor as he looks at them and realizes they are merely puddles of words. All the while, new thoughts, begin to illuminate the shadows cast by the fleeing preconceived yet erroneous rationalizations he had picked up in all his years of formal education and in all his years of being successful in the world’s eyes. (What can I say, it’s fun to see people change right before your eyes.)
However, Josh and RT, RT was correct (or at least in my opinion) in her assessment of the majority of SGMers who seem to value isolating themselves and their children from other cultures. I agree with her concerning the damage it can do.
God is going to call some people to never leave the boundaries of the village that they were born in to. He is going to grow them and mature them, use them mightily and love them right there in that little village, until the day they die.
Other people He is going to call to go to the tallest mountains, the driest of deserts and the most crowded of cities. He is going to call them to meet thousands of people. He is going to grow them and mature them, use them mightily and love them until the day they die.
I think it’s a mistake to say that God is going to prescribe the same life to all people, the same path or the same route to get where He wants them. For some, God will want them to further their formal education. For others, He has a different plan. To believe that one is equated with the acquisition of knowledge while the other isn’t is erroneous and damaging.
PS. RT also said, “It gives a communicator tools to use for comparisons and metaphor.” AMEN! I enjoyed thinking of Sherman and Atlanta when I was talking about my discussions with my friend.
I have 3 credit hours at a community college.
Stunned–I’ve missed you! You know what I love best about you? You and I blather on, then want to go out for a glass of wine and a good laugh. Let’s move in next to each other in the new heavens and earth. Sherman and Atlanta! LOL!
Forgive me if I came across as arrogant. I’m not heavily degreed, but do enjoying learning stuff. But whenever I engage my beloved SGMers, I can’t get beyong the next conference or Harris twins book. There is so much wonder and mystery out there!
You made me laugh and then nod with many of your excellent points. I completely agree that much “knowledge” puffs up and that only true wisdom fills.
And I think you understood what I was getting at: pastors need education. Whether that comes from multiple PhD’s after your name, or self-study, or travel, or missions, or conversation, or just plain reading the classics and history…get some, for heaven’s sake. But above all, get wisdom, which comes from the Word.
And stop accepting mediocrity from your kids adn making them be so afraid of the world. That’s God’s world out there, for heaven’s sake.
Let’s go out for that glass of wine, now.
Stunned -
. Brent was degreed and look at the destruction left in his wake.
You absolutely crack me up. Can’t wait to see you display some passion in your comments sometime. LOL — I really wanted to pass this subject by but I feel compelled to comment (I did eat pizza last night so it might be the result of something I ate).
Thought you might find it interesting that a couple of the definitions of academic include “scholarly but lacking in common sense or practicality”. or another “theoretical not practical, realistic or directly useful”. Academia was used originally to mean ‘of no earthly good’. Thought these fit the theme of your comment(s).
I would agree with many of your statements and also many of your conclusions but would like to add some clarification if I may. I understand this will be very boring and most likely unnecessary but there you go. A person that has earned a BA hasn’t really learned anything but they have shown they can gather information (professor, book, etc.) and are able to pass a test. The proof that they learned anything will be revealed over the next number of years after they graduate to determine if they have actually done something or accomplished something with what they learned. If actual fact it is the graduate that certify’ their degree not the degree certifying them
The BA gives a student a foundation of knowledge that will allow them to go learn and accomplish something. My daughter in law recently graduated from nursing school. After 3 months as a nurse at the Mayo clinic, she realizes she is just now learning to be a nurse. I graduated with two degrees from the University of Texas but didn’t know anything because I hadn’t done anything – I learned business by doing not attending a class. A graduate in accounting had the opportunity to learn how to be an accountant. etc. etc
At our university one can earn a BA in Theology by through our test 4 credit program that shows us what they have learned by the test but that is all it shows us. they show us through their tests if they have completed the requirements (hours of credit) we can award them their degree.
Our masters and doctors go through an extensive assessment program that tells us what they have done (and verified) with what they have learned AND they have been successful in teaching and helping others achieve!! The way universities and colleges award masters and doctorates today is not just scary but appalling – it is all academics not applied knowledge. (BTW – Physicians have been misnamed as doctors when in fact they are physicians – master and doctors were a church designations not secular designations but I digress) We have PHDs running around presenting themselves as experts when they have done anything except complete a thesis or a practicum. I call them eggheads — they have knowledge but don’t know anything.
So in response to your impassioned comment(s) – I would agree with many of your conclusions; formal education does have a place as long as we understand it and define it appropriately.
Didn’t mean to bore everyone (or at least those who read this).
To segue back to SGM, I would make this observation. Something took place along the way (way back — early to mid 80s), leaders were chosen and appointed more because of their managerial skills rather than leadership skills. There are reasons for this as leaders have some built in issues that the A-team really didn’t like or wanted to deal with. They did not want free thinkers, men that could stand on their own (so to speak) and men that could create something that might look a bit different than their ‘model’. As a result they (SGM) ended up with managers and caregivers but not leaders (in my humble opinion:).
When managers are put in leading positions they tend to carry out the company policies and directions as they understand them. But they don’t have the anointing or grace to lead as they are managers not leaders. This results in a well managed church but it is usually done through management skills and control not through leading, equipping and releasing. (HUGE DIFFERENCE). What is worse is when they took leaders and tried to make them managers – that is another story all together.
Even within the A-team they couldn’t allow leaders to co-exist together (i.e. — getting rid of Larry) From my viewpoint the A-team that I knew and remembered were nothing more than glorified administrators thinking they were leaders and even worse apostles. They burned through some good men of God who were not administrators but leaders. Look at how many men they almost destroyed that are leaders in the kingdom today. These men were made to feel less because they didn’t think like them (A-team). They couldn’t release men to their gift, they had to control them.
All the degrees in the world will not help the main issues. If CJ, Steve, Dave had their masters or doctorates it wouldn’t change their methodology — only the Holy Spirit can do that. Can you imagine how dangerous a Dr. Mahaney might look like
I will conclude (and everyone said ‘at last’). Formal education has its place and I hold the value for what it is. Beyond that is is about what one has done with what he knows and it bears the fruit of the Lord and His kingdom. One last note (I promise) — a masters and doctorate degrees are not for the holder of the degree but for those who submit their minds and hearts to their teachings.
And to Jim — it isn’t the hours but what you have done with what God has taught and empowered you to do. (I am not demeaning but respecting)
And Kudos to Josh who went to the Pastors College and though you didn’t make it through you have taken what you learned and applied those things to your life and you are successful — And you found a good thing
RT and Stunned – Mind if my wife and I join you for a glass of wine? I’ll buy!!! We are fun
RT, I haven’t gotten beyond your second paragraph because I so badly needed to say, that you did NOT come across as arrogant! Not in the least. Not in the least. (Man, if i repeat myself so much now, what’s going to happen when I have Alzheimer’s. I mean what’s going to happen when I have… oh wait…)
I’m so sorry if I communicated that at all. I have NEVER thought you came across as arrogant. Truly. I’m so sorry that I made you feel that way. I wish I could come across as humbly as you have in every one of your posts. Though, I suppose that if I want to come across as humble, it would be my first priority to actually become humble. I do try.
Hopefully by the time we’re sitting on my terrace in heaven I’ll have changed.
Tonight in the middle of homegroup I thought about my rant and thought, “I’m an a$%.” Yes, I cursed in my own head while studying Romans. What can I say. Truth is truth and I was much too fervent in my post above. But even with that, you were so far from arrogant that it never dawned on me that you would think I’d think that about you.
Repeat myself much? I’ll stop and get back to the rest of your post.
RT,
YES! (I just read the rest of your post above.) That is exactly what I was wishing I could have said.
But whenever I engage my beloved SGMers,
Have I told you how much I love your love for these kids? My heart seriously warms whenever I read about it.
I can’t get beyong the next conference or Harris twins book. There is so much wonder and mystery out there!
That is just too sad.
And I think you understood what I was getting at: pastors need education.
Yes, yes, yes, yes!!!!!!!!!!!! And a-yes! How are they to lead, how are they to impart knowledge if they are not going out and learning? And to be frank, I think that formal education is often the most expedient way to acquire it. And it is often the most common for many a good reason.
Whether that comes from multiple PhD’s after your name,
Yes!
or self-study,
Yes!
or travel,
YES! (Opps, a little too excited there.)
or missions,
Yes!
or conversation,
Yes!
or just plain reading the classics and history…get some, for heaven’s sake.
Yes, yes, yes and yes!
But above all, get wisdom, which comes from the Word.
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
And stop accepting mediocrity from your kids adn making them be so afraid of the world.
So sad.
And RT, if you’re not heavily degreed then that is proof positive that it isn’t necessarily a formal education that teaches you to think, because, Girlfriend, you are freaking brilliant. Sharp as a tack yet gentle. (Darn it, can you please stop it? Not making some of us sisters look good out here.)
Irv said, “Can’t wait to see you display some passion in your comments sometime”. Oh, dear heavens, if only I could stop. I think Jim has many gifts and has displayed a character I admire. But I can’t help but think that one of his greatest gifts is him being patient with me here. I wish I could be more like some of the other ladies or gentleman, all calm and cool.
Other than that, I agree with everything you said. Everything except a few (’cause aren’t you just dying to know what that is? *tongue planted firmly in cheek*).
AND they have been successful in teaching and helping others achieve!!
Too many horrible TAs in my experience to agree. (OK, really only one TA. And I’m obsessed by someday proving to her that I am not the atrocious writer she thought I was. My second book will be dedicated to her in the most snarky of ways. To _____ who thought I couldn’t write. Sucka!!!)
The way universities and colleges award masters and doctorates today is not just scary but appalling
Agreed. Thus my contention that academics should not be equated with learning but more so, putting in time and having enough money to feed you (or you and your family) while you get through school.
Physicians have been misnamed as doctors when in fact they are physicians – master and doctors were a church designations not secular designations but I digress
That’s sort of fascinating. I had no idea. I’ve always wondered how we gave them that moniker.
This results in a well managed church but it is usually done through management skills and control not through leading, equipping and releasing. (HUGE DIFFERENCE).
Amen, amen and amen. Well said. Especially that releasing part.
And Irv’s last two paragraphs—- can I say amen to those, too. Wish I had put it that way.
Irv, wine is great as long as everyone else that visits here can come along, too. Wouldn’t want to leave out all the kind, brilliant, loving and patient people that are here. Especially if you’re buying.
Irv said:
“To segue back to SGM, I would make this observation. Something took place along the way (way back — early to mid 80s), leaders were chosen and appointed more because of their managerial skills rather than leadership skills. There are reasons for this as leaders have some built in issues that the A-team really didn’t like or wanted to deal with. They did not want free thinkers, men that could stand on their own (so to speak) and men that could create something that might look a bit different than their ‘model’. As a result they (SGM) ended up with managers and caregivers but not leaders (in my humble opinion:). ”
That is quite an insightful post about the group. My experience in the early 90′s is they wanted followers. They didn’t want people that questioned. I have sometimes characterized SGM as similar to the Japanese culture of conformance. That culture has pros and cons.
Irv,
Several of your comments here and at Survivors have been very illuminating. Your comment about SGM looking more for managers than leaders and your explanation of why that is so makes so much sense. My hubbie was a home group leader for one tumultuous year. He was a free-thinking, God-worshipping, God’s-Word-studying, follow-the-Holy-Spirit-wherever-He-leads kind of leader. Not to be boxed in or mushed in a mold. He tried. He really did, mostly for my sake I think, but it did not end well.
Thank you for your insight. Next time hubbie and I sit down and talk, I’m going to relay what you have shared here as well as your comments about SGM responding counter-culturally as they developed and grew. I’ve tried to express some of those thoughts in the past here, but you have verbalized it quite nicely.
Gracie -
Thanks for your kind words. It is a shame that so many good men and women have been run over by SGM over the last 20 – 25 years. It is a shame for SGM and for those that placed (or misplaced) their trust in those leading. I think if the PDI/SGM leadership would have been listening some rather than doing all the talking things might have been different. I trust the Lord has brought healing and restoration to you and yours and you are experiencing the abundant life post SGM.
Canary – also meant to thank you for you kind words as well some days back!
Irv -
Stunned -
Not a problem on enlarging the party. I am sure that Jim has in his budget funds to help cover the cost of the wine for everyone
Also, I do not find any difficulty with someone disagreeing with me – sometimes I disagree with myself
Stunned & Irv,
“Irv, wine is great as long as everyone else that visits here can come along, too. Wouldn’t want to leave out all the kind, brilliant, loving and patient people that are here. Especially if you’re buying.”
Hey, if all Survivors & Refugees are invited, How about a central place like, …. Our house here in Colorado?
I can help with the wine, (got about 325 bottles in the cellar right now.)
Cover my cost @ $3.50/bottle, and I’m a happy winemaker.
Woo Hoo, Let’s party!
;>}
Defender -
LOL – you should check your geography concerning a central place although I like the venue but you had me at 325 bottles in the cellar!!
I think Stunned made it clear that everyone here should be invited — She and RT started this one as they thought they might sneak off and have a party themselves. Always dangerous to do on an open blog!!
Defender,
Mr. Canary and I aren’t far away. We’ll bring the cheese and crackers. Birdseed isn’t cheap but I can bring some mixed nuts (my five kids)…
Love this conversation! Irv, I saw valued true pastors forced to resign from PDI because of their lack of administration skills. In the early eighties they were valued for their love and care for the saints. Suddenly, they were no longer useful. Didn’t matter that they’d put their hearts and souls into the saints and that we had grown to trust these men and women. If they couldn’t administrate, out they went. One particular couple who has sense moved onto pastor somewhere else was the ideal pastor and wife. Such love! Such imitators of Christ! What a shock when the pastor was degifted for not being gifted in administration. What bird poop (pardon me)! Now, it seems like pastors are administrators first, loving shepherds somewhere way down the line of qualifications. No wonder there is an implosion going on. I think these pastors need someone to pastor them in how to pastor and love the sheep. Maybe Jesus could help in this???
Nah, he wouldn’t qualify. Didn’t you hear? His firstborn really blew it and fell. Ate some fruit. he wasn’t supposed to. Apple I think.
“Jesus was not a Senior Pastor” — quote from an apostolic team member!!
Irv,
Geographically, I might be a little off from center, but ya gotta admit, we are between the coasts, and we got an International Airport about 30 or 40 miles away.
But personally, this is the center of my universe, if I want to play the Narcissist game.
Canary,
Do your “mixed nuts” like to play with puppies?
We still have 4 left right now. After July we expect two litters of child friendly fun, while we watch and drink to the goodness of God.
Bring your bird seed!
OOOOH, we LOVE dogs, especially puppies. I have eight dogs, most of them Maltese. We bred them for a while. What breed of puppies do you have?
Stunned, you are so funny. So Adam disqualified Jesus from pastoring. Oh wait, the Great Shepherd was not a “senior pastor”, according to Irv’s quote from an apostolic team member. Wait…what????? :0 Oh, my poor tweety head. Can this be true? Did he really say that?
Canary,
Labradoodles.
Write to us at Defended1@gmail.com and I’ll give you a link to our website.
Yeah, I’ve heard SGM Apostles say some rather heretical things too.
Alright Stunned,
That one makes me laugh.
“His firstborn really blew it and fell. Ate some fruit. he wasn’t supposed to. Apple I think.”
I’m convinced that Stunned is a very fun person. Wise, too.
Mr. Canary and I aren’t far away. We’ll bring the cheese and crackers. Birdseed isn’t cheap but I can bring some mixed nuts (my five kids)…
Canary, you and your nest-full are VERY welcome at our house!
Anytime! We’re just east of the ‘burbs’ and love to have kiddos play with our LABRADOODLE puppies!
Irv – that’s a fabulous quote about Jesus vs. sr. pastor!! you are crackin’ me up!
ps….just ‘give me Jesus’ please!
Defended,
Why thank you very much. I’ll tell Mr. Canary. Sure would be nice to meet you folks!
Defended & Canary – “the quote is absolutely true”
Mr. Canary and I are really shaking our heads. Mr. Canary says, “The further you get from Jesus, the more suspect you become.” Wow, Irv. No wonder you left. Mr. Canary’s biggest issue with our old church was that we rarely heard the name of Jesus. What the heck did they mean by “Jesus wasn’t a Senior Pastor”?
Canary, I’d LOVE to have Stunned join us for our wine, cheese & crackers gathering!
Who else is lurking out here in/near the Rockies?
Stunned, so often you say what I am thinking.
I gotta tell ya, the more we hear and compare here, the more difficult it is to deny that SGM is a CULT.
Very deceptive.
I’m going out on a limb here,
So deceptive that even the elect would be led astray, if they could be.
Nah. Couldn’t be THAT bad. Could it?
Canary,
You’ve got mail!
Stunned–you are adorable.
I’d lift one in your direction, but I’m too tired to crawl over to the fridge. Power-grading just wears me out. Putting essays on finals = sign of early onset Alzheimer’s.
Blessings to all, in the name of our Saviour!
Defender,
Mail received. Will respond as soon as I can. Mega shark and Octypus movie is starting. Guess who is starring? Lorenzo Lamas. Oh brother is this going to be cheesy…what fun.
Defended,
Stunned would be the life of the party. I thought there was someone else posting who lives in CO. Just can’t remember who…
Seems to me it’s a fair question to ANY congregation to sum up or hash out (if the congregation has any say in the matter) exactly what do they/we want from a pastor/leader?
Or team of leaders? Pastor? Preacher? Teacher?
Fascinating to me that now, our very-onboard T4G pastor at a local baptist-ish church has a leader who is all about preaching and VERY LITTLE about true pastoral care. Kind of surprises me since this ‘local church’ was hurting and needing pastoring when he came along, but they were also needing to hear the Word preached without compromise. But after 6yrs of seeing so many falling thru the cracks or going without ministry beyond mention on a prayer list email, I’m a bit more philosophical about this tedious balance. I think God’s people always need both! Not necessarily from just one man, of course, but I feel a bit odd or out of it that a pastor could see it as ‘not his job’ to care for the flock? What about leading in showing care? Or truly equip the flock to care for itself? Or is it really the “job” of the flock to care for itself and just content itself wtih a pastor who preaches the Word?
Honestly this isn’t just about sgm or is it the sgm influence seeping into T4G? Or is it a coincidence that these guys have all found each other?
My observation in our current congregation is that people don’t pay a whole lot of attention the polity of their own congregation, even outside of sgm.
“Jesus was not a Senior Pastor”
So you could either aspire to be like Jesus or a Senior Pastor?
Hmmmm…
Tough decision.
AWWWWWWWW, your kids playing with Labrodoodle puppies! How cute!!!! (Though I suspect Canary might have the most fun with them.)
Defended, you are very sweet. I have to admit when I read, “Stunned, so often you say what I am thinking” my first thought was, “Oh, you poor thing! I’d hate for anyone else to have to be living up here (in my head)!” But glad I get to voice your thoughts sometimes. So often I wish I could keep more quiet and be all SGM-demure. Seriously. I do.
RT, just give ‘em all A’s.
PS. The essays on exams line was hysterical.
So often I wish I could keep more quiet and be all SGM-demure. Seriously. I do.
But Stunned, then you would be so boring! I know and can say – I use to be one of those quiet and demure women. You wouldn’t have wanted to know me back then. I was like boiled chicken – flavorless. Now I’m more like Kentucky fried since Jesus changed me! We love your uniqueness…
I love me some KFC. It makes me sad to think of you as boiled chicken. Were you unhappy during that time?
Stunned,
KFC with cold slaw and mash potatoes…yum. I don’t think I knew enough to be unhappy. I was like a prisoner who never knew freedom so I didn’t understand what I was missing. As the Lord began to reveal the truth I became restless for my freedom. The reason I lived so much in fear was that I lived so little in faith. Life without fear is full of spice!
Jesus or Sr. Pastor? Pleeeze! Give me Jesus!
lol. tough decision? HAH!
Stunned, why do you think I got in trouble? I thought it was ok to be the me that God made when we were in SGM! no such luck.
Canary, I’m so glad you’ve got your 11 herbs and spices now!
The statement “Jesus was not a Sr Pastor” is obviously a stupid statement under any circumstances but it does deserve a context.
As a senior pastor I was not beholden to my office. My day usually consisted of spending the first part of the day walking our property or in my home office praying, meditating and contemplating with the Lord. After that I would be mentoring, counseling or meeting with people where they were rather than having them come into the office. I was also spending a day a week at the campus or other venues just meeting and talking with people about the Lord.
My time was limited in the office as I had a full time administrator to take care of the office so I might spend four or five hours a week at the office unless we have an elders meeting. The apostle was trying to get me to see the church office was a command center and the people needed to know that I was there seeking the Lord, planning, studying, etc. I spent most of my study time at my home office which was not the acceptable practice.
I commented to him that I saw Jesus spending time with His Father and then he was with the disciples and with people. My schedule was worked out with that as my template if you will. It was then that I was told “Jesus wasn’t a senior pastor”. What he was trying to tell me is that my responsibilities to the church were different than what Jesus was accomplishing in His three and half years preparing the disciples. (at least I think that is what he was saying).
I did respond to him after his statement “then I am not your (PDI) man”. At that point, the writing was on the wall (to the apostle and to me) that I was not going to cut it with PDI. But instead of letting me go peacefully, there had to be sin that I needed to acknowledge in my life and I lied to the church as to what was really happening when I finally resigned my position. To say the least it was very ugly and a very difficult time our our lives.
The good news is there is life and life abundantly after PDI. Hope that sets the statement in its proper context.
“The apostle was trying to get me to see the church office was a command center and the people needed to know that I was there seeking the Lord, planning, studying, etc”
‘Cause you can’t seek God other places?
Silly apostle.
I agree with Stunned. Very silly apostle. Command center? What, were we the military or something? Sad that they had to accuse you of sin to make you leave. Ugly, very ugly. We are glad you are here, Irv!
What about all those men how seek God out on the Golf Courses on Sunday mornings??
Okay Okay, just kidding!
I do, however understand Psalm 139 “Where can I hide from Your presence?”
The Office perhaps? (An SGM Office maybe. Where the Holy Spirit has left the building.)
It all just sounds controlling to me. And awful, that an “apostle” was trying to micromanage a guy who is supposed to be mature enough to be entrusted with the care of the flock. for crying out loud. I’m so sorry, Irv.
But yeah, life and living abundantly is the deal outside of sgm.
Hey Defender,
How about football Sundays? Don’t forget those. Go Broncos! A lot of fellowship goes on in our house over chips, dip, and football. Didn’t God invent football? I’m sure He must have…
Seriously, the more religion boxes a person in, the less they can really hear God for themselves. A church should not be run like a corporation. Glad we all found our freedom to live full lives for the Lord!
IRV…
When was your coming our party? I have heard a few pastoral horror stories by ex SGM pastors but that one only shows me the level of manipulation apostolic oversight is will to go through to make anyone in leadership who thinks about leaving SGM the subject of a Salem Witch Hunt. It must be that/those sins in your life and we must tell the congregation that is the real issue. Being sinners I am sure finding something wasn’t the issue. Using it to cover issues you had with your SGM Apostle is another matter. THE SIN. It disqualifies us all. Why do we even bother < sarcasm intended>!
Makes me wonder about the fiasco in my own MLC experience. Todd could not escape fast enough or I am sure he too would have been the topic of the hunt. He kept trying to expose all this for over a year with zero help or response. The rest of the team? Danny was in my estimation incredibly sincere. Benny took about 60 seconds and should have gone on for 30 minutes more. Mike, gads there is not a lazy bone in his body and he is repenting for laziness. Not buying that one for a nanosecond. My summation? It was hard to believe any of it after Danny. If you were there you know what I am talking about. Navel gazing. Yes, I agree IRV “The good news is there is life and life abundantly after PDI”/SGM. Our life is in Christ. WHOAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Canary – I can give you a thumbs up on the football – I know there are many that attend the 1st church of the NFL. As a Redskins fan, we were glad to pick up your Bronco reject – perhaps we will enter the NFL this year. O if we could return to the days of Joe Gibbs!!!
DEBUTANTE – I resigned my church in 1996 and officially left 6 months later. Unfortunately with PDI their image was more important than truth. There are many good men and women that SGM drove away who were hurt but SGM was also hurt missing the potential of maturity and growth of His kingdom but as keepinginstep commented – the most devastating person that was driven away was the Holy Spirit. (devastating to SGM that is)
Must say your counsel to Collateral Damage was right on! I hope she hears you. Appreciate your honesty and freshness on the blog!!
Hey Irv,
Another Redskins fan?
Cool!
Hail to the Redskins!!
Irv
June 5th, 2010 at 12:33 am
“There are many good men and women that SGM drove away who were hurt but SGM was also hurt missing the potential of maturity and growth of His kingdom but as keepinginstep commented – the most devastating person that was driven away was the Holy Spirit. ”
NOT much has changed then IRV.
Canary, I may just become a Bronco fan after your new quarterback acquisition from FL!
—–start snip—–
O if we could return to the days of Joe Gibbs!!!
—–end snip—–
Now that’s something I can say “amen” to!
Josh
Surely it’s no coincidence that “Hail to the Redskins” starts in the same melody as ‘Yes, Jesus Loves me!”
right?
Gracie,
My family in FL are now official Bronco fans. Tim T. is now in the 3rd position as q.b., with the guy who had that position having been let go (wasn’t better than Tim T.). There is still a quesiton of who will be starter qb between the first and second string. Everyone is speculating but will have to wait and see after they have their camp, next week I think.
As to the Redskins, woo-hoo! Joe Gibbs was a great coach. I remember when they won the Super Bowl in the early eighties – cars honking, parties going on! Then we moved to NC and got the Panthers. Still sad over the loss of Dehlome (spelling?) but I guess they gave him a lot of time to improve. So, now we are Denver fans. But we lost Marshal who caught a ball like a ballet dancer in flight. Going to miss seeing that…
Debutante and Irv, I too noticed that the Holy Spirit didn’t seem welcome. I didn’t want to say it out loud, but you saw it too, right? I wasn’t imagining it? Our pastor deliberately made a decision (according to our cg leader) “not to go that way” during a time of refreshing that changed many lives. I just didn’t want to believe any leader would say that!
Well, I guess there is a reason there are warnings and stories in scripture about lying to, or grieving, or blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
It usually turns out very badly.
K. Jacob said on two known occasions that he thought of himself as the Holy Spirit, or at least wanted to “be the Holy Spirit”.
That unholy thought process seams to be rampant in SGM leadership culture.
It’s scary!
Keith once stopped someone from bringing an encouraging word to the congregation because of time restraints, and said to the congregation that this person had a “word from the Holy Spirit that was very good, but we didn’t have time for it today.”
No time for the Holy Spirit in the “worship service”?????
A family confronted Keith about that, and after several months of “conflict” with Keith, they left the church.
That was a common pattern we were seeing in the south Denver church, and then we got our turn.
Yes, it’s systemic in SGM!
Surely it’s no coincidence that “Hail to the Redskins” starts in the same melody as ‘Yes, Jesus Loves me!”
How’d that go?
Yes Jesus Loves me,…
Coach Joe Gibbs Told Me So.
So glad there so many spirit filled Redskins fans. It warms the cockles of my heart
Just got back from a disappointing Diamondback win over the Rockies. Mrs Irv, born in Colorado, was very unhappy with the 4-3 outcome. As many of you men out there know – when momma is happy everyone is happy but the reciprocal is true as well – when momma is unhappy everyone is unhappy.
I placed a sign over my wife’s desk as a reminder to me & the kids.
“If Mama ain’t happy, ……… Ain’t nobody gonna be happy.”
That caption is under the picture of a Cowgirl with two smoking guns in her hands.
Lookout!
Josh said:
Yes, I paid tuition and living expenses while attending the Pastor’s College (with Dad’s help).
—–start snip—–
—–end snip—–
Very little college experience, and certainly no college degree. I guess I’m not very “well rounded”. I do have a wall worth of meaningless technical certification plaques, in case that’s worth something.
Sorry for my late response back. Thanks for getting back to me.
This is interesting how you say you paid for attending the PC. I have heard other places where both are paid and is a quite significant cost to put someone through the PC College. Part of that cost can be explained by SGM and/or sponsoring local church having to pay the student’s living expenses in MD plus possibly an existing mortgage that the family has back home in addition to the training cost.
Well at least in your case since you didn’t complete the training due to as you say your fault it was good that you paid your way and not SGM or the local church sending you.
An argument for having obtained a degree from college (preferably at least a bachelor’s degree) is that it demonstrates one has what it takes to study and earn a degree. This would include having the necessary discipline and study skills. This especially necessary with an accelerated and short program the pastor’s college is.
I would also argue that one needs more training and schooling than just home schooling gives or if some have the traditional high school diploma. I am guessing that a lot of the pastor’s college students were home schooled. I am glad to hear that now most of the have some type of a degree.
Defender — LOL We are both men under authority
and understand what that really means.
AMEN Brother!
IRV AND DEFENDER :-}~~~~~~ At least you both know what that means ROFL!
The Presbyterian Form of Government is a tried and true way to enhance accountability and prevent authoritarianism in the church. Sure, we’re not charismatic, but I have absolute confidence in our elders (who are nominated and voted on by the congregation) that they will do the right thing concerning our pastor (who is not a member, not on the session, and is simply under care of the regional presbytery). It’s almost like we lease our pastors but with an indefinite timeline on their contract. The only power he gets is from the elders and the only powers elders get comes from the congregation. SGM-defectors, please consider joining the PCA, OPC, BPC.