Introduction
I remember first reading about the Preacher Standing in the Stead of God controversy here on the ‘fuge and other blogs about fifteen months ago, and honestly not being that rattled about it. I can’t really explain it, other than at the time I thought it was a distraction from the “real” issues of SGM’s polity-or lack thereof-corrupting the finer points of theology and fostering authoritarian practices in all levels of its leadership.
However, the phrase kept coming up time and again in blog discussions, and I could see that whether or not it initially alarmed me, it was obviously troubling to a great deal of folks here on the blogs, and an obvious stumbling block to the reform that I was praying for and pursuing within and without SGM at the time.
That’s when I decided to do some serious research.
The Preacher Standing in the Stead of God controversy is both a symptom and description of much deeper issues regarding the view SGM leadership has of themselves and the flock in relationship to God. As such, I believe the bombastic statements it makes requires at least a semi-scholarly response, and I have attempted to do so here.
Apologies for the color-coding, but this article reaches a quote-within-a-quote-within-a-quote level that I believe requires extra effort in distinctions between the writers/speakers to avoid confusion. Here’s the color scheme (and ”PK’s post-of-many-colors” jokes are welcome and OK):
CJ Mahaney: blue
J.I. Packer: grey
Protestant Knight: black
Jeff Purswell: bright red
Charles Simeon: dark red
Of late I have been writing many research papers for school and found the required APA formatting to be easiest to use and do as well, particularly for citations and references.
–pk
~~~
Man Instead of God
by Protestant Knight
In his blog entry titled “The Preacher Standing in the Stead of God,” C.J. Mahaney communicates in no uncertain terms what is of extreme-if not most-importance to him and Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM) in establishing the bride of Christ: “In Sovereign Grace we are committed to the primacy of preaching in building the local church. And within this conviction is an awareness of the gravity of the preaching event” (Mahaney & Purswell, 2008, para. 1).
Mahaney continues briefly in introducing a transcribed segment of an address given by Jeff Purswell at the SGM Pastors College during a preaching conference in February of 2008. I would encourage any reader to examine the entire blog entry and quote by Purswell to provide context, but here is the controversial segment, which includes Purswell quoting J.I. Packer:
Listen to this quote from a classic essay on preaching by J.I. Packer in The Preacher and Preaching. Packer writes,
God’s standard way of securing and maintaining His person-to-person communication with us His human creatures is through the agency of persons whom He sends to us as His messengers….Such were the prophets and apostles, and such supremely was Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son….That is the succession in which we preachers today are called to stand.
It’s sobering that this is “the succession in which preachers today are called to stand.” The moment of preaching is not simply one in which you-by virtue of your job or by virtue of the nameplate on your office door-get to stand up and share some thoughts. No. You are not sharing thoughts. You are not Jay Leno. You are not a talking head. You are standing in the very stead of God.
Oh, that is a frightening thing (Mahaney & Purswell, 2008, para. 8).
The subjects most often commented about on this and other blogs are not only the problem-fraught “…standing in the very stead of God” type of statements, but also the parallel that Purswell attempts to establish between the present day preacher and Moses-the latter’s Mount Horeb “I AM” experience, and later the giving of the law, specifically (Mahaney & Purswell, 2008, para. 6). This is a stretch, beloved, to say the least; however, I will not re-hash what has been on the blogs on the above subjects, with the exception and addition of:
- A simple definition and grammatical point
- The possible origins of the “…standing in the stead of God” language used by Purswell
- A complete version of the J.I. Packer quote used by Purswell, examined in context
- Contemplation of an analogy–one not often mentioned–by Purswell in the “Preacher Standing in the Stead of God” message excerpt
“In the Stead of” and “Instead”
The word “instead” is actually a contraction of the phrase, “in the stead” and like so many of our English words handed down through the centuries, “instead” was a contraction that-for better or worse-stuck. In looking at dictionary.com’s definition of “instead”-which is based on the 2010 edition of the Random House Dictionary-the first usage listed gives the following definition: “as a substitute or replacement; in the place or stead of [emphasis added] someone or something” (“instead“, 2010, para. 1). So, in fact, looking at the phrase, “the preacher standing in the stead of God,” it is essentially saying “the preacher standing instead of God,” in modern vernacular. It gets all the more harrowing in this context when you see it refers to a “replacement” or “substitute” in terms of “someone or something.”
Where Purswell’s Use of “Standing in the Stead of God” May Have Come From
In his message, Purswell quotes from J.I. Packer’s “Why Preach?” This is a 29-page introduction to the book The Preacher and Preaching (Logan, Jr., 1986). What is interesting to note is Packer quotes Charles Simeon in the same introduction in the same book; interesting because Simeon’s comments created a serious blip on my radar for obvious reasons:
“Ministers are ambassadors for God and speak in Christ’s stead,” wrote Charles Simeon. “If they preach what is founded on the Scriptures, their word, as far as it is agreeable to the mind of God, is to be considered as God’s. This is asserted by our Lord and His apostles. We ought to therefore receive the preacher’s word as the word of God himself” [Pollard, 1959, pp. 188-189]. There is no nobler calling than to serve God as a preacher of the divine word (Logan, Jr., 1986, pp. 24-25).
No one is going to start riots because Purswell did not credit Simeon on the “in…stead [of]” phraseology. That being said, it is a pretty safe bet this is where the language came from, as it sits in the same volume within a few pages from the Packer quote that Purswell uses to back his point. All of this needs better framing by what Packer actually said in his “Introduction: Why Preach” from The Preacher and Preaching.
J.I. Packer on Preaching
Here is Purswell’s quotation of Packer again, with the missing segments in bold and underlined by me to differentiate. This includes the beginning and the segments missing within the ellipses (the “…”) that help provide better context:
Now the Bible makes it appear that God’s standard way of securing and maintaining His person-to-person communication with us His human creatures is through the agency of persons whom He sends to us as His messengers. By being made God’s spokesmen and mouthpieces for His message, the messengers become emblems, models, and embodiments of God’s personal address to each of their hearers, and by their own commitment to the message they bring, they become models also of personal response to that address. Such were the prophets and apostles, and such supremely was Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son, who has been described as being both God for man and man for God. That is the succession in which we preachers today are called to stand (Logan, Jr., 1986, pp. 15-16).
To my brothers and sisters in Christ, within and without SGM: Before we or any preacher get lost in any illusions of positional grandeur, it is of great importance to know what Packer correctly attributes to whom in the above statement regarding one aspect in God’s methodology in preaching:
- Man: human, creature, spokesman, messenger, emblem, model, embodiment
- Jesus Christ: God incarnate, supreme spokesman, supreme messenger, supreme emblem, supreme model, and supreme embodiment via “God for man, and man for God”
I would appeal that we never forget this before we start talking so highly about ourselves. I am also submitting that in the twenty-nine pages of Packer’s “Introduction: Why Preach?” there is an entirely different tone. Packer’s theme is one of service to a flock, and not governance over plebeians.
Statues
Admittedly, this is the only part of this critique where keeping my emotions in check in any type of cool-headed scholarly fashion is difficult, to say the least.
In making his point through analogy, I believe Purswell makes what is arguably one of the poorest choices possible, and then uses such man-glorifying language to buttress this analogy that I am at times bankrupt for words in expressing my revulsion to it:
Just as in the ancient Near East a king, in vast provinces he cannot travel to, would set up huge statues of himself which represented his presence and authority, in the same way God has set up an image of himself to represent and reflect himself. And that is man. And this impacts the way God communicates, as he speaks through divinely appointed messengers. After man was ejected from the Garden, God has communicated to his people by mediating his word through someone. Even the Scriptures were mediated from God through someone (Mahaney & Purswell, 2008, para. 5).
Even re-reading it now months later since that first reading, this passage still takes my breath away, in a bad way.
Let us be very clear on what Scripture and history relates to us in terms of a statue, and in particular a statue of a king. I would first suggest a simple systematic search of verses and sections of scripture that contain the word “statue,” to see primarily what their reputation is in scripture, even if statues in and of themselves may at times not be inherently evil unless they fall under the description of being an idol (worshipped) in the category within the Second Commandment. This link will help facilitate such a study across five different translations of the Bible.
Second, I would look briefly at the examples of history in the context of the statues of leaders. Particularly analyze how the past, present, and future has treated the citizenry whom live(d) in the shadows of the statues of “near east kings” like the Pharaohs, the kings of Babylon, the Kings of Persia, the Mesopotamian kings, and the Sultans, just to name a few. This is aside from the statues and iconography erected to honor the Roman emperors, the Byzantine emperors, the Popes, Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Kim Jong-il, Ho-Chi-Minh, and Ceauşescu. In regard to the statues of leaders and whatever subjective feelings there are on the part of any of us, I think a general consensus can be reached that this analogy is a poor one.
Purswell stated that “God has set up an image of himself to represent and reflect himself.” You bet He has. And I would argue that God’s supreme image of representation and reflection is in Jesus Christ and Him alone. He alone is deserving of this type of language of worship, honor, adoration, affection, and service.
“You are standing in the very stead of God. Oh, that is a frightening thing.” It’s frightening, all right. That is, frightening in a cosmic sense when you try to raise a man’s head to the level of Christ’s crown, let alone trying to raise it above that crown.
When the flock is offered (and chooses) icons and statues of man instead of God, the result is every sort of mayhem and grief that runs the gamut of the imaginable up through the unimaginable.
The only things I want standing in my province to remind me of the presence and authority of my Ruler is an Empty Cross and an Empty Tomb. And when He returns and stands in my province, my face will gladly hit the ground.
–pk
~~~
References
Logan, S. T., Jr. (Ed.). (1986). The preacher and preaching. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed.
Mahaney, C., & Purswell, J. (2008, July 5). The preacher standing in the stead of God [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.sovereigngraceministries.org/Blog/post/The-Preacher-Standing-in-the-Stead-of-God.aspx
Pollard, A. (Ed.). (1959). Let Wisdom Judge. London: Inter-Varsity Press.
instead. (2010). In Dictionary.com unabridged. Retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=instead&ia=luna
PK,
Good job brother, very well stated.
Just as in the ancient Near East a king, in vast provinces he cannot travel to, would set up huge statues of himself which represented his presence and authority
Not only CAN God travel to be with each of us, He HAS. No need for someone to stand in for Him. He is here and guess what, there’s some good news that says He is willing (and dying to- literally) come and live WITHIN US. Why would we want any other substitute from that. It would be like having an idol in our lives. Like having some statu…. hey, wait a minute…. Yep, God is a jealous God and has NO desire for ANYTHING to stand in His way of communing with us intimately. WHO would want to stand in His way? What a terrifying place to be. Terrifying indeed.
Bryan: Thank you.
Stunned: Good thoughts.
–pk
PK -
This is an amazing post.
I feel sort of foolish for admitting this, but I actually was under the impression that the “standing in the very stead of God” phrase was something that had been uttered a couple of times in sermons. That, of course, is alarming enough.
But to think that Purswell had taken the time to research and write an entire apologetic for such a view of leadership is…well…words fail me.
I frequently receive email from folks who want to know just what it is about SGM that is so problematic. Typically, I cite the usual – polity. But now I’m starting to think that at the root of SGM’s polity problems is this thing, this belief that pastors actually are some sort of stand-ins for God Himself.
Scary indeed.
Kris,
THAT is the chicken that informs SGM’s polity egg. All of the apologetics are clearly proof texting, either w/Scripture or “creative quoting”.
PK – great discussion of a topic that seems to shine a light of truth on the foundational delusions that inform many of the decisions and underly the motives of the SGM Pope and his Cardinals. In their twisted and perverse world, they have convinced themselves that what they are doing is right (just like the poor delusional individual that is convinced that a tinfoil hat will protect him from the CIA reading his thoughts).
The logic clearly follows that, “if they are standing in the place of God, then:”
1) Anyone who questions them is questioning God
2) Their motives can only be good
3) Anyone who questions them is ill-motivated
4) They do not have to explain anything to anyone – because they are infallible
Their doctrinal position sounds a great deal like the First Vatican Council’s position on Papal authority and infallibility. (The English language summary of First Vatican can be found at:
http://www.papalencyclicals.ne.....ecum20.htm
The essence of the message is:
Wherefore we teach and declare that,
by divine ordinance,
the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church, and that
this jurisdictional power of the Roman pontiff is both
episcopal and
immediate.
Both clergy and faithful,
of whatever rite and dignity,
both singly and collectively,
are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this
not only in matters concerning faith and morals,
but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the church throughout the world.
———————
Since the Roman pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole church, we likewise teach and declare that
he is the supreme judge of the faithful [52] , and that
in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment [53] .
The sentence of the apostolic see (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone,
nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54] . And so
they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman pontiff.
————————–
Therefore,
faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the christian faith,
to the glory of God our saviour,
for the exaltation of the catholic religion and
for the salvation of the christian people,
with the approval of the sacred council,
we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that
when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA,
that is, when,
in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians,
in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,
he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church,
he possesses,
by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter,
that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals.
Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable.
So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.
————————————-
Substitute SGM for “Catholic” and CJ for “Roman pontiff” and it would seem to explain many of the strange things within the SGM world. Perhaps they could simplify many of their doctrinal statements by just adopting the various Vatican Council rulings by reference.
PK,
I was so glad to receive your email, telling me that you have a post in draft. I was about to leave my desk when I received it, and published your post without reading it.
To those who are fairly new here, that’s how I feel about PK. Complete trust and admiration would be an understatement.
PK- I was so floored with the “stead of God” that I completely missed the implications of the statues.
I fear for the PC grads, and for their congregations. This nail is hammered so hard at the PC, and continually reinforced by CJ and Purswell and who knows who else.
Men simply cannot handle viewing themselves in this way.
PK – Great blog and very revealing.
As you and I are very aware SGM is reforming some of their polity, theology and evaluating how they administer authority within the local church. This will give those boys a lot to think as they continue to work through it.
Quoting SGM – “committed to the primacy of preaching in building the local church” in and of itself places the pastor/teacher/elder above everything else. This is problematic but for me revealing that “Seeking first the kingdom of God and His righteousness” is subservient to the building of the church. Or perhaps they are mistakenly using church and kingdom synonymously which adds another set of issues (for me).
I believe that Jesus said He would build His church and that we are to go and make disciples of the nations and teach them how to live. But that’s just me!!
As you so skillfully laid out the misinterpretation or at least misappropriation of the elevated place of the pastor/teacher (messenger) and “in the stead”; it reads to me that this type of belief system could be the foundational issue leading to their abuse of spiritual authority, lack of approachability, choosing of Elders and church discipline.
It also appears to me that SGM has taken steps back toward the Catholic and/or Anglican model bringing even a greater divide between “clergy and laity” and the laity’s ability to read and understand the scriptures as the Holy Spirit is our teacher. This might also conceptually place the pastor/teacher as standing in the stead of the Holy Spirit in the personal lives of the congregation.
I also struggled with the “ministers and ambassadors” as Christ’s stead with respect to themselves (messengers). If I am not mistaken every believer is a minister of reconciliation and an ambassador of Christ and His kingdom. And the sons of God are led by the Holy Spirit.
The images thing is something else again. Your comments provoked a couple of thoughts about this. Perhaps this is why SGM sings and worships more around the cross (the image) than Christ? Just thinking!!
I am wondering (really strongly suggesting) if SGM shouldn’t commission you and Jim to help them reform their polity document (and methodology) and help them adjust where they are weak in their theology. Just a thought!!
Thanks again for a clear statement of “standing in the stead”
Kris: Thank you for that generous compliment, and ditto on what Jim said in response to you: May 8th, 2010 at 11:48 am e
PDI Past: Excellent thoughts and analysis, even if it makes my heart heavy. It’s like that feeling when the doctor cleans a wound; it hurts awfully, but you know it’s necessary, and probably life-saving.
Jim: Thank you, and once again, undeserved. The confidence is humbling.
–pk
PDI Past — You are reading my mail. Some very intriguing insights!! I was making my comments and didn’t see yours before I posted but we are thinking along the same lines. These things really deserve some considerations by the SGM heads of state!! Irv
Irv said-
I am wondering (really strongly suggesting) if SGM shouldn’t commission you and Jim to help them reform their polity document (and methodology) and help them adjust where they are weak in their theology. Just a thought!!
Umm… I get emails and phone calls from some surprising sources, but I’ll never receive the “what do you think about our polity” call. My personal polity, which I course think is Biblical, is so far removed from the mainstream that I’ll state right now that I’m unqualified. Pk is another story.
The sad truth is that men like Grudem are a phone call away. I’m pretty confident that Wayne wasn’t asked to review Jeff’s statement.
Moses doesn’t ask for a second opinion from those who have a different view.
BTW, I’m completely open to correction on this issue. SGM leaders, please prove me wrong. Please tell me that someone outside of SGM read Purswell’s statement and said, “good job, Jeff.”
PK,
Thanks for that. Hearing CJ use the “very stead of God” quote was alarming enough. Now to find where it came from…OMGoodness. Haven’t those men read Hebrews? Thank you for clarifying it all – well done. (Hope you and your wife are doing better!)
Question: is this belief in a pastor’s position why they see the need to constantly teach on authority and the sinful state? More than on grace, or the Jesus being our Mediator, or the Holy Spirit enlightening the Word to us? Is it because they believe pastors are as Christ to us? Am I reading you correctly? If I am, this explains much.
PDI past- excellent.
PK- excellent. Thank you.
I always thought from Hebrews 1 that “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” ( or image).
Now I find out ”in the same way God has set up an image of himself to represent and reflect himself. And that is man.”
This goes well with Kris’ post at Survivors about the changing doctrines from the front. Strange how God keeps switching his opinions through his representatives. God’s mouthpieces demonstrate a God who says one thing or man is right or gifted today, and then tomorrow is wrong or not gifted. Hum…..maybe they are not always speaking for God after all?
Complete and total barf, eh?
The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals needs to deal with this. Seriously. Where are the big dogs? You need to intervene guys.
One more comment…
LOOK AT THIS!!!!!
“After man was ejected from the Garden, God has communicated to his people by mediating his word through someone. Even the Scriptures were mediated from God through someone (Mahaney & Purswell, 2008, para. 5).”
They are by implication putting preachers on the SAME LEVEL as CANON!!! They are subtly- or not so subtly- putting SGM pastors on the same level of inspiration as the men who spoke scripture.
How is this not blasphemy and heresy?
Jim -
Even though Grudem and others are a phone call away, they don’t have a history with PDI/SGM. PK has had 20 years of PDI/SGM experience. It is humorous to me that PK received what he is sharing with us from the very books and writers recommended by the leaders of SGM.
I am wondering if the pastors and elders are reading or have read these books themselves? Just a thought!!
Irv: Excellent thoughts and thank you for the compliment.
In reviewing their own polity, there just seems to be an unwillingness on the part of SGM to ever entertain even slightly breaching the leader/sheep divide, from my perspective. Talking about polity review and change is one thing, but visible fruit-bearing steps in doing it is another.
I have personally encountered local leaders willing to talk about these issues, which is good…it is truly a gift and to their credit. However, the ones above them are, from my perspective, only talking amongst themselves about it. The secular parallel that springs to mind is the government voting to give itself a raise, and we are supposed to take their word for it-based on their squeaky clean history in these matters-that they thought it through long and hard and consulted everyone from Dan to Beersheba on the matter.
Where’s the fruit? Even the tiniest berry?
This is an understatement, but SGM needs to get out in front of this and talk to their sheep/churches about everything, let alone polity, missiology, you name it. The whole polity and such that is designed by leaders for leaders to elevate leaders while protecting and feeding leaders has left the flock in the cold, rain, tornadoes, and every imaginable hell. If SGM exists to serve pastors, then be honest about it and become a para-church ministry for pastors, and stop this Fisher-Price playing-church nonsense that uses the flock as guinea pigs for the next great Big Thing to fall through the feed chute.
Far from being a rabid congregationalist, I just simply think there needs to be genuine care for the sheep-as in ALL of them and not just the ones who don’t annoy us or don’t fall in line with our man-instead-of-God lifestyle. What I would give for a cognizance of the church not being tiered, caste-filled, divided, etc.; the flock HAS to have recourse in certain important matters.
How hard is it to see that? How many times do they have to orbit the mulberry bush? How many times do we have to have chicken-egg arguments over polity informing theology or the reverse?
Why do I put myself and my family through this?
Apologies for the tangent…like any flock member, at times I have to speak/write out loud when crying out to God. Everyone’s patience is not only appreciated, but cherished.
I want Christ.
–jw
Can someone answer my earlier question, please?
Question: is this belief in a pastor’s position why they see the need to constantly teach on authority and the sinful state? More than on grace, or the Jesus being our Mediator, or the Holy Spirit enlightening the Word to us? Is it because they believe pastors are as Christ to us? Am I reading you correctly?
Thanks. Canary
Canary:
You are welcome!
In regard to May 8th, 2010 at 12:43 pm e , you are absolutely reading me correctly.
–pk
5yearsinPDI:
In re: May 8th, 2010 at 1:14 pm e , I hear ya, loud and clear. The whole post/transcripted section is chock-full of man instead of God.
–pk
Canary:
In re: May 8th, 2010 at 1:54 pm e
Apologies, I was in the middle of a long post and certainly didn’t overlook your questions, which were good. And I repeat, you are absolutely reading me correctly.
–pk
Okay, let me rephrase the question, because I’m having trouble believing that these men have strayed so far into error. Do these pastors believe//get taught that they are the mediator between man and God, instead of the Holy Spirit? “For there is only one God, and only one Mediator between God and men, the Man Jesus Christ” (1 Tim. 2:5). Please be patient with me – I am totally dumbfounded.
Canary:
It may be a matter of semantics, and I promise I am not wimping out on your question by saying this: Purswell stated outright that men/preachers mediate God’s word to God’s people (Mahaney & Purswell, 2008, para. 5).
The direct quote is “After man was ejected from the Garden, God has communicated to his people by mediating his word through someone. Even the Scriptures were mediated from God through someone.” [emphasis added]
Where Purswell extends that role of mediation from mediation of God’s word perhaps into other realms, I simply don’t know. But PDIPast’s blistering comment at May 8th, 2010 at 11:49 am e is certainly a warranted response with disturbing parallels. Once again, SGM needs to get out in front of this.
–pk
No apologies necessary, PK. I am absolutely, utterly, totally dumbfounded. It is GREAT ERROR for a man to believe that he is mediator between believers and God. It goes against all scripture I have read on the matter. HOW CAN THIS BE? I am talking with my husband right now about it, so I’ll take my angst over to him and spare all the readers here. This is seriously agitating to my soul.
Let’s be clear-they are saying that God has always used spokespersons, and that a preacher in the pulpit is similar.
They are not saying they are mediators.
Incorrect view of their role, IMO, yes. Heresy-no way.
Okay Jim. No heresy. So they do understand that our Mediator is Christ. They are just taking on more authority than God intends for them to have. I think they are walking a really fine line. My husband was saying that, as pastors believe they are responsible for so much, they cannot delegate as easily, but feel they must be in charge of everything (even new members’ dinners). Of course this can lead to poor caring of the saints, and many gifts in the Body lie dorment.
“God’s standard way of securing and maintaining His person-to-person communication with us His human creatures is through the agency of persons whom He sends to us as His messengers….Such were the prophets and apostles, and such supremely was Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son….That is the succession in which we preachers today are called to stand.”
I just don’t see this in the New Testament. Communicating God’s heart, words, etc. are not the sole ownership of pastors.
Hi, folks. I’ve never weighed in here before. Been reading all along and appreciate the “necessary evil” that this site is. Thank you, Jim, for your courage. When I first heard sgm leadership speak of standing in the stead of God (a couple years back, I think), I immediately thought of the Roman Catholic title “Vicar of Christ.” Vicar= vicarious= instead of = in the stead of. I’m not bashing RC’s. I have Christian friends who are RC’s. I’m not bashing Protestant churches who use the title “vicar” either (such as Episcopalians and others, too, I think). But when a leader in an ostensibly Reformed church regularly harps on his authority, superiority and vaunted position over God’s people by saying he’s “standing in the very stead of God” during “the preaching event,” I get kind of, well, zealous. Anyway, I found this letter by Martin Luther to Pope Leo X. Man, did Luther (flawed though he was) have some serious chutzpa and courageous zeal! If you don’t have time to read it all, you can scroll down to section 18 (the numbers are to the right side of the letter). Is it just me, or does Luther’s letter (at least at points) sort of fit in with this discussion?
http://www.bartleby.com/36/6/1.html
Therefore, Leo, my Father, beware of listening to those sirens who make you out to be not simply a man, but partly a god, so that you can command and require whatever you will. It will not happen so, nor will you prevail. You are the servant of servants, and more than any other man, in a most pitiable and perilous position. Let not those men deceive you who pretend that you are lord of the world; who will not allow any one to be a Christian without your authority; who babble of your having power over heaven, hell, and purgatory. These men are your enemies and are seeking your soul to destroy it, as Isaiah says, “My people, they that call thee blessed are themselves deceiving thee.” They are in error who raise you above councils and the universal Church; they are in error who attribute to you alone the right of interpreting Scripture. All these men are seeking to set up their own impieties in the Church under your name, and alas! Satan has gained much through them in the time of your predecessors.
Wow, hard to believe this was written by a man over 400 years ago. Welcome to the blog, bennet. Very interesting read. I read some of Martin Luther’s works about grace after leaving pdi, just to understand what it was all about!
Jim & Canary:
I’ll quote Canary in regard to exactly how feel:
“Okay Jim. No heresy. So they do understand that our Mediator is Christ. They are just taking on more authority than God intends for them to have. I think they are walking a really fine line.”
–pk
PS – Thanks Jim for once again helping me from going off the deep end in my comment spontaneity (seriously). I really need to stick to just writing the “scholarly” works…lol.
bennet:
Nice to meet you, and great link.
–pk
Thanks for the welcome, Canary and PK.
“God’s standard way of securing and maintaining His person-to-person communication with us His human creatures is through the agency of persons whom He sends to us as His messengers….Such were the prophets and apostles, and such supremely was Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son………….*****That is the succession in which we preachers today are called to stand.”****
Sorry guys, but I will have to respectfully disagree that this is not heretical, unless this particular quote was later modified or clarified when presented.
Look at what this paragraph says…pretend you are back in high school English class.
God’s communication through prophets, apostles and Jesus is canon. It is inerrant, infallible, perfect scripture.
Do preachers stand in that succession? The succession of all the human instruments who gave us canon? Moses, Samuel, David, Isaiah, the minor prophets, the apostolic epistles, the gospels?
Or do they stand in another, distinctly different succession, one that maybe Grudem would call inspired prophetic speech that is non canonical and non authoritative and subject to error? Anointed maybe, used by God as they expound scripture, yes, but NOT in the succession of the canonical writers.
Maybe this is just real bad teaching and communication skills. Maybe. Maybe they don’t mean this quote the way it sounds. Maybe. But this quote, as it stands, is heretical.
( note…quote from JI Packer, one of the men who in Lloyd- Jones time joined together with men who denied the virgin birth, miracles, atonement, and resurection, in “ecumenical unity”, calling them fellow Christians. Read Iain Murray’s ” Evangelicalism Divided” for a heartbreaking account of how Packer and Stott among others compromised the most fundamental basics of the true Christian faith for the sake of ecumenical unity. And yeah, he did write some well regarded books).
I should have said at first: Thanks, Protestant Knight, for your post. I appreciate the work you put into it.
Wow. PK — you do terrific work.
I think that if they really believe they’re “standing in the very stead of God”, they’d be filled with fear and trembling, and the result would be an attitude of absolute love and servanthood — if, indeed, anybody would really want that job. Who could possibly be good enough? Who could possibly think they could “get it right” every time — especially as they dispense advice and counseling on every jot and tittle of a parishioner’s life? If they have any sense at all, they’ll run as far as possible from that teaching — and as suggested above, hire PK and Jim to straighten out the mess they’ve gotten into.
Happy Mother’s Day, from one who isn’t great at standing in the very stead of the Proverbs 31 woman, but blessed by His grace!
PK,
Amazing post — you are a gifted scholar! Thankyou a zillion for so clearly bringing this significant issue (sgms declaration of pastors standing in the very stead of God) to light. Thankyou for all the work and the color coding so we can clearly compare full contexts of the various authors. Purswell certainly seeks to build a case for an sgm doctrine of pastors as governor/rulers over the people of God.
So true, your words: “(standing in the stead of God) is both a symptom and description of MUCH DEEPER ISSUES regarding the view sgm leadership has of themselves and the flock in relationship to God.” —Their self-exalting authoritative posture begs the question: WHY???? Why so important to establish their rulership ?? Why so much emphasis on pastors (oops, now pastors and apsotles are beginning to be called elders) ruling and congregants submitting?? Why edging out the Voice of Holy Spirit as He leads,guides,counsels,teaches,instructs,gives discernment to all Believers???
This all goes beyoooooooond polity—’something’ at the very core of sgm is pulling eyes and hearts away from our Risen Savior Redeemer——-why??????????
Saints, we must remembering Whom we are worshipping and submitting our lives to:
I Timothy 6: 15-16 “…(our) Lord Jesus Christ is the blessed and only sovereign, the King of kings, and the Lord of lords, who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light,whom no man has seen or can see. To HIM be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.”
5yearsinPDI: In re: May 8th, 2010 at 10:37 pm, I absolutely understand the position you took in respectful disagreement, and I still respect you as well. I will go so far as to say that in my opinion it is heterodox (that is heterodox in its modern usage; i.e., it’s on the edge), which is still probably too weak a description for you, but here’s the point: Thinking Christians on this blog have opinions regarding this position SGM proliferates, opinions that range from it being questionable at best to heretical at worst.
Isn’t this worth SGM re-examining statements like this and reverse-engineering it into the bad methodology and/or theology it comes from? Good thoughts and reasoning in your post, 5yearsinPDI, and thank you. It is good for any of us to disagree agreeably; but I think we both understand the harrowing implications of man-instead-of-God practices and are surely in agreement on that.
bennet: In re: May 8th, 2010 at 10:51 pm, thank you, and never worry about me looking for accolades on any of this. While exposing sin and questionable statements always brings a heavy heart, it is a pleasure to write and voice concerns in ongoing dialogue with other Christians.
nickname: Thank you!
Waters: Thank you, and you are welcome! It certainly does go beyond polity, as this man-centered view informs their polity…but I get your point, and you are right.
–pk
Pk, forgetting what they said here, which might be really poor teaching skills…..
They will admit, won’t they, that their preaching even under an anointing is still subject to error and not canonical, right? It is not to be treated as infallible, right? In which case yes, I’ll conceed no heresy is intended.
I knew people that treated the pastors as essentially canon, sorry to say. Scary.
At the very least they need to clean up their teaching so as not to be seriously misunderstood. Those who teach need to work on precise clarity, and go back and modify things that were poorly communicated.
Thanks.
I think you have hit upon something here, 5yiPDI:
The problem is how some treat the pastors’ words as canon; it was almost as if there was no need to check any/every thing by scripture.
And I agree 100% with you on this:
“At the very least they need to clean up their teaching so as not to be seriously misunderstood. Those who teach need to work on precise clarity, and go back and modify things that were poorly communicated.”
Ditto. What you said.
–pk
So true, your words: “(standing in the stead of God) is both a symptom and description of MUCH DEEPER ISSUES regarding the view sgm leadership has of themselves and the flock in relationship to God.” —Their self-exalting authoritative posture begs the question: WHY???? Why so important to establish their rulership ?? Why so much emphasis on pastors (oops, now pastors and apsotles are beginning to be called elders) ruling and congregants submitting?? Why edging out the Voice of Holy Spirit as He leads,guides,counsels,teaches,instructs,gives discernment to all Believers???
This all goes beyoooooooond polity—’something’ at the very core of sgm is pulling eyes and hearts away from our Risen Savior Redeemer——-why??????????
Waters, good question. I ask “why?” as well. If the leadership was worthy of being followed, people would follow without being told to. That’s how Jesus did it.
PK,
I love words. Heterodox – on the edge. That’s the fine line I see in their authority teaching. Thanks for the education!
The language which PK dissects above is a an interesting example of a couple of common interpretive errors. One relates to the translation of Scripture, and how an inaccurate translation can create a false idea. The other, rather than “Scripture interpreting Scripture”, is “Scripture distorting Scripture”, which can happen when two Biblical concepts are mixed in a way which, rather than clarifying them, actually damages or distorts both ideas.
In God’s stead, or something like it, may be familiar Biblical language for some. It comes from the KJV translation of 2 Cor 5:20, where an important truth is taught, though the translation is slightly misleading.
18And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 19To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 20Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.
There is a powerful truth here: that God saves men by means of the preached Gospel, that when that Gospel is preached by men, it is as if God himself is speaking to sinners, calling them to repentance and faith, that when the Gospel is proclaimed, those preaching it stand “in Christ’s stead” as His ambassadors.
Even without addressing the translation of “in Christ’s stead” one fact should be immediately obvious. This is not telling us about pastoral office and authority within the church. It is telling us that when we proclaim the Gospel, we carry an official word from God, and when we entreat men to believe, beseech them to repent, we do so as the ambassadors of Christ, as His delegates (as it is elsewhere translated), as His representatives, carrying His message to the world. Why is this important? Paul uses this language in one other place, in the context of seeking the prayers of the people of God, that he may be bold in the proclamation of the Gospel, as Christ’s ambassador (Eph 6:19-20). How is it that the church could carry the message of Christ boldly before even the mightiest rulers of the earth, through suffering and up to death itself? Because they were ambassadors not of a king, but of the King of kings! This is part of a vein of teaching that runs throughout the NT.
But what about in Christ’s stead? The words so translated are the simple construction huper Xristou. This same phrase appears earlier in the verse, and is translated ”for Christ”, as in ”ambassadors for Christ.” Why, in this latter place, the KJV translators chose much stronger language is unclear, except that they probably were carried away by the context. Later translations change this to “we beseech you in Christ’s behalf” – a much milder construction, and not so apt to mislead.
But there is a second error, as I mentioned at the beginning. SGM introduces the concept of mediation into the mix. Obviously, mediation is also a Biblical concept, in fact, it is arguably the most vital Bible doctrine of all, having to do with our sin and guilt, and our need of a perfect substitute to shield us from the righteous judgment of God, to stand between us and intercede. But here’s the problem-
There is an enormous difference in standing between God and man as an ambassador, and standing between God and man as a mediator.
I am not saying that I think they truly believe that preachers are mediators in the same why Christ is. However, I’m not the one who appropriated the language of mediation and intermixed it with the concept of representation. Big errors begin as little errors, and grow over time. No one invented the Pope, or the veneration of saints, or the worship of Mary, or the mass as a sacrifice – they each started as a bad emphasis, a heterodox leaning, and grew over time into fully-formed heresies.
Using mediation when you mean representation is certainly a poor choice of words. But it is also more than that - it is a carelessness with one of the single most important theological concepts in the entire Bible. Not an action that commends someone as a expert teacher of the Word.
Pastors Job Description
Ephesians 4:11-13 (English Standard Version)
11And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.
I see nothing in Eph. 4 that says “rule over, or in the very stead of God”
Rather I see countless passages about the work of The Holy Spirit in the lives of the saints, directing and teaching.
It is a very scary thing to believe that YOU, and YOU, alone hear from God for YOUR people.
That Bad Dog,
Very well said, as usual. I know that they don’t see themselves as mediators in the true sense of the word, which is why I’m saying “not heretical”.
But, it was downright foolish for SGM’s resident “theologian” to use the word “mediated”, and it was foolish of CJ to draw attention to it.
PK, meet That Bad Dog. That Bad Dog, meet PK.
The two of you should have a blog with close to 40,000 readers per month.
This one’s available
Well the way that the SR pastor of my local church stood in the stead of God, was to beat the sheep, judge the weak, lie, and cover up obvious personal errors…whoops then blame it all on Brent.
I think I’d rather listen to Leno…..
Charlie,
Brent’s become a popular whipping boy in the Southeast.
My response is, “you’re a grown man, right? Ohhhhh…. he was ‘the boss’ and you were protecting your job. Doesn’t Scripture call ‘men’ like you hirelings?”
That’s the ticket-blame someone/anyone but the man in the mirror.
Pauls post 3:43
A HEARTY AMEN !!!!
That Bad Dog:
Great post at May 9th, 2010 at 3:40 pm e .
Thanks,
–pk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W004ZKvz86A
PK in particular and others participating in this discussion; wow! PK, you are brilliant.
Sorry I have nothing to add but blubbering admiration.
“Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed, shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.” [emphasis added]
1 Peter 5:1-4, NASB
Jim:
Good video link at May 9th, 2010 at 7:14 pm. That one cracked me up.
Paul:
Great comment at May 9th, 2010 at 3:43 pm.
–pk
I believe that Jesus said He would build His church and that we are to go and make disciples of the nations and teach them how to live. But that’s just me!!
Irv… I so agree with this statement.
From the research I have done on CJ…. He was formerly Catholic? Right…..
I’m sure this is where many of their beliefs do come from!
I will continue to pray that they see their error and realize it is about building the “kingdom of God” not building the local church up!
I wrote and asked about a church plant in my local error – I was told by one of the Pastor’s they would never plant a church in my rural area – they only plant in large cities? Is that because their is more money there? Just my thoughts….
Good word from all of you.
“PK in particular and others participating in this discussion; wow! PK, you are brilliant.
Sorry I have nothing to add but blubbering admiration.”
DB, ditto that!
Wow!
Bruised,
Unfortunately, SGM has a pattern of planting in upscale, church saturated suburbs. They could learn much from Tim Keller and Mark Driscoll in regards to the importance of urban planting.
oh mercy.. forgive my typo’s…… shouldn’t type in a hurry…
I asked about a church plant in my local area! lol
hope you all follow me when my brain is out to lunch!
Maybe that is why they would never plant a church in hickville! LOL
to funny
My local church agrees much with Mark Driscoll…. I’m still trying to read and learn more of what he believes……..
It should be noted SGM believes in a continuing apostolic gift: “present-day apostles plant and build local churches for the sanctification of the believer, the expansion of the mission, and the exaltation of God.” For more on why they use the term, what it means and does not mean, see the SGM booklet by Harvey titled Polity: Serving and Leading the Local Church (2004), pages 17-26, 49-50.
This is fine if you believe the local church is only for the BELIEVER…..
But – this is why they are not about MISSIONS…………..which can cause the inward cult like behavior.
Ha! Great link, Jim.
This has nothing to do with the topic but has to do with Packer. I have enjoyed his books and they really make me dig deeper. However, when men like Packer (and others) are constantly quoted as the authority on a topic, it concerns me. The Word is my authority.
Nevertheless, For transparancy reasons, I believe Packer should make it known that he is complimentarian YET his wife is an egalitarian and does not even attend the same church he does. How do I know? A very good friend of mine attended the same church asPacker for years. I doubt this is something that CJ would approve of yet Packer is a big name and can get by without this hurting his career in certain circles.
The more I read about Sovereign Grace Ministries, including actual quotes and listening to the words of CJ Mahaney, the more amazed I am by the outright scriptural sloppiness.
This is disturbing stuff.
Patiricia,
I find it not only disturbing but confusing. For men who pride themselves on their purity of doctrine, how could they be this sloppy about it? Fine line, I say again. Fine line. Or “heterodox”, as PK taught. Love those big words!
Yes, Canary.
Irv said something interesting: “Perhaps this is why SGM sings and worships more around the cross (the image) than Christ? Just thinking!!”
That’s quite insightful.
How often do the pastors actually refer to Christ in their sermons – in terms of referring to Him directly?
From the quotes and sermons I’ve listened to, it sounds like many of the pastors place themselves (and/or their co-pastors) on a high pedestal. Their focus is very much on the local church body being close-knit, which on the surface doesn’t seem problematic, except for the fact that the importance of church “family” gets more air time than focus on a personal relationship with our Savior and Lord. For a cult to function, the people must be tightly knit together and Christ on the outer ring of the camp.
Do the pastors commonly refer to Christ as our Savior and Lord? How often is Christ’s resurrection brought up? Is His coming return ever a focus?
How is Christ usually brought up? Like Irv, I’ve heard “the Cross” mentioned, but rarely do I hear Christ brought in.
Am I off the mark? I have to wonder what an Easter Sunday service is like.
Patricia,
My husband’s reason for having us leave PDI in 1997 was that we rarely heard the name of Jesus preached. Is that still happening today?
Patricia said — “Their focus is very much on the local church body being close-knit, which on the surface doesn’t seem problematic, except for the fact that the importance of church “family” gets more air time than focus on a personal relationship with our Savior and Lord. ”
It facinates me that you said that! I was talking to a friend today whose church has just been taken over, uh, adopted, by Harvest Bible Chapel — the James McDonald group. She said something eerily similar to your words — that the sermons are now “always about life groups — when they USED to be about Jesus.”
This focus may also be one of the reasons “families of churches” like SGM and Harvest BC don’t include poor neighborhoods. Poor people are always working – extra jobs, 2nd shift jobs, service industry jobs — and they don’t have evenings available for caregroups, etc., or the extra money for gasoline to get there. They’d love to have opportunities for more fellowship, but they cannot afford such luxury. Going to church with “poor” people for the first time in my life has opened my eyes to a whole different way of “doing church.” They need Jesus, pure and simple. Many of us have no idea how easy our Christian lives have been.
In spite of going for years to caregroup, cell group, homegroup or whatever the fashionable term was at the time, the deepest fellowship I’ve known was created when praying with folks I didn’t even know very well — people who sat in small circles, held hands, and prayed together at plain old-fashioned 45-minute Wednesday night prayer meetings in a denominational church. Praying together bonds hearts in a unique and powerful way.
Jim, you posted a great video above. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W004ZKvz86A) I don’t understand how people can look at this and not think it’s crazy.
Marta said, “I believe Packer should make it known that he is complimentarian YET his wife is an egalitarian and does not even attend the same church he does. How do I know? A very good friend of mine attended the same church asPacker for years. I doubt this is something that CJ would approve of”.
Marta, Packer would NOT be allowed to be an active member of an SGM church in that case.
Nickname:
I agree about the area that they plant their churches.
I had a very dear friend leave the church because her heart was for missions and was told that area is not a part of their focus……………..hmmmm.
I just pray that a few of the issues I see and you see are heard and that God touches and changes their hearts toward those that aren’t a part of SGM but still a part of the CHURCH…. All of you are a part of MY CHURCH and the SG members are still a part of MY CHURCH…… the church consists of ALL OF US serving together for the good of HIS KINGDOM PURPOSES…..
Great to finally be figuring that out. For a year now I have beat myself up thinking I’m just not a good submissive christian. I failed.
I did fail in many ways and allowed sin in to my life: But by the grace and mercy of our Lord and Savior.. He has forgiven me and I’m still his child and loved……
Thanks gang,
“I was talking to a friend today whose church has just been taken over, uh, adopted, by Harvest Bible Chapel — the James McDonald group. She said something eerily similar to your words — that the sermons are now “always about life groups — when they USED to be about Jesus.”
James McDonald has been working hard to pattern his ministry after SGM. Too bad for him…he should have been reading the blogs. It’s hard to tell any difference between the two these days.
He’s going to find his ministry the topic of a blog one day, if he hasn’t already.
Stunned & Marta -
Stunned writes “Marta, Packer would NOT be allowed to be an active member of an SGM church in that case.”
Very interesting information and comments ladies. I can’t remember right off hand but at one time we were encouraged to take books out of our ‘book store’ (it was a table for us:)) of writers who had fallen or something from their past come into the light that didn’t line up with “our” core values.
Stunned – I think Packer would be allowed to be an active member (which you may be correct) in SGM but I don’t think he would qualify to lead a care group or qualify to teach in the church.
You provoke another thought however, I wonder if his books are allowed to be sold in their book stores? Just curious!
Perhaps 30years or someone else in SGM might shed some light on this. An inquiring mind would like to know:)
I had a friend who was in our SGM church from nearly the beginning. She was a gorgeous, intellingent, godly… basically kick butt Christian single woman. She knew a wonderful, humble, gentle, godly single man. (He was a sweetie. We all liked him very much.)
They knew each other for years and were very drawn to one another. They both loved the Lord with all their hearts. For a long time thye considered getting married. But he had no desire to leave the Catholic church and she had no desire to leave her SGM church. Whenever they prayed about where they each belonged, she believed that she belonged in SGM and he in his parrish.
What to do? What to do?
They broke things off for quite a long time. But after more years of prayer, they knew they were meant to be married. She was in distress over this. She was torn between what she believed God was calling them to (marry yet each continue at their seperate churches) and SGM’s teaching on worshipping together as a family. (Though ya can’t really find that anywhere in the bible.) She did what any good SGM woman would do. She went to her pastors. (Actually, I believe they both went.) They wanted to know if she coudl still continue as a member of the church, if after they married her husband remained as a member of his church.
Our wonderful pastors told her that of course she could still be a member of our SGM church. They loved her. This was her family. His church was his family. And there was no reason we couldn’t mix the two families, having each be members of the church God called them to seperately.
Hurrahs! Hoorays! Let church bells ring!
And they did.
The couple were finally one. Finally wed and finally happily married.
Then it happened.
A few months passed and a new directive came down from on high.
She recieved a communication stating that she was no longer a member of the church. She could still come, but she was no longer considered a member of our church. For she was married to a man who was a member of another church.
She was crushed. Just a few short months before that they had told her differently. But somehow, (I assume) God woke up in the middle of hte night and changed His mind. God would NEVER want a woman to worship at a different church than her husband. There must be something sinful about it.
Do you know what they did?
Her husband dried her tears. He held her and comforted her. He encouraged her to forgive the stupid basta… I mean, to forgive the men who had made her feel so betrayed. Who had said one thing then did another. He encouraged her to stay there if that was what she wanted.
And you know what she did?
She stayed.
They went on to have many children. He kept going to his church. She kept going to hers. He also often joined her at homegroup/caregroup. (Like I said, many of us loved him. And her. And their kids.) He taught in children’s ministry at SGM once a month, since that is where his kids were.
Did it all work out? Sort of. If my memory serves correctly, she eventually left the church. He continued coming to teach in children’s ministry for a while. (It was sort of funny/ironic, I have to admit.)
It was a waste that a man made rule caused so much pain to such nice people.
So, yes Irv, she could still come. But she could not be a member (though she was there for more than 15 years). He (who was not a member) was even allowed to serve in children’s ministry. But could she be considered a member? No. That is the same of many people who came to my SGM church but who had a spouse in another church. You could not be a member. My spouse was not a member of any church, so though I came alone, I was allowed to be a member. However, none of us would have been considered worthy of what they acted like was the more important ministry roles.
Stunned -
WOW! (not a positive wow) Color me enlightened but overly surprised!! Thanks for sharing this story.
This is the destruction that comes to people when the local church (or denomination) is “THE KINGDOM” and not part of the kingdom of God. I didn’t really feel the loving kindness, graciousness and compassion of the Lord expressed from the leaders to this couple in your story. Did I miss something?
Stunned, that story is so heart-breaking. I hope the couple you spoke of are walking in happiness and joy of the Lord. I hope they are not part of the walking wounded.
Sweet, but two people in love and both under a different pope. One pope wears a zuchetto, while the other is bald.
Better to be married and both in a church congregation Biblically solid under the headship of Christ who sits at the right hand of His Father in Heaven.
Anyone ever wonder how CJ’s former friend Tomczak’s adherence to Catholic “charisma” might inform his views on heirarchy today?
Quote from Wikipedia:
“The organization of over 70 member churches grew out of the charismatic renewal of the 1970s under the leadership of Catholic Charismatic Larry Tomczak and has its roots in the Gathering of Believers (now Covenant Life Church) in Maryland.[6] It was formally established in 1982.[7] CJ Mahaney and Larry Tomczak were the co-founders of both Covenant Life Church and People of Destiny.[8] Both Mahaney and Tomczak withdrew from the Charismatic Catholic scene shortly before the creation of Covenant Life Church.[9]”
Stunned – meant to say “enlightened but not overly surprised” –
Yes Patricia… I have thought that OFTEN!
My husband and I were talking about the role of pastors, and how some assume more authority than God grants them. He would post himself but he is incredibly busy with his business. So I will try to put down what he said: back in the NT days, a leader was someone different than we see today. The leader had to raise up his “flock” rather quickly, teaching them all he knew and helping them move in their gifts. It was imperative that the Body was doing the work of the Lord (not just a few people in leadership). It was probably the sole purpose of this leader’s life – to raise up the believers to maturity so they could do the work of the Lord. Why so imperative?
Because leaders in that day didn’t stick around long. They were the ones executed first for their beliefs. Their necks were on the line. They didn’t know when it could happen, when a Roman soldier or such would bang down their doors and take them away for leading others to Jesus. Leaders had to be sure that the believers they were leading could continue on without them!
I know this still happens in places around the world today. I wonder what leaders here would be like if they knew they might die tomorrow for the faith? Would they have more compassion for the sheep? Would they put all their time into raising other leaders, or would they teach the whole Body to mature in Christ so THEY could continue preaching the Gospel?
My husband and I had a compelling conversation about this. As a Pastor, knowing you might die any day because you are leading others to Jesus, well, reality would be a bit different. Your heart would be to give everything to those folks you lead (not just potential leaders who show proper submission to you!). There would be more compassion, love, and urgency in the way you serve. There probably wouldn’t be much thought given to who is in charge but many charges given to love the Body. They wouldn’t worry so much about the money purse (Jesus gave his to a thief!), but more teachings about storing your treasures in heaven, for you might be seeing that wonderous place sooner than later!
Something to think on when we are talking about “Man Instead of God”.
A church fails (spiritually), because leadership fails (spiritually). In the Bible, the flock of God suffers because of the unqualified leaders. Note, there are:
[1] “Stupid shepherds (Jer. 10:21),” – “For the shepherds have become stupid and have not sought the LORD; therefore they have not prospered, and all their flock is scattered.” Note: when pastors/leaders stop seeking God is when they will scatter the flock. Godly pastors humbly seek God for council and not insist in his own leadership position.
[2] “Destructive shepherds (Jer. 23:1),” – ” ‘Woe to the shephered who are destroying and scattering the sheep of My pasture!’ declares the LORD.” I have seen believers scatter from their churches because the shepherd insists his own way without regard for the sheep. How tragic this is!
[3] “Greedy, abusive, and uncaring shepherds (Ezek. 34:1-4).” – “Then the word of the LORD came to me saying, ‘Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel… Woe, shepherds… who have been feeding themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the flock?… Those who are sickly you have not strengthend, the diseased you have not healed, the broken you have not bound up, the scattered you have not brought back, nor have you sought for the lost; for with force and with severity you have dominated them. They were scattered for lack of a shepherd, and they became food for every beast of the field and were scattered.” What a shocking passage! As a pastor this passage frightens me and it shows how much God wants His flock fed, nurtured, loved, cared, and protected! But we as pastors have many times failed our solemn task!
The common result is that sheep are scattered and hurt. So are we lost, then? No. God promises, not a better human shepherd (although he does – Jer. 3:15), but He Himself will be our Shepherd through His Son (Ezek. 24:15-16, 23). It is our “good Shepherd” (Jn. 10:11) who through His death & resurrection will heal us, feed us, and protect us. Therefore, all human shepherds (pastors) are under-shepherds of the “Chief Shepherd (1Pet. 5:4).” We pastors work under the Chief Shepherd who has shown us how to tend His flock. Hence all pastoral work must lead His flock to the Good Shepherd.
AW Tozer said, “No one can lead another farther than he himself has gone. For many ministers this explains their failure to lead. They simply do not know where to go.”
Canary and Irv and others, lookie here!
This is a fun little read indicating that Tomcziak and Mahaney birthed People of Destiny and Sovereign Grace in Gaithersburg where, interestingly enough, the Catholic Charismatic Mother of God Community was thriving at the time.
Anyone here know more about this? This is downright creepy.
Quote from a Washington Times article following the Mother of God Community: “The group put its principles into a covenant to which committed members would subscribe.
Like other communities of its kind, Mother of God evolved toward a structure often referred to as “headship and submission” or as “shepherding and discipleship.”
Each new member who joined would be assigned a “head” or “shepherd” or “buddy.” That head, in turn, would report to another head up through a chain of command that terminated with a small cadre at the top.”
Oh wow! http://www.washingtonpost.com/...../mgod3.htm
What is described as being part of the Mother of God Community fits uncomfortably close to what is happening with Sovereign Grace Ministries! Please read the above link and see for yourself.
This is where I stumbled upon all of this:
http://skellmeyer.blogspot.com.....tight.html
Quote: “By 1982 he (Tomzcak) had left the Catholic Church to co-found Sovereign Grace Ministry. By sheer coincidence, PDI and Sovereign Grace Ministry were based in Gaithersburg, Md. — where the Mother of God Community was and is based.
And, again by happy coincidence, the Word of God community which took its philosophy in part from Tomzcak’s theology, was the progenitor for the Mother of God community. All of these Tomczak-inspired communities subscribed to the same “headship” principle of “shepherding”, a principle that in the 1980′s caused many Catholic bishops to become wary.
As it happens, the Mother of God community’s “shepherding” technique was so heavy-handed that, despite initially receiving the approbation of the local bishop, it eventually invited a Washington Post series on the “Catholic cult” aspects of the community.”
Doulos,
What a post for “man instead of God”…..
I pray to be lead by the “good shepherd!
Is it just me or does the description of this Catholic Charismatic group sound similar to descriptions of some Sovereign Grace churches?
http://www.motherofgod.net/pages/gcg.htm
I don’t mean to be redundant, but this is really wierd:
Wikipedia claims that both Tomzcak and Mahaney had associations with the Catholic Charismatic movement.
At the time they form PDI and SGM in Gaithersburg, there is a Catholic Charismatic church in Gaithersburg called the Mother of God Community – which has similar beliefs and leadership styles to that of Tomzcak and Mahaney.
The Washington Times produces a series of reports on the Mother of God Community. As you read the reports, you find many similarities between SGM structure and that of MGC.
http://skellmeyer.blogspot.com.....tight.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...../mgod3.htm
What’s up with this?
Hi Irv:
Your question: “You provoke another thought however, I wonder if his [J.I. Packer] books are allowed to be sold in their book stores? Just curious! ”
Having run the book table for some ten years or so in SGM over two churches, I can say that we have consistently carried his “Concise Theology” and “Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God” titles, plus if anyone wanted to order any of Packer’s books, I certainly did that or would point them to a source to do so.
–pk
Doulos,
Good to hear from you again!
Hey gang, if I’m not mistaken, Doulos is a pastor.
Way back in June 08, when I first posted http://sgmrefuge.com/2008/06/2.....ad-of-god/, I asked pastors from other denoms to come on here and comment. They were all pretty shocked by the blog post. Many comments are truncated, due to our famous broken blog situation back in 08.
PK, why do you believe the SGM churches have bookstores with recommended books?
Did any former SGM members posting here ever feel like they were being snooped on? The following material is from the Mother of God Community.
Information Gathering:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....gather.htm
The Buddy Report:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...../buddy.htm
Teachableness (Accepts how much of GIF Teaching?):
Known Problems with MOG Teaching:
Old ideas (refuses to part with):
Friendships/Brotherhood: (w/you) (Friendships/Brotherhood:) (w/others)
One of the obvious problems you are most likely just reading the text in English. If you flesh it out in the Greek I am sure you will find clarity on the whole church membership thing.
If that doesn’t work for you , you can refer to 1 Cor 17 (the whole chapter). It is very clear about church membership. I am surprised you haven’t read it before.
Cheers
Thanks for the info PK -
As we both go back a ways, do you recall books that were recommended and went on the un-recommended list. I know there were a couple but I can’t remember who the writers were. And then the impossible, would you have recollection of why they came of the list?
The issue for me isn’t really the books so much but they do provoke my thoughts of a deeper issue. Here is my point in even asking the question. Many people have been hurt, wounded, disillusioned and/or removed from PDI/SGM by the leaders and it appears that some have been dealt harsher judgments than others as things have changed through the years.
As Stunned illustrated, Packer most likely would not be allow to be an active member in SGM because of the situation of he and his wife (if the testimony of Marta is correct, which I have no reason to doubt). But if his books are recommended reading and carried in the SGM books stores this would point to a measure of hypocrisy or SGM has lighten their standards.
It would seem that there are present situations that people were judged or misjudged with a standard that now has been changed and/or the impact of the judgement lightened. Would it not be to SGM’s benefit and the benefit of those wounded for SGM to issue a public apology specifically speaking to those specific offenses?
Don’t know if I am making any sense in my reasoning but just thinking out loud. If anyone can clear up this confusion for me please be welcomed.
Irv
Mr. and Mrs. Canary – Very good perspective. Sometimes the American church has an American gospel that can tend to be a church gospel that won’t translate well in all the world. However, the gospel of the kingdom will transcend to all the world Matt 24:14.
Paul was certainly aware of how quickly leaders could be gone. When Paul was leaving Ephesus on his way to Jerusalem. They all knew they would never see each other again. He said to them (the elders) “And now I commend you to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified” At the end of the day, the church is a possession of God’s not the elders.
That Bad Dog – Great post!!! You and PK make a great team!!
Just saw this quote on a friend’s Facebook page:
“Leaders in the church are required by Scripture to set an example in the areas of love, kindness, gentleness, patience, and forbearance before they are appointed to preach, teach, and rule. If we obediently require these attitudes and character traits of our leaders, what will our “new community” look like?” Jerram Barrs
Well, Stunned, at least they let her continue going to church; they kicked our glutials to the proverbial curb.
Hi Jim!
I was away for 8 months or so (from SGM Refuge), and I received email from our brother Paul who attend(ed) Metro and he told me that he left the church due to church polity. The exodus from Metro was many and they were scattered. But Paul keeps his faith in the wisdom of God. So I was led back here to check things out. I am disappointed by current SGM church structure. This was one sticking point why I couldn’t join them – knowing the fact that NT church was congregational.
NEway, I hope all things are with you and the fellow SGM Refuge posters.
Irv:
I knew what your general theme was in asking about the books (and I agree with you), I was just answering specifically about my experience with Packer.
Speaking of booktables and bookstores, etc…
My experience is probably not unique to any other book table/media center person. Fads are just that-books come and go based on popularity, etc.
On a brief somewhat side-note but relevant to this discussion: I know SGM takes a ribbing to an outright skewering on the “Essentially Reformed with Charismatic Distinctives” saying popularized in the organization. I was idealistic and naive enough (I still am) to believe that this is a noble pursuit, one worth pursuing, as I don’t believe the two are in conflict with each other with the exception of how peripherals are lived (please don’t debate me on this, because it’s a fool’s errand that just puts us both in a chase around the mulberry bush). My point is that my idealism never matched what I saw practiced in SGM. The phrase to them, based on how I saw it lived out, means “We do what we want until it bumps into something, then we keep going with substitutionary word meanings in place.” What it meant-and still means-to me is that the doctrines of grace and gifts of grace don’t strangle each other to death, and one hasn’t mysteriously or arbitrarily disappeared while the other one has taken over. I don’t care if that separates me from Reformed brethren forever or separates me from the Charismatics forever. This is the best PK there is. I was earnest in my study of Reformed+Charismata=Unity. You don’t have to agree with me, but you do have to deal with it.
What made my bookstore experience interesting and life-changing is that more often than not, whatever the popular book was, it was saying something different than what was being handed down from Maryland. There were some good books on that table that changed me…and it wasn’t matching what I was seeing and reading coming from Sovereign Grace Ministries. A few examples would be:
(The following is composed entirely of my opinions; take them for what their worth…)
Nine Marks of a Healthy Church by Mark Dever: SGM churches getting 8 out of 9 is being generous; had SGM truly let this be a blueprint for churches, these blogs wouldn’t exist.
Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem: A good book with a bad rep because most folks believe that what’s in Grudem’s book is what SGM believes; I’m here to tell you the bulk of it isn’t. One example: Grudem’s ideal proposed polity model of a Congregational/Plural Local Elders structure may as well be on Mars for the influential power it has in terms of an SGM church’s structure. I’ve also been told post-ST craze that Grudem is a cessationist (like that would make him a leper), and he’s NOT. Read my polity article-not a promotion, I’m just too lazy to go hunting for ti right now-that points to a Grudem interview that contradicts this.
Surprised by the Power of the Spirit by Jack Deere: When I first took over the book table in 2000 (different SGM church in another city), this hardback was under the book table collecting dust. I would set it out, and some phantom whom I never saw would put it under the book table again (it wasn’t the pastor, that much I know). It was almost comical after awhile, and then I finally bought it. Here’s why it never sold or was was displayed in that church, in my opinion (description from Wikipedia): “Deere’s 1993 book Surprised by the Power of the Spirit details his journey into charismatic Christianity, and argues against the cessationist position that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit have ceased. He deals with the arguments of B.B. Warfield and John MacArthur, among others…” Well, there you have it. So much for the “Charismatic distinctives,” I thought. Deere’s book is outstanding, by the way.
The Reformation Study Bible (ed. RC Sproul): A one time staple in our churches, I think the study segments regarding a Reformed perspective on Infant Baptism (gasp) and the Apostles (as in there are no modern-day Apostles, even with a little “a”) and the white hot ESV Study Bible eventually killed this one. I guess “Essentially Reformed” means not these two items, or whatever else is in conflict with SGM. My Reformation Study Bible still works, last time I checked, and I bet if others dusted theirs off, they’d remember this one-time friend and might start using it again. Maybe I shouldn’t get my hopes up. This Bible stays on Protestant Dame’s nightstand, btw; she is in it all the time, and if I ever take it-even temporarily-to do some study, she looks like Linus after his binky gets stolen. What’s funny about all of this is that she got it as a gift for me.
Spurgeon vs. Hyper Calvinism by Iain H. Murray: I am convinced that most who say they’ve read this…well, haven’t. My concerns are mirrored in this article.
That was just a few.
—-pk
Irv:
You said, “It would seem that there are present situations that people were judged or misjudged with a standard that now has been changed and/or the impact of the judgement lightened. Would it not be to SGM’s benefit and the benefit of those wounded for SGM to issue a public apology specifically speaking to those specific offenses? ”
You don’t know how many hours of sleep I have lost over this, and I finally settled on one fact: I can’t change men’s hearts.
I do know this: SGM needs to STOP being the authority on humility, within and without itself, until it begins to do a fraction of what you suggested, Irv. The key word here is PUBLIC. My experience with SGM is they are all about secrets, apologizing in whispers, and changing history while they think others aren’t looking or watching.
It’s nauseating, and it needs to stop.
–pk
PK….is it possible to write you a private mesage? Do you have blog or anything? ( I am not on facebook).
Thanks.
5 Years,
He has a blog if he wants it.
PK posted an email addy under the polity tab, top of page, which I think is still good.
PK – You absolutely crack me up (LOL).
“”(please don’t debate me on this, because it’s a fool’s errand that just puts us both in a chase around the mulberry bush)”" You have a way with words that I can only acknowledge is a gift from God!!!
You have taken on a mission that I cannot get my arms around, trying to help reform the un-reformed.
By comparison the mission I am on is easy – preparing leaders for world impact believing that we can change the world as we preach the gospel of the kingdom to the world and make disciples of the nations as we go.
I would not match words with you my friend as I know when I am outclassed!!! Personally you are an inspiration to me. You can articulate through the written word like few men I know. Saying that I would really like you and PD to come out for a couple of days when you are able. I would surely like to explore how we might utilize each others gifts to advance the purpose of God.
Anyway — my love to you and PD!!
Irv
5yiPDI:
protestantknight -at- gmail -dot- com
–pk
Irv:
We (me & PD) were talking about the same thing (stop reading our emails, willya? ). I’ll have to do it during a slow week at school. Sorry I missed your call (I have a voicemail announcement that was misleading because I forgot to change it).
Call me after 8pm my time, if you so desire.
–pk
Bruised, I looked into Mark Driscoll because I liked his perpsective on the emerging church. But apparently his own church has leadership problems similar to SGM, and I am particularly distressed by his attitude toward women. For that reason, I am not every likely to attend a church in his Acts 29 network.
Mark Driscoll in “Pastor Dad” e-book:
“Proverbs 19:13 further stresses the correlation between the type of mother you choose for your children and the kind of children you will have, saying, “A foolish son is ruin to his father, and a wife’s quarreling is a continual dripping of rain.” These two miseries simply go together. If a wife is a nag who disrespects her husband by chirping at him all the time, then the children in that home will follow her example and become fools who ruin their lives by similarly disobeying and dishonoring their dad. Wicked women not only fail to restrain their tongues in front of their children, but often intentionally attack their husbands in an effort to get their children’s allegiance, undermine the authority of their father, and bring anarchy to the home. Proverbs rightly calls this rottenness in the bones.
By the way, this is how we have arrived at our present culture. Carolyn Graglia, the author of Domestic Tranquility, writes that in the 1950s, men were not doing a good job of leading and loving their families, but that the wives did not have the power and authority to overthrow their husbands and rule the families as they desired. So the wives simply recruited their children as allies against their husbands. If they could undermine the father’s authority and respect in the home, then the wife and children could control and manipulate and drive out the husbands and rule over the family. Brilliantly, Proverbs 19:13 explains how we got from the 1950s to the anarchy of the 1960s—namely, foolish men married godless women who recruited their own children to overthrow their fathers and usher in anarchy. Anyone doubting this descent would be well served to simply watch one of the innumerable popular sitcoms on television where the husband is an idiot and the wife trash-talks him in front of the children, and ask themselves why anyone finds that funny.
Whose responsibility is it? Ultimately, it is men who are responsible because they chose their wives, they let them continue in sin, and they let them destroy their children. Hence, it is important that a man first love God and then seek a woman who loves God and will respect him and love his children, because he is ultimately responsible as the head of his home. Does this mean that the wife can never speak to her husband honestly? No, but if she is angry or the conversation will be tense, she should speak to her husband privately and respectfully and not in front of his children. This does not mean that the parents never disagree or resolve conflict in front of the children. The children need to see their parents resolve their differences, and this should be done in a godly way in front of the children and taken in private if things are not being handled well. Some of you grew up in homes where mom continually cut the knees off of dad right in front of you. And you learned to dishonor your father. Wise men seek to avoid this at all costs by marrying wisely.”
~~
My comment: In other words, if the wife is disrespecting the husband, it’s his fault only in the sense that he was foolish enough to marry this godless, wicked women in the first place and then didn’t put her in her place when she had the nerve to speak a word against him in front of the kiddos. So what is he to do now? No mention of lovingly sitting down and asking if there was anything he did to offend her or even asking himself if he has provoked his wife to the point of utter exasperation. No, he is just left to mourn that he married the wrong woman but that since he is stuck with her, he needs correct her until she is in full submission to him.
You might also like to check out the article about him at this link: http://www.salon.com/life/feat...../righteous
Bruised, here are some You Tube clips on Mark Driscoll about a church controversy… Oh, this first one sounds so similar to SGM. Sad.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM7dCj7QWKs
Mark Driscoll on why the “Chickified” church needs punch-them-in-the-nose dudes…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
My apologies Irv, as this was a general statement not directed at you:
“(please don’t debate me on this, because it’s a fool’s errand that just puts us both in a chase around the mulberry bush)”
lol
LOL
Sorry about that, sir.
–pk
Driscoll is a bully almost worse than CJ himself. Terrifies me that anyone is looking to him as an example of anything but what not to do. (Though he does have a somewhat decent fashion sense. Or at least whoever dresses him does.)
metrostill,
I haven’t looked at the first two videos yet, but I’m very familiar with the last. I don’t think that you did this on purpose, but you posted a parody of what Mark was saying. Here’s the original, in context, and Mark is right.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lex6orNNzTs
Comments about the book table ministry (or at FCC, the book store room) reminded me of one of the purchases I made there quite a few years ago. I’m pretty sure it is no longer on the “approved book list”, but it provides some interesting references to the start of PDI/SGM and the Mother of God movement mentioned in an earlier post.
The book is: Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, by Stanley M. Burgess and Gary B. McGee. Page 141 and 142 in the article on “Charismatic Movement”, notes:
“A similar pattern of “nondenominational” charismatic Christianity is found in the network associated with Larry Tomczak and C. J. Mahaney. They founded a church in Wheaton, Maryland, in 1977 and now lead the 1,200 member Covenant Life Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland. In 1982 they founded People of Destiny International to provide pastoral care for other local churches and the training of leaders. By 1987 there were sixteen churches in this network. These assemblies are similar in many ways to the churches linked to NLC, both in their style of worship and in their presbyterian patterns of church government. Their main distinction is a stronger emphasis on God’s restoration of the NT church in the end-times, a point on which Tomczak and Mahaney have been influenced by the Bradford (Harvestime) network of the House Church movement in Britain. Their bi-monthly magazine, People of Destiny, is similar to the Bradford bi-monthly, Restoration. The group also has close links with the Maranatha Christian churches arising from the campus and youth ministry of Bob Weiner, based in Gainesville, Florida.”
====
“NLC” noted in the article refers to the “National Leadership Conference” – “The largest association representing a particular bloc of convictions is the National Leadership Conference, formed in 1979 largely because of the initiative of Ken Sumrall.”
metrostill,
Watched the first two videos. Although they are edited, critical videos, watching the originals in context wouldn’t help Mark on these issues. Mars Hill’s polity took a hard turn in the wrong direction a couple of years ago, and he seems to share SGM’s laity/clergy view.
Jim, it’s almost like some evil is beginning to really infect some pastor’s minds. I don’t know what any of you believe regarding the Tribulation and the coming of Christ for His church, but it is interesting to me that more and more churches today are going in wierd directions making apostasy more evident.
Wasn’t Satan the first being to want to exalt himself above God and be revered? I’ve never liked the term “Reverend” placed in front of a pastor’s name for that reason. The emergent church is really off-base.
Btw Jim, I sent you an email. I hope it went through. Please let me know if it never arrived. Thanks.
Metro:
My comment: In other words, if the wife is disrespecting the husband, it’s his fault only in the sense that he was foolish enough to marry this godless, wicked women in the first place and then didn’t put her in her place when she had the nerve to speak a word against him in front of the kiddos. So what is he to do now? No mention of lovingly sitting down and asking if there was anything he did to offend her or even asking himself if he has provoked his wife to the point of utter exasperation. No, he is just left to mourn that he married the wrong woman but that since he is stuck with her, he needs correct her until she is in full submission to him.
Gosh… this is so what I felt from my ex: He wasn’t about to marry the wrong woman that could not submit to his authority..
All making perfect sense to me now! Thank you.. I will certainly check it out
Jim,
The thing that most irritated me about the first Mark Driscoll video was that he morphed directly from a brief confession of his own pride and how he set a poor example of humility to his congregation, to a longer diatribe about of how THEY now, in their awful arrogant pride, have the audacity to ask for information, question policies, and have some say with what was going on in their own church. Sound familiar, anyone?
Bruised, the other thing wrong with the disrespectful wife scenario that he paints is that sometimes a husband THINKS his wife is dissing him when she is merely offering a different perspective. Some male egoes feel threatened by the merest hint that they might not be 100% right.
My oldest boys fit the age group of 21-25, and listen to Mark D. quite a lot. I have warned them about his sgm type leadership stand. He has some good things to say though. So did Larry T. and CJ years back when my husband and I were 24-25. Is what happened to their doctrine only around the corner for Mars Hill? Don’t know for sure, but we will see. So, I tell my guys to keep the good and throw out the bad. My 18 year old son would like to attend the Masters program they have begun (after he gets his bachelor’s degree). Yet, he has a hard time with some of the practiced doctrines (especially the ones on women). Could he be accepted as a prospective leader/member some day if his ideas don’t line up completely with M.D.’s? The million dollar question – time will reveal the answer.
However, my guys soak up the manliness teachings that tell them not to be passive in this life. The problem with the men I saw in pdi was that they were TAUGHT TO FOLLOW. Innovative ideas, stepping outside the box – not so good. After leaving pdi, my husband’s gifts began to flow to the point that he now owns his own business. Those gifts seemed stifled in him while he was taught to only be a follower. So I have to give Mark kudos for his attempts to reawaken the male Christian population to stop being passive on-lookers. It is true that this is what 20-25 year old believing young men are drawn to ( at least my sons) – they don’t have to give up their guns and UFC watching in order to be bench warmers in a wishy-washy church setting. They can love Jesus without relinquishing their manliness. Good stuff.
However, I see the same tendancy towards hero worship of M.D. in my guys that I use to have towards L.T, CJ, and others. This raises all sorts of alarms. They are definitely independant thinkers, but the celebrity-like status given to M.D. makes me nervous. I can only hope that my husband and I have given them enough wisdom to avoid the same mistakes we made when we were young members of the pdi culture. Again, we will see. It just all seems so dang familiar, like the early days of pdi when the teaching seemed so sound. The leaven was there and took time to grow, years actually, for it to become clearly evident and damage some of the saints who followed unquestioningly. Phew, am I long-winded today. It is just a subject that has troubled me of late.
One thing that puzzles me: if the current church structure in most of America is that men do most if not all the leading while women remain in the background (nursery duty, anyone?), yet M.D. says the church is “chickified”, tell me why that is? Scratching my head, here…
Metro said:
Bruised, the other thing wrong with the disrespectful wife scenario that he paints is that sometimes a husband THINKS his wife is dissing him when she is merely offering a different perspective. Some male egoes feel threatened by the merest hint that they might not be 100% right.
Trust me… I lived this for 4 years………….Any time I pointed out that I felt his theology was wrong – and pointed it out in scripture I was accused of attacking him and wanting to argue over the word of God… I didn’t want to argue – but I did want to voice my concern and not just sit by and keep silent when I thought what he wanted ME TO BELIEVE was wrong…..
I was told I needed to trust God enough that even if he made mistakes and was wrong… I still needed to hold my tongue and submit to his authority.
I’m sorry.. Last time I check… Husband and wife were a team.. I would have been called to “help him”………………support him…………..
Totally in the past.. But I am concerned about the local church I attend and their strong support of MD……………………….I have been down the SG path…. They have many beliefs that I have held on to and I totally believe 100% but for much of the structure……….man…. doesn’t hold fast to how Christ calls us to love others!
Thanks again for the help on this journey!
Canary: Good point about the chickified church… got to agree with you completely
Canary,
I think most American churches are different from SGM. My pre-SGM church experience was being a part of congregations that were mostly women. The closest thing to mainline was AOG.
I think the situation is worse in mainline churches.
My problem with Driscoll’s Chickified Church comments is not that he is calling on men to be masculine. I’m all for that. My problem is that in the full context of what he is saying (not just the little video clips here, but his other teachings and writings) he is bashing femininity in his attempt to raise up masculinity. I got the feeling that he wasn’t telling men not to be chicks because they were made to be dudes, but that they shouldn’t be chicks because chicks are not worth very much. Also, he was not leaving much allowance for personality styles. A man can be fully a man without fitting the macho stereotype. God makes sensitive poetic genteel men, too — ones who don’t have to prove their masculinity with such things as physical strength, intimidating gestures, domineering attitudes, and coarse talk. (Driscoll is also famous for cussing and sexual references in his sermons. I can do without the vulgarity, thank you very much. Just because he’s trying to reach the Indie culture in Seattle doesn’t mean he needs to resort fo that. He’s not a radiant role model in my mind, and I wouldn’t want my kids following in his leadership style, even if he does have some good things to say. ) Sigh.
I don’t necessarily equate gruffness with manliness. I am not into wousy human beings (though adore my quiet and gentle mother). Someone who is worried about a chickified church to me is more advertising his own insecurities than discussing the reality surrounding us. I mean seriously, what is he scared of, that we are going to bleed all over him during our periods? Braid his hair if he grows it? Ask him to wear t-shirts with women on them? Wear a bit too much product in his hair?….. oh wait, he already does the last two.
WARNING METROSTILL- WARNING. Seriously, if you don’t like vulgar things, seriously do not read my last post (above). I am hoping you are like some of us who read from the bottom up. I was a bit vulgar in the above post in my (most likely) lame attempt to prove a point. I respect you and wanted to warn you about it so you could avoid it if you’d like.
God’s best for you,
Stunned
Stunned, I already read your post and didn’t blink an eye. OK, maybe on second thought the bleeding part was a bit graphic (though not sexual), but minor in comparison to M.D., from what I’ve heard. No big deal here.
Hi Folks:
It has gotten back to me that I am getting personal in my criticism toward SGM leaders. While that may have been true two years ago, it simply isn’t the truth now. I have made extra effort in addressing the bigger issues without taking the gloves off and getting “nasty” about any issue. I don’t even have a desire to take potshots or judge men personally on these things, because that type of criticism is distasteful to me.
I need to make it very clear in my “Man Instead of God” post that I have no axe to grind with Jeff Purswell personally. I have no axe to grind on a personal level with any men in SGM leadership, and I made a personal effort-and I thought a successful one-last year to apologize to anyone I made personal comments about.
However, not once did I back off from my stand on the bigger issues. If this is regarded as insincere in asking for forgiveness of these men, then I have an entirely different understanding of what forgiveness and repentance really is.
If anyone feels I am attacking these men personally, I’d like to know because I’d like to be given the chance to correct it and remove such language from my posts and criticisms…honestly.
I do have an axe to grind in regard to some of SGM’s theology, polity, methodology and practices, and I do not apologize for those…some of those issues happen to be big issues. These items, to me, do not fall inside the realm of personal attacks, and involve issues on the purity of the church in which SGM members at no time have ever felt they had the freedom to bring them into a public arena of discussion.
If I have misinterpreted the recent t4g public meetings they had on elders, the local church and apostleship as simply being restatements and reaffirmations of current polity practices, and in fact these meetings were much more of an open forum and these issues are being genuinely reviewed and re-tooled, then someone from SGM please come forward and tell me so; even in an email would be fine: protestantknight~at~gmail~dot~com.
In Christ because of Christ,
–pk
PK -
You last post was a bit confusing to me. I really appreciate the heart in which you have communicated but still the same it is confusing. If I can be so bold?
Since when is criticism is ‘a sin’. This blog is an open forum in response directly to the actions of SGM leaders with respects to their theology and practices that have resulted in over 100 pastors fired or disqualified in the last 28 years, and an untold number of people that have experienced hurt, wounds and disillusionment caused by their abusive leadership.
By the admission of the present leaders of SGM they want to get things right and make changes where they need to make them – and they want reconciliation!!! Although there are things posted on Refuge that can be hurtful and regrettable, things are what they are.
On a personal note, my encouragement to you is to continue to be honest and open with how you see things based on your personal study and your personal experience. The SGM leaders know who you are and how to reach you if they would like to have personal conversations with you.
Having been with PDI for 14 years, I feel that I have some experience and insight into the SGM methodology and doctrines of which some of it I am critical. I am not bitter with them at all. I have many friends in SGM both leaders and church members, and I would not intentionally hurt them which is your heart as well. They know who I am as well and I have invited them to a discussion of anything I write on the blogs.
SGM is part of the body of Christ of which we are members with them. If we hurt them we hurt ourselves. At the same time if we help them by bringing things into the light then we ultimately help ourselves.
Criticism by its very nature can be personal or taken personally but I haven’t see anything you have written that has been an attack or made personal. You have mentioned names from a quote standpoint which is the right thing to do. You are passionate about truth and that comes through and that is what blesses all of us that read what you write. And unlike myself, you don’t waste words.
Saying all that, I do appreciate your heart to clarify your heart and statements and you have invited them to the table of discussion. I am finished so you can file this in the “for whatever it is worth” file. I am inclined to write more but the wife and I are on our way to the Diamondback Dodger game but I couldn’t go without putting in my two cents!!
To God be the glory!
Irv
Jim, thanks. So, when M.D. makes his chickified comments about the church, he is speaking about the majority of attendees being women, even though the leadership is mostly male? He is noting the fact that “real men” don’t go to church anymore. But if men do most of the leading in churches, isn’t it still puzzling that mostly women are the members? Doesn’t that say something about the male leadership? I am sooooo scratching my head. Guess I’ll go ask Mr. Canary what he thinks. Poor guy gets all my bird-brained questions…
Stunned, I agree that M.D. comes across a bit condescending of women, but probably not on purpose. He does seem particularly called to raise up a male population of believers who will face the responsibilities of manhood. He’s a bit rough around the edges. Hopefully, time will improve his manners some. But what do I know, I’m only a chick…
MetroStill and Stunned,
I agree with you about Driscoll, my “icky” radar went off with him the first time I heard him.
Canary,
Driscoll draws a lot of young Christian males. Keep talking to your boys. I have some young folks that I’m talking to about him, pointing out the negative. I know it’s hard when there’s some good stuff mixed in with it. It always makes me think of the story of the dog poop in the brownies.
I’m sorry, I’m back on Driscoll.
His whole demeanor comes across like the “jerks” we taught our daughters to stay clear of.
It is difficult to tell if a person’s “ministry” is on track or will stay on track. M.D. might just be like a bull in a china store, yet be leading many young men to a true walk with the Lord. I could not say. So I have to help my kids know the difference between law and grace. I try to teach them to think for themselves, to reason out an idea. Don’t just believe everything you hear – see it in scripture. Test the spirit. Then I can only pray because ultimately God must lead them. So hard to be a mother!
MD is addressing the practice of putting nice church boys in leadership. I wouldn’t go to mars hill, but I would much rather deal with a guy who will tell it to me straight up, than some of the passive/aggressive/insecure/emasculated church boys I’ve had to deal with.
It’s probably just a personality-personal preference things. A nice church boy wouldn’t start a blog like this, and would never be able to take the heat.
Dudes and chicks are words that Mark uses. I find it sort of silly, as I spoke that way when I was 17, but I don’t feel that he is demeaning women when he tells guys not to act like one.
Having said ALL of that, the macho stuff is over the top, which is Mark’s style. I know some very strong, completely non-macho guys.
I find him entertaining, and sometimes I agree, and sometimes I disagree.
I’m with Kindred. Ick alarm bells going from the very first moment (before I found out he was supposed to “be” somebody.) God has been teaching me more and more to listen to that gut He gave me. (Now if only I would obey it!)
“ A nice church boy wouldn’t start a blog like this, and would never be able to take the heat.”
Jim,
I actually stated that in a comment once.
King David wasn’t a wimp. I’m quite sure the girls swooned everytime he rode back in from battle, and that the men under him had the utmost respect for him as a leader. A “real” man.
I’m also pretty sure he wasn’t a “jerk,” knowing that we can ALL act like a jerk at times, and that he CERTAINLY acted like one with the whole Bathsheba thing. Jerkiness comes from insecurity. I understand what you’re saying, and I agree.
(I still think Driscoll’s a jerk.)
“Then I can only pray because ultimately God must lead them. So hard to be a mother!”
AMEN, CANARY!
Kindred,
I get it, the analogy I use is fishing in the cat box for tootsie rolls; chances are if you’re dipping in the cat box, those aren’t tootsie rolls.
A nice sscure male does not need to put women down to feel good about himself. He doesn’t need to have a quiet timid wife that can’t hold her own in a debate, either.
I was not created to be my husband’s helpmeet (or any other cut of meat, for that matter,) I wasn’t enjoined to check my brain at the door.
Having two X chromosomes is not pathological.
We are all told to examine teachings and weigh them against the scripture.
I *was* created to worship G0d; we were all created for that reason and all this putting down half the population so some insecure boy-men can stop dragging their knuckles already is, ahem, distracting.
Irv posted:
SGM is part of the body of Christ of which we are members with them. If we hurt them we hurt ourselves. At the same time if we help them by bringing things into the light then we ultimately help ourselves.
I so agree with this Irv… I still love the families I met and pray for them daily. I would be open to reconnect and still maintain friendships with each and every one of them. At times I can see where I feel short and held them at a distance because of the sin between my fiance’ and I out of shame and not wanting to feel conviction while in their presence…. So I agree that there is always TWO SIDES to every situation.
DB
So agree….. as woman.. We are not called to check our “brain at the door” and we are called to be a HELP to the man….. so that would require our in put… OUR VALUED INPUT……………..
Glad to be here and just healing through our focus on truth and God’s amazing grace.
PK -
I am sitting in the Paradise Bakery waiting on my appointment and thought I would share a couple of other thoughts. I initially thought about doing it off line but then thought it might be better on Refuge for additional insight and thought. I understand where you are at this moment and I do feel yours and PD’s pain but it will only be a momentary affliction.
You have been heavily criticized for using the blogs to communicate not just concerns but truth that has taken hundreds of hours of study, meditation and formulation of thought (that is quite clear and very powerful). Now there are some who are slamming you and the blogs in all sorts of ways.
Here is the problem. The leaders at SGM have had such a deaf ear to those who have been wasted along the line. There have been countless attempts to get their attention. Now we have taken it to the church via the blog appealing for repentance, humility and some sort of reconciliation and restoration of which I am not sure what that looks like.
What I failed to say in my last comment, the shoe falls both ways. When they hurt the congregation of God we are all hurt. There is much healing that is need to body so we can get on the mission of God and fulfill the purpose of why He called us.
Anyway – need to run but I will comment more later!! Keep the faith bro!!
Irv
Jim,
I think I’m in agreement with you on M.D. Having sons who like to listen to him, it has helped to clarify my thoughts on how to warn them to stay sharp. If one can disagree with a church leader and still have fellowship with him, that says a lot about the ministry. As I said before, we will see…
Irv, above you mentioned that over 100 pastors have been disqualified over the past 28 years. Given the number of churches, that seems a rather high turn over rate. Does anyone know the statistics on the turnover rate within SGM and without SGM? Or rather, what is the average amount of time a man lasts as an SGM pastor? 5 years? 20 years? 2? 50?
How about the national average?
Stunned -
I don’t really know. The over 100 was shared with me by a member of SGM so I don’t have any other statistics than those.
These are some statistics that I have from two sources: George Barna and Francis A Shaeffer Institute of Church Leadership Development.
1400 -1500 pastors leave the ministry monthly due to moral failure, burnout and contention in their churches.
50% of pastors are so discouraged that they would leave the ministry if they could, but they have no other way of making a living.
10% of pastors feel ‘they have” the gift of leadership to lead their churches
80% of pastors feel unqualified and discouraged in their role of pastor
4000 churches are started every year and 7000 churches close every year.
When you see these type of numbers you get an idea of why 2.7 million Christians leave the church every year due to hurts, wounds, disillusionment and just plain neglect.
And taking a step further, you get a sense of why we have lost our influence in our country and why we are not taken seriously. About 25 years ago the Lord showed me “that what we see happening in our country is what is going on behind closed doors of the church”. I haven’t seen anything that has changed my mind about that.
Hate to be so negative but there you go~
Irv
I don’t see that PK’s latest post, Man Instead of God, includes any type of personal attack. I found the following statement though provoking.
From his article, Tradition in the Modern World: The Reformed Habit of Mind (http://reformedtheology.org/Si.....ticle.html), Brian Gerrish writes,
“Without criticism of tradition, there would have been no reformation of the church. Now there is a Reformed tradition, but it cannot be a Reformed tradition without continuing self-criticism. The full original title of the Reformed church was indeed “the church [or churches] reformed according to the Word of God.” And yet, in faithfulness to the spirit of the founding fathers, we have learned to say: ecclesia reformata, semper reformanda. And we had better make it a habit of mind, not an empty motto. Otherwise, we will reduce living tradition to the narrow limits of our favorite shibboleth, or checklist and cancel our pledges whenever someone says something we aren’t used to hearing. To be Reformed is to invite criticism, not to be forever on the defense (emphasis mine). The open invitation of the authors of the old Scots Confession (1560) is that,
Irv, that is important statistical information. Do you have a url for it per chance? I can do a search and I will, but sometimes finding exact info online by Barna is challenging. I’m glad you shared this. I have been concerned it might be the case for quite some time. I know lots of strong Christians who are searching for a church with solid teaching. They do exist, just take some searching to find.
Patricia -
The notes I have from Barna was not from their website but were shared at a meeting with some other pastors. I think the information came from David Kinnaman. But here are some other website with similar stats!!
http://www.intothyword.org/art.....umnid=3958
http://lamintl.org/Pastor_Statistics.aspx
http://www.bethesdarenewalcent.....stics.html
http://submerging.reclaimingth.....statistics
What of the other statistics that I pulled from Shaeffer is the 2.7 million Christians become inactive (leave) church every year because of hurts, wounds, disillusioned and neglect.
Irv
Irv
In regard to May 12th, 2010 at 6:29 pm and May 13th, 2010 at 11:33 am…thank you.
–jw
PK -
You are very welcome my friend. I am glad that you and PD have resolve and closure to your situation. We carry you in our hearts!!
Irv
Jim – I am not sure where to drop this one so I will post it here – if it needs to go somewhere else please take the liberties to do so!!
To the Refuge Ladies -
but I’ve got a dream!!! Jesus is obviously the great example of what a man really is and who defines masculinity. He didn’t mind mixing up with His disciples,and with other men including the Pharisees and Sadducees. He was comfortable with sinners drinking and eating with them and they were comfortable with Him.
). Nor is it my intent to offend you ladies. I love women and I am glad I have many in my life especially my wife, my daughter, my daughters-in-law and close friends.
It has been in my heart to respond to the discussion of men, not in defense, but maybe an apologetic from a perspective from 35 years of ministry. Yes — that makes me old
Nobody challenged him when He turned the tables in the temple. When he called the disciples to follow Him there was a masculinity they could respond to as they were a ‘rough around the edges group’ if there ever was one. They were open and honest with one another and there was a discourse and relationship between them that was manly.
At the same time Jesus brought a sensitivity to women that neither the Jewish culture or the Greeks put into place, which we see demonstrated many times in the scripture but He was still a man. Even at that, at the crucifixion there were both men and women calling for His death.
That being said – herein lies the problem today. Our culture has emasculated men that has been very destructive to our society but especially the church. Instead of the church engaging the culture the culture has engaged the church (but that is another discussion).
The church structure and practice is more geared toward women than men and I believe that is one of the things that MD is communicating in his crass approach but what he is saying is accurate. The distinctives between men and women are not just lost but have become very confusing to both genders. Men have become more feminine and women have become more masculine. (not every man and woman but generally speaking).
Most men respond to learning much better by doing not by sitting and hearing someone speak at them where it is the other way around for most women. (How many men read the instructions?) I could speak for hours on the different dynamics but I will spare all of you. Men love to debate, compete and mix it up but the church doesn’t give that outlet and if they do have that outlet they are called out if the are too rough, too course or too __________. (You can fill in the blank.) Men like to get dirty, build things, destroy things, kill things, etc.
Man is aggressive by nature (created by God). God commanded Adam to go and take dominion, subdue and conquer the earth. Men are warriors, conquerers and leaders and in our culture (and the church) they are made to feel guilty for these things. I don’t purport to have all the answers but I am with MD we need to recover manhood in our boys and men.
We all realize that at the fall the nature of men and women were drastically skewed but the nature (the image of God) is still resident within us. I believe that God is about making His men real men for these last days. We are losing ground (our influence) in our nation daily because men will not stand up for what they know is right lest they be shot down by a culture what wants men to be docile.
We need warriors that can stand against the onslaught of the enemies without fear but full of courage and faith. The time for being nice and controlled by the forces of darkness and the philosophies of men must come to an end. Man’s aggression has been turned on one another (and our women) where the home has become a dangerous battle ground in too many instances. We can no longer allow the humanistic philosophies remove the last vestiges of our masculinity.
I have talked with many many single women over the years that want a man but they don’t see them in the church. The church has not done well to reach men because of our practices and the perspective unsaved men have of Christian men. What they see is not what they want to become or be part of.
I don’t advocate crassness or crudeness but I do know when men mix it up, there is a good chance for both. Our young boys need to see our men being men and not merely church attenders. I have heard from so many men through the years that feel they were dragged to church by their mothers and when they got married they feel dragged to church by their wives.
The church up to this point as been part of the problem not the solution which is what I think MD is getting at. Leaders in the church are becoming an anomaly. Leaders have been replaced by managers and managers hire yes men. So instead of the church being led they are managed (and nobody is happy or fulfilled except the manager). I, along with MD and others, are looking for the men who will lead. Men who are willing to risk their lives not so concerned with doing everything right but moving the cause of Christ and His kingdom into the world.
We are the world changers according to the Bible but I fear we have become world followers. Ladies in no way what I share is an excuse for men to behave badly (sounds like that would be a good name for a TV series
But I also love men and I want to see manly leaders step up and take their place in the kingdom of God to challenge this world and become the conquerers God has called us to be. “Lord – your kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven”
Lovingly,
Irv
Irv, I think most people–male AND female–learn better by discussion and debate–not by listening to looooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnngggggggg “messages.” The messages at CLC are mostly self-indulgent–men loving to hear themselves speak, chortling at their own jokes, and so on.
As a high school teacher, I almost never lecture in class, but provide lots of time for discussion and debate in both small group and whole class formats.
Speaking up in care group however was fraught with challenges–I was a woman and I was supposed to be encouraging leadership in men by smiling and nodding, not by questioning, not by debating, not by discussion. I became more and more invisible, less and less a person at church. I will not be silent anymore.
Irv and acme-well said.
Good post Irv,
One concern as a women coming out of SG, is that women were/are often so hemmed into the expected role of wife/mother, that there are often extra-biblical limitations placed on them/us. These June Cleaver expectations can restrict the very person we were created to be, rather than promoting proper biblical roles. Women are not cookie cutter images, as we often become when our role is so narrowly defined. When we come out of SG and see that we don’t have to be just-June, ya kinda want to dance through the grass with bare-feet. It’s o.k. for me to have leadership giftings, God will use them in a proper biblical role. It’s O.K. for me to disagree with my husband and tell him so. It’s o.k to have a career and enjoy it. One can be a Godly, submissive, servant helper to her husband and not look just like June. Irv, we ladies here all lived under those false restrictions at SG; some for decades. So, we may want to dance in the grass barefoot a bit, some maybe more than others. Also, when promoting the Warrior man, we mustn’t neglect to hand- in-hand teach the Servant man. Jesus was a servant leader who promoted humility, washing the feet of his followers and on occasion turned tables. He didn’t turn them daily. My husband is strong when he humbles himself to serve. Very attractive at that point too, I might add. Humility is strength, not weakness. I’m quite fond of his warrior side too though. Men today certainly do need to be challenged to man- up as you’re saying, subduing and conquering the world, but hopefully NOT their wives. I found it such a shame to see all of the potential male leadership wasting away in the pews at SG because there was so little opportunity provided or encouraged in the church, for any but the select-elect. Men are better leaders in their homes when they have affirmation as such outside of their homes as well.
Hope
Acme – No disagreement from me on that we (both male and female) learn better from interaction. My opinion was based on my experience that most (not every) women learn better in classroom situation than most men. Your point is well taken — And women have the same freedom as men as citizens of His kingdom and indeed they do not need be silent anymore (except in church and care group— I’m just kidding
. I will go out on the line of this one but my observations lead me to believe that most preachers/teachers love to hear themselves talk more than they are concerned with what their listeners are learning and applying – but that is just me. So at the end of the day it is about a man and his ministry not equipping the saints for the work of the ministry. I do get the SGM silence requirement (some might even say stifling) for the women. Unfortunately my wife would not sit back, be silent and smile but she felt that she should be able to speak so she spoke her mind 
You can only imagine how this kept me in a constant state of conflict with SGM (and with her).
Hope – I am totally on board with your comments – I am not sure about the “It’s O.K. for me to disagree with my husband and tell him so”
—– In actual fact most of the time (and I am not going to incriminate myself any more than that) when my wife disagreed with me she was correct. I do like the visual of dancing barefoot in grass. I don’t think we are in disagreement unless I am missing something.
and it is time to get the grill going to cook our dinner.
When I was writing about it is time for men to be men, I really got lost in my thoughts and forgot or lost my sensitivity of how SGM (we) treated women. I was expressing from a place of liberty and equality of both men and women. The statement that men and women both live under the SGM oppression would be an accurate one!!!
Back in the day (early 80s) all the leaders and pastors (from top to bottom) were for the most part a mess. I guarantee you that SGM would not allow a man to come into leadership today if they were in the same condition that Larry, CJ, Brent, Benny, etc. were in back then and they were providing leadership and care for several thousand people. I could have some fun with this one but I won’t for the sake of the guilty
Anyway – Thanks for your graciousness!!
Irv
No problem Irv, thanks
I’m not referring to being argumentative when I say disagreeing. I was referring to a difference of opinion. If I don’t state mine when we disagree on something, he doesn’t get to hear another side. That’s part of being a helper sometimes, helping him to see another side to something (respectfully.) My husband welcomes my opinions and seeks them out, I don’t have hide them. When he decides on something, then I need to stand back.
Irv,
I love it when you go off! Just kidding, but you know what I mean. Good post & good thoughts. I have been blessed in these recent years as I’ve seen the Knight take up new and invigorating avocations — such as hunting — with all his brothers. Picture 4 bro’s out in the desert dove hunting & you have a recipe for great male bonding and general getting-back-to-basic manlihood. It stirs all those primal urges (in a good way). My Knight also has taught me that sometimes the pen is mightier than the sword, and sometimes his physical limitations hold him to just weilding his pen. But I see him using that instrument to make a stand, holding firm in his convictions. So I say, “Rise up oh men of God!”
Irv,
Most likely we’re around the same age, I may be a little older.
I don’t think anyone disagrees with the call to “man up” - I welcome it, and encourage it.
Crudeness and crassness doesn’t bother me. I grew up with brothers, and lots of family and guy friends in the military. Girls may blush at it, but to be honest, most of us kinda like it.
The key word is “balance.” In our intense effort to help men “man up,” we’ve slacked off on the call to be servants - sensitive and compassionate. Unfortunately there are Christian women suffering as a result of the ”imbalance,” and NOW we need to do something to correct *IT*!
It’s crazy, and it’s frustrating! Help men “man up,” but keep it balanced. You *REALLY* have to be careful when you’re doing what Driscoll’s doing. I hope every man reading will hold him and everyone else teaching “manhood” accountable. We could end up with a problem worst than what we started with. Based on what I’m observing, I’m already concerned.
And moms and dads, boys ARE different. They do all the things Irv mentioned, and more! But teach them self-control. Once again, this is an area we’ve gotten out of balance in with our parenting. When little boys went hunting with their dads they had to learn to sit patiently and quietly. There are character disciplines being defined as “girly” and we now have a generation of Christian males lacking certain character traits as a result of it.
Balance, my friends, BALANCE!
Well said, Protestant Dame.
Jim,
I have a comment (2:12 a.m.) in moderation.
Great discussion! I’ve wanted to see all this talked about for a long time. When women speak up against the chains they were placed in, we are too often categorized as “feminists”, which is so far from the truth.
Irv, what you are describing is how my husband has become through the years. It took leaving pdi for that manliness/ warrior to appear. His business is thriving today because he fights in prayer and hard work to make it so. He told me the other day that, after these recent challenges pass (thanks to the “hope and change”), he wonders with some disappointment what he will do. What will he fight for next? Of course, I just roll my eyes and tell him I’d like him to stay home by the fire with his family before heading out to do battle with yet another giant. I get what you are saying. He loves the battle, the challenge set before him, the faith it takes to conquer. Sitting in a church pew every Sunday being taught to follow other men severely hampered this gift within him.
As for the woman side of things: we walked in fear – fear that we weren’t quiet enough, fear that we weren’t modest enough, fear that our children didn’t behave well enough, and omg, fear that someone from church would visit when our houses were cluttered and the kids were crying. What a snare! And then, to top it all (Stunned, I’m thinking of you), we had to try to be like the leaders’ wives, forcing our character and appearance into molds that didn’t always fit us! It was like trying to cram a size eight foot into a size six pair of pumps. The frustration, the guilt, and the pain of constant failure were sure to cause intense inward struggles, even depression and anger.
Worst of all, we women had to hide who we were. We had to temper our gifts so that we did not bring undo attention upon ourselves (at least from my point of view). A friend of mine would pray for other women and their children out in the foyer (where we with little ones had to sit). There seemed to be a lot of unhealthy mothers and babies. Anyway, her prayers of faith were often answered. My baby son had his eye healed, thus avoiding surgery, because this friend prayed over him. Her gift was real, and such a blessing that women began to come to her for prayer.
The leadership began to notice. They then required that she cease praying for others on her own, and put her on a prayer team that went down front at the end of meetings to pray over those who needed it. Can you imagine how she felt? What wrong had she done? Yet the leaders decided she needed “oversight” in using her gift for others. Well, I’m sorry to say that her gift of healing evaporated under that type of scrutiny and self-doubt. She has, to my knowledge, never walked in it again. This is a tragedy.
Real women don’t wish to have authority over men. They just want to move in their freedom and gifts to edify the Body. Unfortunately, we tend to be silenced. Which is why I don’t understand why MD says the churches have been “chickafied”. To me it seems a contradiction. Even if most church members are women, most women are not allowed to step out of their gender related boundaries.
Thanks Irv, for your post. Great points to which Mr. Canary kept nodding his head, ‘Yes!”
Irv has a point and I also agree with Canary. Men need to be men AND women need to be women. If women can’t use their gifts for the benefit of others (outside their home) as God calls them to it begs the question as to why God gifted them? It seems that leadership too often is more concerned with controlling the gifts than empowering them. How this must grieve the Holy Spirit!
Canary, the leaders’ wives also lived in fear! We could ruin our husbands ministry by stepping outside the bounds. I constantly had to answer for my attitude/loudness/outgoing nature/speak up not be quiet self not only to the leadership but to my husband (out of fear of man). I was being molded into something I wasn’t so I could conform to their image of a Leader’s wife. I was miserable and so was my husband. We had lots of conflict because of outside interference. Funny, none of the things I was corrected for had been an issue in our marriage before PDI ! My children were under intense scrutiny and unfortunately we participated in it rather than protected them from it. We have apologized to our children (lots!) and with grace they have forgiven us.
Enough of my ramblings for my first time posting!
What a fantastic discussion with so many points of wisdom. It’s wonderful reading the thoughts of people who think! And thank you so much for those links, Irv.
Canary, that’s so sad about the woman who had prayed for so many. She was not unlike many women mentioned in the Old Testament who displayed special giftings to help the body of Christ. In dysfunctional groups the leadership wants to micromanage, so it sounds like they wanted to blend her gifting into a “program” they had created so they could oversee the details.
I don’t know much about Driscoll, but I do know about lots of churches (outside of SGM) and when he says there is some “chickifying” going on, he’s probably on the mark. The feminist movement has made a huge impact in lots of churches and more women are being placed in positions of leadership over men. It is happening. I see this as one extreme, and the barefoot, pregnant wife who is subservient to her abusive husband’s wishes is the other extreme.
I don’t think God desires either extreme. It’s fascinating that SGM has somehow managed to make women (who desire to be good wives and moms) feel so burdened, isolated, and invisible. Are the women discouraged from having normal respectful discussions with their husbands if they disagree about something? Is it that extreme?
I am really curious as to what SGM teaches (today) regarding the role of women in the church. Canary, the specific examples you described where women walk in fear of not measuring up as homemakers is really tragic. The house can’t be clean enough and the kids can’t be perfect enough. This is what I’m hearing here. Is this the way it is in today’s SGM culture?
In SGM today – when they have special meetings only for the women of the church – is perfectionism encouraged? Who do the women have to live up to?
Oh, and here’s the million dollar question: Does SGM discourage its members from visiting with therapists outside the church? Even if those therapists are Christians themselves?
Forgive my many questions, but this is an important topic.
PD — Don’t you just know I love “going off” — I live for those moments so I know exactly what you mean!!
and ramble this way any time.
And to those who have concerns with respect to balance — who determines what is balanced and how do you know when you have it??
Welcome “Traveling Girl” – glad you traveled by
Patricia -
!
Glad to help out with the sites!
I don’t have an answer to your question about the therapist but I have a thought. Perhaps, if you need a therapist it is because you don’t have a clear enough understanding of the gospel
Sarcastically!!
Irv
Canary – Thanks for the kind words. I have a feeling that Mr and Mrs Canary and Mr and Mrs Irv would have a good time together
.
Kindred Spirit — Thanks for the kind words and the insight with respects to the blushing. That gave me many visuals and thoughts that have kept me giggling through the day.
Hope – never thought you were argumentative – I was teasing on the disagreement with Mr Hope!! It is fun to get viewpoints from everyone. And I think there are many fun people on Refuge!!
Hey Jim — Maybe it is time to organize a Refuge party
for the fun ones!! — no for everyone — who knows we might rub off on one another!!
Patricia,
Good questions. I don’t know how it is today, though from what I read here, not much has changed. Outside therapy or counseling was discouraged. We women were taught to live up to the leaders’ wives’ examples. I feel for Traveling Girl (Welome!). It had to be even harder for the women who lived in fishbowls because their husbands were called to leadership. I would have crumbled even sooner under that sort of constant evaluation.
We had a friend who went out to lunch with a pastor/apostle who was evaluating our friend for leadership. The pastor confronted our friend about his son’s weight – he was a big guy. Well, our friend told the pastor his son was off limits to criticism. Needless to say, this friend did not become a leader. He left the church quite soon after that.
I am speaking of the early 90′s. If things have changed from my experience, that is great. There have to be some sgm churches who walk in much more grace. I have to believe that this blog is making a difference.
Irv,
I think Mr. Canary and I would love to visit with you and your wife some day. You don’t live near CO do you? We could meet up with Defender and Defended and have a ho-down. That is, if Defender isn’t out in the mountains with his shot gun, hunting for my kitty cat.
Mr. Canary was telling me that the source of all our previous suffering with pdi began when we took our eyes off Jesus and put them on ourselves – all the sin digging, repentance, accountability, etc. I thought his comment was very wise.
Canary -
Very interesting – CO is within striking distance – our states connect (AZ). Perhaps PK and PD would like to come as well being ex-Coloradans and really party – (PK has been known to dance on tables – that is unofficial knowledge). I have had exchange with D&D and would like to meet them as well.
I have officially put this idea on the burner!! If you would like to connect with us you can use our official refuge email — irv911help@yahoo.com. We really like CO in the summer – we don’t have enough warm clothes or coats to visit any other time . . . but let’s see what might come of this – you just never know!!
And Mr. Canary is wise !!
“And to those who have concerns with respect to balance — who determines what is balanced and how do you know when you have it??”
Sounds like you have it, Irv.
If PK’s gonna be dancing on tables, I’m there….
Florida is a long hike to CO, Jim, but the weather is definitely worth the trip in the summertime. No humidity!
Irv, I’ve never been to Arizona. Mr. Canary and I are hoping to one day rent an RV and see the country.
PK can dance????
As for a get together, there is this really nice Inn in the mountain town we live in…:)
Colorado in the summer is one of the finest things this country has to offer.
I can neither confirm nor deny any dancing on tables.
I do own a shotgun, confirming PD’s aforementioned dove hunting day trips with my brothers (we are about due for one before it gets really hot here in EP).
Have I missed anything?
–pk
I think you missed the dancing on the table story….
Jim from May 12th, 2010 at 10:09 am on Mars Hill polity.
So like SGM they, too, don’t have elders?
Paul,
I’m not sure if they have “lay elders”. A google search on Mars Hill elders will tell you a lot.
Mark moved their polity in a very bad direction a couple of years ago. Here’s a very sketchy, probably partially correct concern.
The elders used to be equal. They elected themselves every year (I think), and something like 25 men all had one vote.
They then created a new category-something like executive elders, maybe five men, who are in a different class.
It was a big deal, and is all over the internet.
CO in the summer is like paradise. PK, we will let you off the hook on the “dancing table” story. Maybe we can ask your wife…
About Mark D.: the very thing that Jim mentions is what alarms me. As I said earlier, my youngest son is interested in the Resurgence school they have begun for men (no women) to earn a Masters Degree (not yet accredited). According to what we read, this will be run by men other then M.D. However, the early signs of a controlling church have all ready been put into place, whether or not Mars Hill actually ends up that way in 10 years. I really, really, really hope not. It seems so much like the early Tomzcak, Phillips, CJ, and others who put their churches together with a similar design. They had the same draw for young folks (like myself at the time), the same celebrity status.
My son contacted Mars Hill recently. He received a very gracious email from someone on staff who encouraged him to go for a business or accounting degree before entering the Resurgence program. The man did say it was just his opinion. Guess they have too many theology degrees and not enough degrees on administration. The “big business” mentality where there is much money to handle can be a good thing if the money goes to the right folks. Or, it can be another sign of another sgm problem – the church becomes a corporation where the head guys are way up on the nose-bleed level of the building and only certain folks are allowed into those holy places. Churches and big money = danger, Will Robinson! Jesus gave the money purse to a thief. What does that say?
Here is a link about Mars Hill Pastors: http://www.marshillchurch.org/about/elders
I did a search on “elders” but could not find what I was looking for. On their list of “About”, Jesus is at the top. Really good to see!
If you study the consistent bad behavior of the priests in the OT, you see a sad resemblance to todays Christian leaders. Even though the covenants are different, the behavior of those in leadership is much the same. Power and authority are sin traps. Which is why no human in the Body can be in authority over another human in the Body. That is the Holy Spirit’s j0b. (The Body is not to be like the civil, secular government which does not have the indwelling Holy Spirit)
“Jesus is obviously the great example of what a man really is and who defines masculinity.”
Irv, I am not picking a fight but there is no pink and blue Christianity, salvation or sanctification. In Christ…there is neither male nor female. That passage suceeds the full inheritance we are taught we ALL receive.
And keep this in mind about Jesus’ masculinity…it’s an overlooked fact that speaks volumes about Jesus Christ’s view of masculinity:
Soon afterwards [Jesus] went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. The twelve were with him, as well as some women who had been cured of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, and Joanna, the wife of Herod’s steward Chuza, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their resources (Luke 8:1-3, NRSV).
Patricia,
There were always strong affirming words regarding domestic and motherly duties. We were encouraged in these roles, as is fitting, however generally to the exclusion of any others. Obviously SG women are never placed in any type of position where they could be perceived as being in authority/leadership over a man. Women finding themselves in roles that took them outside of the home, would not find those roles encouraged. The culture in our neighborhood was not outwardly condemning of those women, just painfully silent. The silence, I believe, can speak pressure (and condemnation) into lives of women as to what the more desirable, acceptable and “biblical” role is. Opportunities for women to serve in our former church were primarily of a domestic nature. Also, since there was NO women’s ministry in this church, opportunities for women to serve were limited.
Mrs. C.M. was promoted as the “ideal” woman, the one we’d aspire to emulate. There were no other prominent role-models, she was it (until the girls arose.) Also, because there is no relationship with (non-SG) ministries that serve and teach women, the possibility for additional women role-models from “outside,” is all but eliminated.
You may find some info of interest on this thread at survivors regarding counseling.
Hope
Marta, I don’t read Irv’s comments as a separation of men and women in Christianity. I think he was just pointing out a fundamental difference between men and women. Women can sit and chat for a long time but men like to talk while they are actively doing something. Just broad generalities but pertinent never the less. Women are as gifted as men but we tend to have different roles. Just my two cents worth/thoughts on it.
Hi Irv,
I just read your longer post above. Nothing wrong with long, brother. Once you’re here long enough you’ll understand I don’t know what the word brevity means. (I think it has to do with laughter among men. levity+brothers=brevity?)
Anyway, I think I get what you’re saying. Heaven knows I have been happy to spend quite a bit of my life among men. I love chick nights, but I’m happiest when I’m one of the guys. You know how most women say they like smart men? Not me. My past would show that I like ‘em strong and dumb. (The fact that current boyfriend is a member of Mensa not withstanding.) My ex husband is one of the more masculine men you’re goig to meet. He’d come home from his construction job smelling wonderfully like the eart and dirt and manliness. My best friend who always wanted to marry a rich scholar was there one day when he got home from work. After he went up to shower she turned to me and told me that she had just reversed her decision.
Actually, he was the manliest of the manly. He worked his way up from a ditch digger to the VP of one of the larger construction companies on the east coast. He did NOT get there by being gentle. Nor did he get there by differing to the boss. He was respected by many (and hated by twice as many) for arguing with the boss int he board rooms when everyoe else was happy to smile and nod. He knew he could get fired for it. So what?
Our son was an extremely physical boy/man. He ended up being recruited to play sports on the collegiate level from hunderds of colleges in the nation. (The recruiter from the Air Force Academy in Colorado- go Colorado!- even told him they would see to it that they would wave the color blind requirements to get him in.) When my daughter was being harrassed by a boy in high school, a boy who was older than my son, all it took was for my son to walk up to the boy, and politely but with a cool persuasion in his voice simply tell the boy, “You’re never going to ask my sister for a piece of gum again.” and that was all it took for the boy to agree and never dare speak to my daughter. (Six months later while he was sitting in a class room beside my duaghter he did ask her for permission to speak to her. Sorry, still cracks me up that the bully was shut down so easliy- as they often are.)
My son was both tough and gentle. I’ve stood on the field as they have closed the ambulance doors, with my son inside, preparing to speed him off to the hospital. I’ve seen him joke with surgeons who were about to cut into him, asking if he could get a local to watch the surgery. I’ve seen him get up in a recovery room ( a different surgery), walk across the hall and when finding out his gown had been open in the back and had just effectively flashed patients, family and nurses alike, just laugh his hearty laugh.
My male roommates and favorite friends and neighbors over the years (after my marriage ended I couldn’t afford to live alone) have consisted of men who were in the middle of opening their own gyms (oh the male physiques on these guys!), professional furniture movers, guys who did all the physical work to set up special venues across the city of London (95 foot tall screens for Wimbeldon anyone?), men who were 6’5″ and who were so ruggedly handsome that women would approach them begging them to take their numbers and call, lead singers of bands who were so many that women would beg them to take their numbers and call, a guy who was getting his degree from a well known university in (are you ready for this) skateboarding (years of living on the road as a professional skateboarder combined with a degree will get you a job for life believe it or not), a very large, scary homeless man (homeless except when he was livng in the room beside me) who fed himself working as a bouncer, another friend who supported himself working as a bouncer, a rugby player who was offered a professional job playing rugby while he still had a break in a vertabrae (and not offered here in the wimpy US, his contract was for a country quite a bit more rugged than here), farmers in New Zealand who KNEW what masculine meant, ranchers out west who defined rugged, a 6’6″ body builder from Sierra Leone who you would NOT want to meet in a darkened alleyway, a SWAT team member, men who have started barroom fights, men who have ended bar room fights … the list could go on.
My whole point being that I’m NOT scared by masculinity. My attitude toward masculinity? Bring it, Baby. (Feel free to go back and check all the times on this site I have questioined how the heck peep – squealy bully CJ ever became someone’s example of masculinity.)
And as much as I truly love peace and gentleness I KNOW that there are times for violence. (Protecting Jews in Hitler’s death camps anyone? ) And I like aggression when it’s appropriate.
I also don’t think that aggression and strength are exclusively for men. I’ve led a group of armed policemen clad in bullet proof vests into a home because, though there were other men who could do it, they decided that with my position in the situation I would have the power to disarm and diffuse the situation better than a man. (Let’s not even begin to discuss the power a woman can have on an unsuspecting man.) And we all know we don’t want to encounter a mother bear, protecting her cubs. And you never want to see the women of my family- every single one of us pastor’s wives but myself and one cousin- play a board game. We go for blood. (Not that aggression is good in that situation. Unless you’re the one who wins.) Please, let’s use this paragraph as a little hint that possibly we could stay away from gross generalizations based on gender. They are after all, gross.
All that to say, I do NOT dislike masculinity. (I’m a huge fan, trust me.)
But my point is, that just in case you think that I get all icked out over Mark Driscoll because he’s masculine or aggressive or has too much testosterone for the church (which he doesn’t), I wanted to let you know that I have absolutely no problem with his masculine level or any of that. (Though right now I’m dying to point out that- if I understand you correctly, Irv- we are talking about some of us maybe having a problem with the masculinity level of a man who wears more hair product than I have ever worn in my entire life- and I find that completely giggle worthy.)
I’m with Canary. We both see signs of something disturbing in this man. And it has NOTHING to do with masculinity or strength. It has everything to do with an insecure man needing to control something. (CJ anyone?) Give me a masculine man any time. Give me a controlling man? Never.
Hope said, “Men are better leaders in their homes when they have affirmation as such outside of their homes as well.”
AMEN! AMEN!!! And AMEN!!!!!!!!!!! Well, said, Sister. Well said.
Irv, sounds like I’d like your wife. Hope she joins us here some time.
Irv, sounds like I’d like your wife. Hope she joins us here some time.
PS Irv, I’m really glad you’re here, too. Genuinely.
PD said, ” But I see him using that instrument to make a stand, holding firm in his convictions.”
And I say, “YES, PD!” THAT is manliness, THAT is strength! You can be small and wheel chair bound and soft spoken but extremely manly when you know what is right and stand by your convictions come heck and high water. (Though, if high water comes I recommend getting out of the houes and into a boat.)
Traveling Girl, welcome to the site. Glad you joined us!
I understand what you’re saying about not fitting in the box. It’s not a pretty place to be.
PS to Everyone. Last night I was taking a long walk around the city. I was thinking about how many of the programs/beliefs/convictions/theology of SGM was more of a reaction to the society we’re living in rather than the pure word of God. It’s like they were more concerned with being counter-culture than just loving God and their fellow man.
It seems to me that this is what this whole chickified church argument is about. Are we responding to the gospel or to this world and other people?
I’m going to start praying that that my life becomes a response to God rather than a response to the world or the church. Like Canary said, I want me some balance or I’ll always be the off-kilter pendulum. (Which I am right now.)
Irv said, “And to those who have concerns with respect to balance — who determines what is balanced and how do you know when you have it??”
Who determines what is balanced and how do you know when you have it? Irv, you haven’t figured it out yet? Clearly. I do.
(Heaven help us all if that is really the case. Said the most off balanced one of us all.)
Thanks Hope. That’s a fascinating thread.
No need to worry about balance. The Holy Spirit will keep you balanced.
It’s great!
He lets you know when you”re getting too heavy on one side. It’s up to you whether you listen, or not.
Unfortunately, I’ve been known to practice selective listening, and somewhat hard-headed.
on 5/13 post, Irv wrote to PK: “You have been heavily criticized for using the blogs to communicate not just concerns but truth that has taken hundreds of hours of study, meditation, and formulation of thought (that is quite clear and very powerful). Now there are those who are slamming you and the blogs in all sorts of ways.”
—————-Brothers and sisters, this reminds me to be praying for PK..for he has brought to light, in a format of studied facts, TRUTHS which have CONFRONTED sgm leadership. When those who walk in control and manipulation are confronted with their blaring error,typically, these types of persons lash out at the confronter. Praying for strength—physically,spiritually,mentally and emotionally for Mr and Mrs PK…and that they will continue in clarity of thought and annointed pen to be heralds of Truth for the cause of Jesus Christ, the One Who is causing His church to be changed from glory to glory into HIS image and likeness………
In sgmland/’happiestplaceonearth’…..truth must be silenced so that illusion may perpetuate. Those who speak the truth about sgm on public blogs,unveil: erred doctrine; abusive controling leadership; destructive unGodly counsel; the horriffic manner/words spoken by pastors and ‘apostles’ to control their parishoner; the divorce of Holy Spirit; absence of spiritual discernment….Therefore, blog writers must be classified as enemies of the church and slanderers. We, as perhaps many of you, have experienced the fallout of being disdained because we write on the blogs—even though our fellow (former) sgm church ‘friends’ know the sordid details of our story. This is excruciatingly sad to realize some would rather choose to walk in the company line with alleigance to men who proclaim they stand in the very stead of God…because they want to believe they really are citizens of the ‘happiest place on earth’ (according to cj mahaney). For my Brethren,I grieve and cry out for their release……….
As the Redeemed, we are called to BE: Light—- light overtakes darkness and reveals that which seeks to disguise and hide itself…….thereby bringing deliverance to walk in the Light as He is in the Light******** And we are called to be Salt— to preserve Truth, to preserve life, to ward off the encroachment of the world and the poison of religous leaven.
*******Is it not amazing that God always brings forth an avenue to bring forth truth*****
Thankyou, Refuge writers ……..you are the modern day “watchmen on the wall” declaring what your eyes are seeing and what your families have experienced at the hands of pompous religous shepherds. Maulings are continuing to occur while ‘leadership’ states there needs to be change—-this is duplicitous—-and alarming.
Let us continue to be sober,alert, and watchful on behalf of our Brethren………while we keep our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Completer of our faith……….
Waters- here! here!!! Well spoken. Thank you for the reminder.
Further inquiry into the polity of the Acts 29 Network (Mark Driscoll and company) and I received this from one of the pastors in Orlando Florida
I don’t know if this is across the board for A29 churches, but to my knowledge most do. The way we do it at CrossPointe is we have a mix of lay elders & pastoral staff elders. We have 6 elders; 2 are on staff and 4 are lay elders. This provides a good balance for accountability & practical ministry
If only SGM could follow suit. Then Jim and Carole could lay this blog down and get back to a life of normalcy. Racing tiny sport cars around hairpin turns and such.……
Paul, I guess I’m less optomistic in regards to lay elders and pastoral staff elders making a significant difference for the good in sgm. Reason being,for some 25 plus years sgm has an ingrained foundational operating mode of authoritarianism which spills into the arrested ability for critical thinking and spiritual discernment. For two years we experienced: pastors,apostles,higherups,laypersons and friends in sgm churches—ALL turn their minds and courses to think alike and according to the sgmspeak…..so that the wheels of sgm could continue as always. Many leaders were appalled at the actions of pastors and apostles in our story—but ultimately—whitewashes corporately occurred and the brethren were left to believe duplicitous presentations and explanations.
So, my question would be—who would be the men,elected as lay elders, who would truly not be sgmthinkingclones??? And would they truly have a valued voice??? So far—the churches that have experienced huge upheavals the past year or more—are continuing in their ‘normal’ mode….and many of the people choose to remain asleep so they may lift up their idols of relationships within the church and believe they are part of the happiestplaceonearth family of churches.—–Oy, so many layers —- the dunamis power of Holy Spirit is needed to bust up all the destructiveness man has created………
On a lighter note….in place of a tiny sports car racing around hairpin turns….we love driving at full throttle across the western plains…….ahhhhh…wide open spaces……..
Waters,
Even the most hardened kool aid drinker can have an epiphany. Paul and I used to argue all the time. One out of every ten posts made it to the blog. Look at him now.
From the same church, look at Todd, who walked away from a career for the sake of his conscience.
Take money out of the equation, and any man can wake up one morning and find that he is a trojan horse. If my ex sgc had lay elders, appointed by the pastors, I probably would have been one. I’m confident the three couples would have been as well.
I don’t care who appoints these men-I was a complete yes man. God changed me. Take away the money, and you won’t have elders who are searing their conscience for fear of losing their paycheck.
Would I love to see SGM recognize the authority of the congregation? You already know the answer, but any type of lay elder would be a step in the right direction.
Jim,
True that— with God, anything is possible and so we continue to ask Him to remove blinders and bring forth redemptive change in the heart of men.
Meanwhile, we’re still on watch…..keeping issues in the light…….and ministering to the broken casualties the Lord brings into our ‘field’.
Jim:
Outstanding comment at May 18th, 2010 at 5:06 pm.
Waters:
Thank you for your kind words and request for prayers at May 18th, 2010 at 12:41 am.
–pk
pk, You’re welcome
What is sad about our situation at Metro is that once upon a time, when Danny left his position at Calvary Assembly, he did trust a group of unpaid men he surrounded himself with. Then Brent was brought down to keep watch over Danny, followed by Larry and CJ. Brent and Larry are gone, and CJ has turned his watch over to…… (fill in the blank), so now the only ones holding them accountable are themselves or pastors 1,000 miles away. What about that original group of men that left Calvary with Danny? Many of those men are still at Metro and Danny will not even entertain the idea of trusting those that left Calvary with him 25+ years ago, to hold him accountable. It is much easier to have his “accountability” coming from pastors 1,000 miles away. That is why people are leaving Metro. They no longer feel safe. Like someone said, at the members meeting “The 3 alcoholics are going to keep watch over each other.”
If any church member had confessed any of the sin that they had confessed (pride, laziness, being unapproachable) that member would have been pulled off the worship team, out of home group leadership etc. etc. until leadership determined that their repentance was genuine. Why are there different rules for them? Sounds a bit like Animal Farm to me.
SGM has tried the non lay Elder route and by the looks of this and other blogs, it looks like it is time to go back to a Biblical model that works just fine for almost every other Protestant denomination. (SGM does seem to resemble the polity of the Roman Catholic Church)
Now if you’ll excuse me, it’s time for a drink of Kool-Aid.
Personally I like cherry or grape kool-aid!!! If i told people about my last visit with Danny people would be shocked. Well, maybe some of you wouldn’t but i certainly was floored. it was sad for i was not one of Danny’s inner circle, but left with the men who started this fellowship (Metro) 25 years ago. It is a shame that Danny’s lack of faith that those men who supported his decision to leave would have his back. Instead he turned to others and has literally sold his soul for a bowl of porridge. it breaks my heart , but this is SGM for you: a complete make over of a man until his faith in the Lord is relaced by faith in a ministry. Sadness beyond belief. praying that eyes will be opened and ears will hear, but it was evident at my meeting with Danny that he really isn’t interested. matter of fact when asked how he feels about people leaving who have been with him for 20, 25, and 30 years, His response, it isn’t that many!! So, if you have been friends with him for decades your leaving and reasons you are leaving just don’t matter. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out!!! Again very sad. This is not the man The Lord led me to follow out of Calvary Assembly 25 years ago.
Jim,
This was a brief but amazing statement:
I don’t care who appoints these men-I was a complete yes man. God changed me. Take away the money, and you won’t have elders who are searing their conscience for fear of losing their paycheck.
Many of us can say this (though without the money involved). If the Lord can open our hearts to the errors we once followed, He can open anyones. Paid staff has a more difficult road to follow because to go against sgm could mean loosing their lively-hood. However, they have to trust God the way we did and choose truth.
I’d still like to know why Jesus gave the money purse to a thief to watch over. He knew Judas’ heart. This has to be significant for today’s church and all the big money it deals with. Jesus knew Judas would steal from the purse. Why did He give it to him?
Yee-ha! My singing canary is back!
Azaziah,
Welcome to the blog. What you say is very, very sad. I saw the same thing happen with a different leader. Deep friendships of many years torn apart over dedication to a ministry instead of love for the Body. It still grieves me…
Canary, Thanks for the welcome, but have been here before under a different alias!! Just felt the need for a new one!!! I am still struggling with whether or not to share the specifics of what happened. Jim knows my story and with others recomment i rtell Jim Britt, but just not sure what purpose that would serve. He is after all a SGM defender and came up through Metro Life!! In the meantime the Lord has blessed and surrounded me with godly men and women who are helping me walk out all the issues built into me over years of oppression under PDI/SGM. Freedom is to valuable to give away!!
Canary,
Like CJ used to whisper in the ear of someone about to give a testimony, etc…”be brief and brilliant.”
I’m happy with brief these days.
Azaziah-I’m glad you’re here. Some of these men just don’t seem to realize/care how deeply they are loved. How very sad….
Danny has no idea how many are sitting on the fence, watching and waiting. My concern is that some will wait so long, the comfort of the familiar will set in and be misinterpreted as “God has called me to this church.”
My question is, when’s the last time you asked Him? It’s a dangerous thing… just ask Todd… but who’s will are we seeking?
Jim, that is a great question, ” but who’s will are we seeking?”, once you slip into pleasing man mode it is a downhill slide in your relationship to God and to allowing others to tell you how to live!!!
It is also true that they don’t understand how much those of us are leaving love them. It is sad to see the lack of understanding, but to be fair , I was a part for 25 years and only really had my eyes fully opened last year, though i had been aware of issues since we first got involved with PDI/SGM.
Azaziah,
Hello. My last meeting with Danny Jones, was a joke, you could have made a Saturday nite Live skit out of Danny’s response/hard heartedness, oh yeah, and he never got back to me…(that was from November last year). When you are a Celeb, you can do whatever you want.
But I can tell you this….
He heard the cries of the broken….
Danny is not my pastor, it is another fool….”under the care and leadership” of Sovereign Grace ministries, as the website states….Hey I’m really sorry Azaziah, I understand. Really I do.
Hi y’all!! Long time no see!
This is, as usual, excellent discussion. However, lay elders should be for far more than simply holding the pastor accountable. That creates an unbalanced situation, and a vaccuum (how do you spell that word, anyway?) for yes men. Put a group of frequently elected elders into equal leadership, and you’ll see men depending on Jesus or a bunch of fools blowing hot air. But if it is the latter, they can be ejected next election.
Elders should lead and serve the church. Pastors and elders should all have equal say, equal vote.
Who would have thought when you and survivors started that you guys would have this great of an impact on the Body? Thank you, Jim and Carole, for your faithfulness. Thank you PK, Canary, et al, for your faithfulness and thoughtful comments.
I had a former SGM friend worship with me this weekend. It’s been more than a year since she’s been in worship anywhere. Just too burned out in SGMland. What a pity–to not feel comfortable enough to join with her brothers and sisters?
We happened to be ordaining and installing the new batch of elders/deacons for the year. The current elders gathered around them to pray and lay hands on them. One elder prayed that God might strengthen the new guys so that they would be able to serve the people of the church effectively.
I felt her jump when she heard the implied exhortation that elders will serve the people.
Then, the sermon was on 1 Thes. 4:11: “…aspire to live quietly, and to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we instructed you, so that you may walk properly before outsiders and be dependent on no one.”
What timing. Our pastor told a story about a mom telling his wife and him that they were bad parents because their kid was still using a sippy cup when he was two, and how ludicrous it is for us to spend time telling each other what to do,to spiritualize all the things that are fundamentally none of our business. Shut up and take care of your own business.
“Refreshing” was the word she used. Tears.
Argh.
I have another friend who is so burdened, and still in SGM. Her kid is different than the SGM in-crowd, and her heart breaks as she observes his continual ejection from social stuff. I asked her why she did not simply leave, and go to a free place? Shesaid she felt called to stay there and speak life and truth to the pastorate.
But church is a group of people who love each other, and, most importantly, join together for worship and teaching. Why, why, why is there such reluctance to leave, such a willingness to be miserable on Sunday morning, instead of free? So focused horizontally on those around rather than vertically?
RT — Just yesterday, I was wondering where you’d been , and what your take is on all this. So glad you commented. Sounds like the 1Thes 4:11 “sippy cup” sermon is exactly what SGM needs to hear and embrace.
Oh, if such meddling advice were limited only to sippy cups. I think back to a 45-year old friend who endured being told that she ought to have more children — the advisor was all of 30. Not that this, by any means, was a directive of SGM leadership — but what an example of the “in your face” meddling that is encouraged by the culture of “observation and correction”. I think of a couple, now married twenty-five years, who were told by their PDI pastor’s wife that she had a “word from the Lord” that they should not marry. They’re happy Presbyterians these days.
It’s likely that the friend who worshipped with you is someone we may know. Please encourage her that there is grace, truth, and life after SGM!
I love your comment that those who blow hot air can be ejected in the next election. Often, I’ve heard defenders of authoritative systems refer to sessions (elder boards) as ineffective groups, hamstrung by infighting that cripples ministry, etc., lording it over the pastors, etc. But recently, a pastor friend commented that he’s been on the receiving end of the good, bad, & ugly over many years — and when the session truly reflects the biblical requirements of elders, it runs like a well oiled machine — with the elders / pastors encouraging and equipping each other, holding each other accountable – iron sharpening iron — a real demonstration of the kingdom.
Thanks!
Thanks Charlie, I have spent alot of my time apologizing to those i hurt through the years when i was selling the company line. Seeing your pastor as less then ideal should not be unusual (they are sinners like us) it is when they don’t care what their dogmatic doctrininal practices do to people that it becomes a problem for the body of Christ!
Hi RT,
Welcome back! Love that 1 Thess. verse…
Canary–thanks for the welcome!
West Ender, et al, if a thirty year old woman told me I should have more children, I’d laugh and tell her to go be a worker at home. Most of you would too. Then, before she left to follow my excellent biblical advice to be a worker at home, I’d ask her if she knew the stats on Down’s kids and older moms, and might even use rhetorical questions like, “What a funny statement. Why do you feel so bold to tell me something like that? Don’t you think that is a private issue? Do you receive this level of quidnuncing from your mother-in-law?”
Then I’d just smile and wait for her response. I’m smiling just thinking about it.
But it wasn’t always that way. I was a people-pleasing co-dependent angry sister years ago. Ironically, as I’ve found the freedom of repentence and reliance on God, his Word and Spirit, my husband’s advice and the common sense God gave me, I find more people are pleased. Often, when we grow in wisdom with God, we find favor with man. But often not. In any case, as a beloved daughter of God, I’m called in Proverbs 31 to be so filled with the joy of my life and calling that I laugh at the future.
I welcome analysis: what is it that makes so many SGMers willing to take the criticism and then go beat themselves up about it once they get home? And what empowers this “speaking into someone’s life” crap? How does a younger woman feel free to tell an older sister (or any sister, for that matter) to do something that is a major decision reserved for the triangular intimacy of husband, wife and Saviour?
That’s the first question my friend asked Sunday, only half jokingly: “So, is anyone going to follow me around and “speak into my life?”" I told her no, probably not.
But she needs to be free and equipped to use those opportunities as teaching times for the “speaker into the lifer,” too. He/she needs to learn to go and busy themselves with their own issues, and not take the place of the Holy Spirit.
W.Ender–didn’t hear that sermon, huh? I had suspected we worshiped together. You might know my friend.
RT!!!!
Hi RT!
Could be wrong but as I read scripture an elder is an elder because of the gift, the anointing, the recognition, the character and the call of God on his life. Elders were businessmen, workers and men who received support from the congregation. They were part of the team (or plurality) to care and serve the people and purposes of God not serve the purposes of the apostle or the denomination. But that’s me!!
Hi Jim and Ellie! Long time no see except for occasional lurking. Too busy of a year with too few SGM students to drive me to distraction and panic. Much going on here in the Old Dominion. You guys work in tandem with the Lord to bring about freedom. I sincerely thank you!
RT -
Do you speak of Old Dominion as in Norfolk VA?
Irv
Stunned -
Thanks for your kind words!!! Mrs Irv is lurking on the blogs but she wouldn’t post as Mrs. Irv as I suggested. She is a woman with her own mind – go figure!!
Irv
RT’s back (even though I know you may only have time for a drive by hello)!
Have missed you.
Irv, what the heck were you doing marrying a woman with her own mind. Silly man. Now you’re stuck with a wife who’s going to make you think. Did you get her pre-PDI or something?
Stunned – Pre-PDI, PDI and Post-PDI!!! After all that and 37 years later she remains steadfast and faithful!! God is good!! (She isn’t bad either:))Irv
RT — I visited your church long ago, and I remember when your pastor was associate pastor at a point on the other side of the rivuh! I am sure we have some dear friends in common. The last time I was in the ‘best’ building, it was for a concert. We’re no longer in the area — just as well since the Braves are long gone and our favorite supermarkets no longer exist! Your comments and insight are so helpful to me. Thank you for being a voice of reason.
Another usage of “…in the stead of God,” by no less than Martin Luther.
Standing By sent me an outstanding reference to “in the stead of God” used by Luther (that is, a translation into English from Luther’s text that reads in this manner). Standing By thought–and I think this reflects my sentiments, as well–that “…the interesting thing to note here is Luther’s use of the phrase ‘in the stead of God’ is directed to the person receiving baptism not the one performing it. At least that’s how it reads to me.”
Standing By also said: “The use of the phrase that I found can be located through a Google search, “luther, in the stead of god” which brought up The Works of Martin Luther with Introduction and Notes, Volume II, at this link. ”
And here is the quote in context:
On page 224, the first full paragraph which starts on line 12 states:
“From this we can clearly see the difference, in baptism, between man the minister and God the Doer. For man baptises and does not baptise: he baptises, for he performs the work, immersing the person to be baptised; he does not baptise, for in that act he officiates not by his own authority, but in the stead of God. Hence, we ought, to receive baptism at the hands of a man just as if Christ Himself, nay, God Himself, were baptising us with His own hands. For it is not man’s baptism, but Christ’s and God’s baptism, which we receive by the hand of a man; just as every other created thing that we make use of by the hand of another, is God’s alone. Therefore beware of dividing baptism in such a way as to ascribe the outward part to man and the inward part to God. Ascribe both to God alone, and look upon the person administering it as the instrument in God’s hands, by which the Lord sitting in heaven thrusts you under the water with His own hands, and speaking by the mouth of His minister promises you, on earth with a human voice, the forgiveness of your sins.”
Good job Standing By, and thank you.
–pk
A different translation of the aforementioned quote by Luther translates it as “but as God’s representative” rather than “but in the stead of God.” Here is the quote again in context:
“3.12 From this we can clearly see the difference, in baptism, between man the minister and God the Doer. For man baptises and does not baptise. He baptises, for he performs the work, immersing the person to be baptised. He does not baptise, for in that act he officiates not by his own authority, but as God’s representative. Hence, we ought to receive baptism at the hands of a man just as if Christ Himself, no, God Himself, were baptising us with His own hands. For it is not man’s baptism, but Christ’s and God’s baptism, which we receive by the hand of a man, just as every other created thing that we make use of by the hand of another, is God’s alone. Therefore beware of dividing baptism in such a way as to ascribe the outward part to man and the inward part to God. Ascribe both to God alone, and look upon the person administering it as the instrument in God’s hands, by which the Lord sitting in heaven thrusts you under the water with His own hands, and speaking by the mouth of His minister promises you, on earth with a human voice, the forgiveness of your sins.”
–pk
Greetings, PK,
As I read the Luther quote, I read that the phrase “in the stead of God” comes in the same sentence as ”he [man] performs the work [baptism]“. God uses man in His stead to perform the work of baptism.
When I share the gospel with an unbeliever, I am an ambassador, or representative, standing in the stead of Jesus.
When God uses a man to preach a sermon, that man is standing in the stead of God to speak forth that sermon.
That is how I see it.
In His grace, 30
It actually seems to be telling us not to place too much attention on the “authority” of the man baptising but on the authority of God who is working through a human vessel. I see sgm leaders taking on extreme authority rather than considering themselves simply vessels.
Christ lives in me.
He uses me to do his will.
When He uses me to do His will, I am standing in His stead simply as His ambassador/representative, clothed in His righteousness and by His grace.
Not a replacement, but simply as an instrument, a representative, an ambassador, a messenger, delivery person, or a servant to others.
Another interesting find: the phrase “…in the very stead of God” also appears in Argument 8 of Question 22 (Whether the Power of the King as King Be Absolute or Dependent and Limited by God’s First Mold and Pattern of a King) in Samuel Rutherford’s Lex, Rex [Law is King, or the Law & the Prince], found at this link.
In context, the quote reads:
“Deut. xvii. 20, The king on the throne remains a brother; Psal. xxii. 22, and so the judges or three estates are not to accept of the person of the king for his greatness in judgment; Deut. i. 16, 17, and the judge is to give out such a sentence in judgment as the Lord, with whom there is no iniquity, would give out if the Lord himself: were sitting in judgment; because the judge is in the very stead of God, as his lieutenant; (2 Chron. xix. 6, 7; Psal. lxxxii. 1, 2. Deut. i. 17;) and with God there is no respect of persons. (2 Chron. xix. 7; 1 Pet. i. 17; Acts x. 34.) I do not intend that any inferior judge sent by the king is to judge the king; but those who gave him the throne, and made him king, are truly above him, and to judge him without respect of persons, as God himself would judge if he were sitting on the bench.”
How Lex, Rex is used across the web is interesting…google it and check it out.
–pk
This thread is a continuation of the “man in the stead of God” discussion.
I agree with you: ”we all have Christ living in us! We are ALL messengers and ambassadors. Every single one of us. So the pastor has no more representation of Christ than anyone else”.
An ambassador goes in the place of someone else. When a pastor preaches a sermon, he is doing so in the place of God. He is no closer to God than than you and I are, he is simply doing what he is called to do. My focus when listening is not on the person talking, but rather, ”what is God saying to me through this person?”
God speaks to us directly and through others.
Jeff Purswell was exhorting a group of pastors to see the significance of preaching God’s Word. He was not saying that they are to push God aside when they step up to the lecturn.
Irv–no, I’m in Richmond, home of Kingsway. I’m a teacher. Because many of my beloved students are Kingswayians, I am double- and triple-dunked in SGM culture and the painful results of the legalism and fear that inundates the place.
My obssessive need to connect with Refuge and Survivor seems to be directly proportional to how many students from SGM I have multiplied by how much time I spend with them. I fear for them, but around here, there is a growing stream of these same families inching towards the Kingsway door and the fresh air that waits outside.
I feel some compassion for the adults, but probably not as much as I should. They are the ones staying month after month, year after year, putting up with the boasting from the pulpit and the hybrid theology and the judgment and the isolation from the rest of us in Christendom. The adults mystify me…but I worry about the kids.
Although there are always exceptions to the rule, many SGM kids are simply dog-paddling in place, it seems, as they grow in adulthood.
Early marriages, illegitimate pregnancies, no desire to pursue learning or further schooling, living at home with mommy, living with other church members, holding sub-standard entry-level jobs with no plans for advancing beyond that. Many of these kids are REALLY smart, but around ninth grade, they slow academically, and finally limp out of their senior year having taken one or two substandard classes at the local co-op. Waiting, waiting, waiting. Looking down their noses at the kids who grab a good scholarship 500 miles (or 10 miles) away, go away, apply themselves, get good jobs and move on.
The girls nanny while they wait to get married, and live at home. Waiting, waiting, waiting. Seems like there is a growing pile of these girls, and the dam is going to break eventually. More and more I see them settling for pagans or nominal believers and drifting away…proud to have caught a man, which is held up as the ultimate accomplishment for a woman, but not at all interested in impacting their world with their gifts, education or God-given calling.
The boys go take a couple classes at community college and live at home. It would never occur to any of them to get up, do some research, find a college or trade school or apprenticeship which would hone their God-given gifts and GO THERE.
Books? Nah, only “Do Hard Things.” Really? Do Hard Things? Like what? Live at home with mommy and hang out at Starbucks? What about going to the Sudan and working to end injustice? What about driving five miles down the road to the inner city to help there?
Heck, what about pulling your head out of the sand and showing grace and kindness to those kids at church who just don’t fit the mold, including them in some of your plans? Not rejecting them because they are nerds? Not rejecting them because they are shy? Not rejecting them because they love history or debate or robotics and you can’t even spell any of that? Not rejecting them because they are just not cool enough for you? Or because they actually don’t sneak around the back of the church to make out, like you do, before going off to small group and boasting about your purity?
That would probably be the hardest thing of all.
They are tied to their parents oddly, yet their parents do not show the same level of submission to THEIR own parents–if anything it is the opposite. The parents of my students (and despite this rant, I truly love them!) are often estranged or dismissive of their own parents (the kids’ grandparents) since they are old, out of touch, and not SGM.
Yet these same parents seem to expect total control over their kids well past high school.
Perhaps this is because they live in a faith community that is highly controlled by a “daddy-polity” who brooks no arguments, tells his “children” where to live, where to work, who to marry, how many kids to pop out, how to school those kids and finally how to rule in those kids’ lives.
But I’m not seeing great passion for Jesus Christ in these kids. Some are excited about experiences, the next conference, the next tent meeting, the next concert, the next book. But about Jesus, in whom we live and move and have our being?
Disconnection.
Their walks with Jesus Christ seem tied only to experience, feelings or rules.
So many arrogant or wounded kids, so many arrogant or hurt women, so many weak and castrated men (who act arrogant but at night, awake by themselve, probably wonder where their God-given call to serve in the church went).
<sigh>
Yet hope remains. Around here, many are waking up and starting to stumble around. Several actually stumbled right on out the door of SGM, and a couple were tossed out. In any case, God rules his church, and is jealous for his people.
Great post, RT! Have you ever seen Karen Campbell’s True Womanhood blog? She takes on the “patriocentristic” (daddy-polity) crowd that you described in your most recent post and lays out exactly what she thinks is wrong with that approach to family life and faith. Also much on spiritual abuse. It is http://www.truewomanhood.wordpress.com/. Don’t confuse this with the True Woman blog run by Nancy Leigh DeMoss, which is much different in their view of Biblical womanhood. I used to read that one and leave dissenting comments, but finally gave up.
In the past, Karen Campbell has just let the ladies ramble with several hundred comments per post (like Refuge and Survivors) but she has closed commenting down for now because things were getting a bit too dicey. She’s planning a blog redesign to keep things more focused and Scriptural, starting next month. She left the previous threads up. The most recent one is here: http://truewomanhood.wordpress.....thread-11/ She also has a podcast series on patriocentricity here: http://www.thatmom.com/?page_id=2659
Another lady who has been writing extensively on these issues (patriarchal families, spiritual abuse, etc.) is Hillary McFarland. She runs http://www.quiveringdaughters.blogspot.com/ and has a book coming out next month. There are more of these blogs that I follow, but those are the two that come to mind immediately.
I’ve been in-and-out of the hyper conservative full quiver, no college, strict courtship camp and definitely seen the dark underbelly as well as some good things. Actually, SGM is the very mild side of that spectrum. I’ve seen a lot more extreme teaching and practices in the home schooling movement over the past 20 years that we’ve been in it. Our family is much larger (10 kids) than the average SGM family, though there is one family at our church (Metro Life) that has more. We are still home schooling, but our daughters go to college around age 16 or 17 as do most of the kids in our church (not just a couple of classes for the boys, either). The teachings on courtship seem to be loosening up, too.
I taught middle school English in a co-op for four years — mostly SGM kids — but we’re pulling back home this year to give our younger ones the heavy literature emphasis that some of our older ones had. I was concerned with the amount of busywork they were doing for homework and wanted them to get more solid meat. One of my big emphases in my English classroom was to get the kids thinking deep and wide, not just accepting whatever they see or hear as true, and definitely being more aware of the big world around them, what is going on in politics, global and domestic justice issues, missions, etc. We did a long series of learning the vocabulary and concepts behind all of the major world religions to prepare them for meeting other people, deciphering news reports, and understanding what’s going on in their college classes in a few years. I don’t want them to be ignorant, obnoxious Christians. You can see some of this stuff here: http://www.continuewellhomeschool.blogspot.com/
February was an interesting month for me because of a child abuse death case that I wrote about on one of my blogs. What an eye-opener — a conservative adoptive home schooling family following the twisted teachings of Michael and Debi Pearl to control their kids. Ouch. I’ve never seen so much traffic on any of my blogs — thousands in the first month, and still a steady daily stream. You can find it here: Child Discipline or Child Abuse?
I also just wrote a post on another of my blogs called
On the Church: Potluck, Pedestals, Pruning & “Prarrows” Sort of along “the priesthood of all believers” line of reasoning.
Well, that’s my contribution for the afternoon. I’m still waking up from a nap so pardon the overuse of parentheses and dashes in my punctuation. I’m not feeling English teachery at the moment.
MetroStill
RT, I see some of what you say in many of the young ladies sitting around waiting for their “MRS. DEGREE” , but what I saw in the young men was the opposite. I remember Brent coming down to Orlando, telling the young men that they had to have a solid career before they thought about pursuing a wife. In fact, I think he went too far. My own son had ambitions to go to Med School and verbally questioned leadership because if he were to follow Brent’s teaching, he wouldn’t be able to think about a woman until his late 20′s. Today he is getting his doctorate, married, with a wife also getting her PHd. I’m glad he didn’t follow the guidelines laid down by Brent.
I did love what you said about the kids not reaching out to “the nerds” and outcasts. Something I saw very prevalent at our church. Unless you could play basketball with the best, no one knew your name.
Having said all that , I want to say that it is to easy to toss ALL of SGM in one category in the effort to paint the whole movement in a bad light.
RT,
You’ve hit the nail on the head of my disgust over the Glimmer Twins’ moon-walk into the Home-school Celebrity Network:
“Books? Nah, only “Do Hard Things.” Really? Do Hard Things? Like what? Live at home with mommy and hang out at Starbucks? What about going to the Sudan and working to end injustice? What about driving five miles down the road to the inner city to help there?”
RT – I cannot express to you the turmoil in my guts with what you have shared with us. When I hear your story and others, I am literally sick to my stomach.
I so appreciate your heart and concern for those whom God has put in your life to influence for the kingdom of God. I don’t know the other leaders but I do know Gene. Gene and Liz were such a neat couple when we knew them in the late 80s and we enjoyed being with them. At the same time I see where it seems they have become so SGM they have lost sight of the church of God and His kingdom.
It is time for leaders like Gene to come to the conclusion the ministry isn’t about them. Most of the issues with between the leadership of SGM and the church is the emphasis on themselves, their role, their responsibility and the people’s correct response to their authority. This is not the kingdom of God nor is it the church of Jesus Christ.
I personally thank you for your commitment and input into the children’s lives and their parents as a brother and as an elder. I also appreciate your compassion for God’s people especially the youth. The dog-paddling illustration is such a descriptive way to see what is happening with our youth.
50% of our high school youth leave the faith and/or church after they graduate. The answer for this dilemma is not more law but more “seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness”. We have so distorted the mission of God for us to the world that people think the mission is the church and not the nations.
SGM and others like SGM see the mission of Jesus as the building of the church not the gospel of the kingdom to the world (making disciples of all nations). Their mission is self-serving not God-serving. It isn’t about the leaders being servants but the congregation of God serving them. I get that – loud and clear!!!!
I see along with you that our young ladies are waiting for Mr. SGM right. This is difficult when our young men have been emasculated or castrated in the “overcoming sin” process. This is not the kingdom of God. Choosing a wife has become so spiritual and controlled that the natural desires and dreams placed in us by God is considered sin. The church leadership have defrauded our women and then blamed them for allowing themselves to be defrauded.
RT – as you share your heart I get this picture. It is like a young girl being sexually molested by a predator and then blaming the girl for making herself available to be molested. Young men and women living with their parents does nothing to prepare them to live and dwell in a world that is anti-Christ or a world that needs to be engaged by Christ and His kingdom. The church continues to live in the wilderness thinking they are living in the promised land.
Leadership and parents want our boys to be docile and somewhat feminized so much so that both sexes are confused as to how God made them and who they are in their sexuality. I am only reiterating what you have said – I agree and understand what you are communicating (which you have done very well BTW).
Based on your observations and my experiences it does seem that SGM wants (or more interested in) to create an image that brings honor to SGM whether it is tied to reality or not. What they want to be is not backed by the reality of the lives of the people they are given to prepare for the work of the ministry. I.E. Sudan, ending injustice, changing the inner city, etc.
You are right on target – “pulling your head out of the sand and look at how people are being treated” You make some penetrating insights as to the children and the SGM legalism which hopefully will get someone’s attention – but I am not holding my breath.
Thanks so much for taking the time to share your experiences and insights. I totally concur with you on your observations. I am confident that many who have read your words will be praying for you and your influence to the children and their parents but also some reformation to take place within SGM.
With great respect – Irv
BTW – the question concerning Old Dominion! I graduated high school from Hampton High School and almost went to Old Dominion in Norfolk!!
I like the way you think, Kiddo. (Kiddo would be RT. Today I’m feeling like an old lady so am considering calling everyone I see in church and afterward “Kiddo”, regardless of their age. I may also start walking with a cane. Just in that kinda mood.)
Story of my life: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Paul, I’ve still got one in moderation from yesterday afternoon, too.
RT, welcome back.
Ditto in my neck of the woods!!
Excellent description, and so sad. Good to hear some are waking up.
Unfortunately there will ALWAYS be those who were ”messed up” before SGM. SGM is the perfit fit for them – the insecure, dysfunctional ones who have always lived in fear. SGM provides them with security and the control they so desperately need.
Newsweek published an article a few years ago on the growing number of narcissists within in our culture. SGM offers the “perfect church” for the narcissist.
Hi AKS!
Narcissists, and sycophants. Not meant disrespectfully at all, since many many friends are “in.” But it seems like many of them need leadership to worship, rather than to fellowship with, to be in community with, mano a mano.
What will happen to the demographics in SGM as these kids age? hm.
Good Sabbath to you all, my sistren and brethren!
OK, my post from yesterday afternoon finally made it through moderation about 8 comments up from the end. I’m hoping it doesn’t get buried, so here’s the link for those who missed it… http://sgmrefuge.com/2010/05/0.....ment-17773
RT — wow. You’re talking about things I am completely unaware of as a former attender of that church. When I was there, there were several kids who went away to college and graduated — even though it was “recommended” that kids go to college locally to remain part of the church. As the years went by, there was a surprising trend – even among several of the most elite families – of sending kids to private / public high schools as well — several that I am still in the loop with recently graduated from esteemed public universities. I guess the church has gotten so big that now there are many more different circles of interaction than when we were involved. Most of my actual friends in that church would never have gone along with the patriarchal stuff — and most of them have long gone elsewhere to worship.
So sad. I wanted, so badly, for SGM to be THE way. Actually, I went there from a truly reformed congregation that had strangled worship with so many rules there was no freedom. In retrospect, that seems far less of a problem than a church that strangles the freedom out of entire lives.
I’ve listened carefully to reports that there is change afoot in that particular church, and though it’s too late for my family, I hope and pray, from far away, that this will grow and continue. But I truly believe that unless SGM polity and policies change as well, it will not “bear lasting fruit.” (Anybody else hear that last phrase a million times from the SGM pulpit?)
hey gang-very sorry about the moderation issues. Carole had a BIG birthday, and we did a long weekend at the beach. Fortunately, we have a couple of friends with admin access and someone stepped in to help.
RT-really good to see you here again. Probably hazardous to your health, but good for the rest of us…
RT-really good to see you here again. Probably hazardous to your health, but good for the rest of us…
Jim, that was my laugh for the day… HAPPY BIRTHDAY SWEET CAROLE!!!!
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, CAROLE!!!!
Jim, thanks for the welcome–the site should be named: SGMmakesmeinsanebutIstilllovethemsoneedtoventaroundotherpeoplewhocareforSGM.com
30…read the sermon on the mount and time yourself….
Preaching is a gift, a role talked about on occasion in the NT. It serves a wonderful purpose in the body of Christ. I come to listen in faith that God will speak to me about something.
Just because the pastor stands up front does not mean he is being worshipped. How do you know that most are worshipping the man preaching a sermon?
There is room in the Kingdom of God for BOTH: a prepared, researched, and hopefully a well-articulated sermon, and you and I sharing a word from the Lord with another person or persons.
The pastor is not running a show.
30- I’m with you on the judging of hearts. It’s wrong, period.
30 years, you write so well. Thanks for your gracious tone.
Regarding pastors, I totally agree with your citation: 11It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.
Paul served as evangelist and as pastor, supported by his trade, but mainly by gifts of the lay people he served.
We do disagree on polity, though. I never see any evidence that a pastor is also the only elder that leads a church. Weird. Elders lead the church, with their varied gifts and callings. A pastor teaches.
In another vein…
At the same time, in your own words, “I am respectfully asking, and pleading with you, does your experience cancel out, wipe away, or otherwise negate all of the” pain and abuse that these folks have seen going on at SGM?
Perhaps, if you are in a wonderful church, this might not be the place for you. On Refuge and Survivors, you are not dealing with people who dream this stuff up–this is a group of people who have either been terribly hurt by SGM personally, terribly affronted by SGM, know and deal with those who have, or SGMers who love the denomination and long for the Lord to right those wrongs.
So in all honesty, it is a fallacious argument you make, although many SGMers make the same one: “YOUR experience is not true/important/worthy of discussion simply because MY experience has been totally different. You cannot make charges against people who, in my experience, have been good.”
A tiger could be sleeping in the sun. You sit next to it and for whatever reason it does not awaken and eat you. Someone sits on the other side, and gets ripped open.
Since you were not touched, do we then not discuss the tiger, and come up with ways to handle and reform that remarkable creature?
A public person, be he friend or not, may certainly be discussed. Blatant slanderous attacks? Of course not. Specific acts and words? Why not?
Unfortunately, many of my beloved SGM and former SGM friends would have written your exact words 1-3 years ago.
Now several of them are lurking and posting on this very site, (hi guys!), wounded and tossed aside by SGM. The others are still on the inside, wondering what happened to all that love.
You haven’t had the experiences these people have had. That doesn’t negate their experiences!
That’s why PK is wise–he doesn’t talk experiences, only facts and doctrine. Hard to refute by simply saying, “C’mon, you’re talking about friends of mine. That couldn’t have happened.”
It’s not just a SGM problem. I firmly believe most denominations have strayed so far from a biblical church model that God will have to destroy the current one. I would love to hear what PK thinks about it.
Eph. 4: 11- He gives us teachers for the equipping of the saints…
I understand and appreciate your perspective on church. I respect what you believe and with your boldness and love of Jesus, I have no doubt God will continue use you to do great things for his glory.
I believe differently in some ways. Scripture does not spell out every detail on how chuch is to be lived out. As in everything, we are dependent on the Holy Spirit to lead in this area. We listen to someone preach on Sunday. This is but one small portion of what we do. No, I do not preach sermons on Sunday AM, but I preach to my neighbors, co-workers, other christians, folks I don’t know, and my family.
Most of us at CLC are out earning money for many hours everyday. This frees up those on staff to focus on serving and leading CLC. This does not automatically put them any closer to God than me. We are all equal in our standing before the Lord, with a different role.
Man-made ideas? No. Holy Spirit-inspired ideas that are embraced and put into practice by the entire church to glorify the Lord.
You said earlier that the comments here are directed towards the pastors of SGM, not the members. I appreciate your concern and care. However, I must point out that we function as a body. As a whole. When you talk about one of us, you get all of us. There is no divide between leadership and the rest of the congregation.
Take polity at SGM, for instance. We believe and are in faith that this is God’s will for our church. We embrace it. We believe that scripture in no way prohibits what we do. In fact, we believe that scripture supports this kind of leadership. The polity is no secret to the members of SGM. There are no ballots in the bulletin. There are no admin board meetings announced. Yet, those in leadership desire to hear from the members. You won’t read anywhere on this blog of the many ongoing, fruitful discussions, debate, and other conversations where members have expressed concerns, desires, questions, and ideas.
What about Jeff Purswell? The comments made about him on this blog are completelty contrary to what I know of him and his family personally and from what I have heard as he preaches on occasion. BTW, I am not talking about the tone or the way comments are expressed here. I am talking about the content of those comments. That has always been my concern. I don’t look down on anyone for the way they express themselves. Has anyone here tried to contact Jeff regarding the “in the stead” phrase? He is not hard to get ahold of.
The references to SGM as a business is demeaning and unkind. It is not what we are about.
______, your experience at SGM has been different than mine. I am not angry. I am respectfully asking, and pleading with you, does your experience cancel out, wipe away, or otherwise negate all of the good things I see going on here? Can you really justify all of the constant criticism that goes on here? I’m talking about the assumptions and negative comments regarding the content of our hearts here at SGM. General debate is one thing, but to make public charges against specific people, this must be a last resort, with research, witnesses, proof, and testimonies from all parties involved. Do you agree?
God bless you, 30
PDIWHO, I’m not always pleased with the institutional church and I am not a fan of SGM (though I am still a member), but there is a place for pastors, sermons, and local churches. We may be disillusioned and have very valid concerns to raise about what we see, and we may need to call leaders into greater accountability for their actions and lack of humility, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater and leave him butt naked in the streets.
2 Timothy 1:8-14 – Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, for which I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher, which is why I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me. Follow the pattern of the sound words that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. By the Holy Spirit who dwells within us, guard the good deposit entrusted to you.
A friend posted this quote on Facebook this morning: “Leaders have power, but power is safe only in the hands of those who humble themselves to serve.” John Stott
Greetings, RT,
Thank you for your gracious response and I would love to comment on your post in the same manner.
I have never denied that pastoral abuse has taken place at SGM. Only the pastoral staff have all authority. The rest of us trust the pastors to lead in a Godly, biblical manner. Pastors have abused that trust. Pastors have confessed to this.
No one is dreaming anything up. No one is lying. But when someone shares their experience here, it is subject to personal bias. “Here is what happened to me and what this pastor did.” And everyone reads and accepts at face value that this absolutely represents pastoral abuse. And then you stack up all the biased reports and say pastoral abuse is widespread at SGM. Publically. With names.
I believe you need to hear from all persons involved, including the pastor, in order to determine the truth of what really happened. Do you? Don’t you think you need to hear from all sides before publically declaring pastor x to be abusive?
Folks who are hurting due to bad experiences are not given a license to make false statements about the members of SGM. It is as though once the conflict takes place anything and everything about SGM is now seen through cynical-colored glasses.
The path to reconciliation is difficult. I have been there. Pointing fingers and making accusations make matters worse.
It is not just me. Or the folks I know. The testimonies I have heard and the fruit I see churchwide does not cancel the abusive behavior. But it clearly demonstrates to me that this on-going billboard of accusations is not justified.
In His grace, 30
Jim,
Judging hearts is wrong. You agree.
2500+ people attended a meeting to honor CJ when he stepped down as CLC senior pastor. You heard briefly from 2 and implied that there was more going on than honoring. Were you judging my heart and those in attendence? Is this right? What was the content of those letters that were mentioned?
This is the kind of instant discernment I am trying to discuss here. Did you really have enough to go on to make those public remarks?
30-please refresh my memory-what did I say?
Jim,
Here is the post:
Jim
May 4th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
C’mon guys, that’s called “honoring”. Completely biblical.
And 30 years missed all of this….
uh huh
Hi 30 years,
I’ve just read above and agree with much of what you say. But it seemed somewhere in each paragraph something would grab at me and I’d feel a big… don’t know how to describe what it felt like… a stab? Accusation? It could completely be me and my past or history that makes me feel this way. I have a feeling I’m not the only one. But it could just be me.
I’m writing to you to see if would please consider some of the words you used and pray about or contemplate how they may affect those who read them. I truly appreciate the fact that you acknowledge that there have been abuses. I respect that you are open to that knowledge, though you yourself have never (at least to my knowledge) suffered from it. I’m glad you or your family haven’t. It is a tremendously horrible thing and some days I wish that no one else on earth would have ever experienced anything like it. I appreciate the fact that though you haven’t you show us who have the respect of acknowledging it. All that to say, those who have experiened pastoral abuse are probably a bit more sensitive to the words others use.
So I’m writing, hoping that you will consider some of the following that, well, give me a check in my spirit when I read them. Like I said, maybe it’s just me and maybe the check comes from something in MY past and these words are just triggers. But possibly, they signifiy something in you that God may have you consider.
Here’s what I’m thinking about:
I have never denied that pastoral abuse has taken place at SGM. Only the pastoral staff have all authority. The rest of us trust the pastors to lead in a Godly, biblical manner. Pastors have abused that trust. Pastors have confessed to this.
I’m guessing that this one, of all the things that made me wince might be due to my own past and not you. The part where you said, “Pastors have confessed to this.” Is there any chance that that could possibly be a blanket statement you’re using to dismiss any further complaints of abuse? I don’t know but it sort of feels like it or something akin to it that I just can’t seem to put my finger on. You see, some pastors have confessed to the abuse. And for those who have confessed and have turned around and changed their ways, PRAISE GOD! That is wonderful and awesome. But not all have. I for one have not had the pastor who did what he did ever confess to me. I’m hiding in plain site. He could contact me any time to apologize. Any time. (I’d probably not answer if I knew it was him because it would take me a few hours to gather my courage, but I’d call him back as soon as I worked through it.)
I know I’m not the only one who has not been contacted by the man or group of men who have sinned against them. Is it possible that your statement, “Pastors have confessed to that” is a blanket statement that either does not apply to all the abusive pastors nor to all their victims? Is it possible that your use of a (possible) blanket statement indicates a desire to move on and forget about it rather than a concern for those who have yet to be sought out and restored?
Like I said, just genuine conern for the situation, you, us, etc. Not trying to be… (fill in the blank for any negative, unkind word).
No one is dreaming anything up. No one is lying.
Thank you so much for that acknowledgement. Truly.
But when someone shares their experience here, it is subject to personal bias.
Of course. I agree completely.
“Here is what happened to me and what this pastor did.” And everyone reads and accepts at face value that this absolutely represents pastoral abuse.
Hmm, this is where I disagree. EVERYONE reads and accepts at face value? I can’t honestly say that I know either the hearts or minds of everyone here. Do you think this could possibly be a case of extreme language. You know what I mean? Like saying “EVERY time…” or “No one EVER…” or “You ALWAYS…”. Statements like those seem to be so loaded and usually don’t allow for anything other than exactly what was said. I can only speak for myself but if I am really the only one (and I don’t I’m not), I DON’T accept the stories of abuse at face value. Maybe a little credit here for those of us who don’t accept every story at face value?
And then you stack up all the biased reports and say pastoral abuse is widespread at SGM. Publically. With names.
) but that is sort of what it feels like is being done in this post. I’m not saying that what you are seeing isn’t real. Not at all. I just wonder if you can see that the words you are using is painting the people on this site with a rather broad brush and possibly you have spattered some paint on those who have not earned it. (And trust me, I have earned plenty of having a loving friend speak to me about how I don’t always speak with love, etc. I have crossed quite a few lines here, I am sure. So please don’t think I’m saying that I don’t deserve to have people say things about me. I just don’t think it’s fair to paint with a super wide brush/rolling pin.)
Again, I wonder if you would consider that this statement may be a bit … err.. some extremism? I for one have never named the person/people who have done what happened to me. Never. No one could probably guess, either. Not even the people on here who know me personally or who knew me then. It would seem that you don’t want us to paint SGM with a roller (forget broad brush
I believe you need to hear from all persons involved, including the pastor, in order to determine the truth of what really happened. Do you? Don’t you think you need to hear from all sides before publically declaring pastor x to be abusive?
I don’t know if I ever proclaimed any pastor x to be abusive but I do not agree with your logic. Now I am going to use a super extreme example to prove my point, so please don’t think I am in any way shape or form calling any of these people Hitler or Edy Amean (like I could even pretend I know how to spell that one) Stalin in a bad mood or anything of that nature. Please know this is just an extreme example to disprove what you said. But I don’t think that I need to know (fill in the blank: Hitler’s, Amean’s, Stalin’s) side of things in order to determine that they did some bad things. Almost every sexual predator denies any wrongdoing, even years after they are caught. (Again, I am NOT saying any SGM pastors do this, I am just using this as another extremem.) Yet if victim after victim comes forward to discuss what has happened to them and if all their stories line up and if all their stories echo the same pattern and if all their stories match up with what is considered to be a pathology found among sex offenders, and if the supposed perpetrator refuses to speak on their own behalf and if they do speak or send someone else to speak on their behalf and they deny it… well, 30 Years, after years of hearing similar stories from the victims from all corners of the country, from those who have never met each other… (You follow where I’m going with this?) At a certain time, if all the stories of abuse keep popping up from people who have never even met each other, I am going to begin to think something is fishy. I am not going to publically declare someone is abusive by name. But I am also not going to believe that the person who has had woman after woman after man come forward to say they were raped by person X are simply biased. (Of course they are biased, we all are!) But at a certain point I stop thinking, “There could be some reasonable explanation for all this. If only I could hear the accused’s sides.” At least not if the accused has had YEARS to come forward and never has. I didn’t say I’d declare them as abusive by name, but I sure as heck wouldn’t be leaving them alone in the room with anyone, either.
Folks who are hurting due to bad experiences are not given a license to make false statements about the members of SGM.
Possibly I have misunderstood this. Are you saying that people have made false statements about the memebers of SGM?
It is as though once the conflict takes place anything and everything about SGM is now seen through cynical-colored glasses.
Hmm, I wonder if you have much experience with abuse. I ask that because this sentence sort of tells me you may not have. Actually, victims of abuse are normally the very last ones to see their perpetrator through cynical colored glasses. They normally do so for year after year with rose colored glasses. You see, that is what allows abusers to flourish. And that is what keeps victims of abuse in the abuse cycle. The refusal to see. Cynical colored glasses (good term, by the way) are not ususally donned (is that the right word?) “once the conflict takes place” but after years and years of systematic abuse. It normally takes God breaking through the religious or otherwise motivated rose colored glasses and holding the person up to the harsh light of reality- then holding them there for a really, really long time before the person finally says, “OK, OK, I get it. This person has been bad to me.” Even then, when he gently lowers you to the ground, you still crawl back toward those rose colored glasses. Life looks so much prettier with them on. Sometimes God lets you put them back on and gives you a rest before He wrestles them back off you. Or sometimes He puts His foot on them and breaks them so that you can be rid of the things that allow you to accept abuse. It may sound cruel of Him to do, but it really is the most loving thing He can do. (Short of simply removing all the mean people from the world. Personally that is my solution to most things, but God, for whatever reason, doesn’t seem to think that is the way to go. At least He hasn’t adopted this genius plan of mine, yet.)
Pointing fingers and making accusations make matters worse.
)
Actually, it really depends on the situation. If I am in a court of law and I ask a witness, “Is the person who did this to you in the courtroom?” then having the witness/victim point fingers and say, “He/She is there.” then it is exceedingly useful. If I run out onto the playground and see a small child beaten to a pulp and ask them who did this to them, having them point a finger and telling me who did it, it most invaluable. However, IF they lied or made false accusations, then it is a terrible thing, indeed.
It is not just me. Or the folks I know. The testimonies I have heard and the fruit I see churchwide does not cancel the abusive behavior. But it clearly demonstrates to me that this on-going billboard of accusations is not justified.
I hear you that you don’t think it’s justified. And I totally respect your feelings on that. I just want to say I disagree. (Though I assume that you know that already.
Best to you and yours,
Stunned
who is way too tired to do spell check at this point
30-I was hoping for some highly judgmental statement I made, judging the hearts of 2500+ people. I would have apologized.
All you could find is one of my little one liners? I’m sorry that I cracked a joke about SGM’s well documented practice of “honoring” if my statement really bothered you, but it’s hard for me to see me judging someone’s heart in that little line.
I’ve said some really stupid stuff here 30-you can do better….
Great post stunned!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
RT: “That’s why PK is wise–he doesn’t talk experiences, only facts and doctrine. Hard to refute by simply saying, “C’mon, you’re talking about friends of mine. That couldn’t have happened.””
RT — you’re knocking it out of the park. Thank you, again, for words of reason & wisdom.
30Years said,
“You said earlier that the comments here are directed towards the pastors of SGM, not the members.” Then went on to say, “There is no divide between leadership and the rest of the congregation.” Astounding statement considering the virtual chasm that existed during the 15 + years when I was part of SGM.
Aww…WE–you’re too kind. I’m going to send you a bag of Ukrops Whitehouse rolls….the usurper still sells them. (Richmond insider talk)
So here’s a story from yesterday:
Good friend of mine (in fact the one who came to worship with us two weeks ago) called yesterday. She had received a Facebook message (focus here, y’all), that was a FACEBOOK message from a former Care Group leader of hers, who has now moved fifty miles away and who she has neither seen nor heard from in over a year.
The FB message said that the senior pastor at her old church wanted her to call him, so she should give him a call. (That’s not that the former CG leader wanted her to call him, but that the senior pastor wanted my friend to call him, the Senior Pastor.)
After I choked on my Diet Coke, I asked, “So, why don’t you think that the Senior Pastor is willing to just pick up a phone and call you if he needs to talk to you?”
She was pretty irritated at this point, after a couple of days had passed, but said her initial reaction was fear and a childlike feeling of shame.
She didn’t call him, or respond to the Care Group leader’s message. I would have enjoyed him answering the simple question: “Why is this any of your business, and why in the world would you have been talking about me to the Senior Pastor?”
There’s freedom out here, SGMers who are burdened.
Jesus lifts burdens, legalism loads them on you.
Your calling is worship, repentence and obedience.
Your gift is joy and delight and freedom and fellowship.
Sunday morning is about joining horizontally to look vertically in delight and worship, not in the captivity of watching your back and wondering who is about to speak into your life. That is the Holy Spirit’s job.
Pilgrim–excellent comment. Wondered the same thing. There seems to be an obssessive need to identify with the pastors, who do not identify with the sheep. Like the shepherds dig the chasm and work hard to keep it deep and wide, and the sheep won’t even admit its there.
Does this explain the absolute hysteria anytime anyone criticizes a pastor, but the complete lack of reaction when a layperson is harmed, or, worse yet, a covenant child is abused? Stories of cruelty go by with a “meh!” reaction from the SGMers here, but describe an abusive meeting with a pastor and all hell breaks loose.
Didn”t Jesus say something once about tying a millstone……
RT,
The SP you mentioned seems to be treating the CG leader like a secretary. Uck. It is sad that the SP didn’t approach your friend himself. It would have shown much more compassion/love if he had.
OFF TOPIC~
Recently because of the post of That Bad Dog and PK i have been diving deeper into this whole truly reformed position that SGM is Flag bearing now. After Reading tons of blogs and reading hundreds of articles by C.J., Piper, Mark Denver and many more i have come to the conclusion that these men are 100% given over to Hyper~Calvinism and its began to make me sick. Please Get your friends out of there. I am planning to make one last plea to my family and friends to at least research what SGM and T4G stand for.
I thank God for this site and the brothers and sisters on it. Who God has used to cause me to research and question what i thought i knew and now truly know what i thought i believed was wrong.
RT:
Outstanding illustration with the tiger. Really. Outstanding!
Now…
To those still in SGM who still have problems with the really mean things said here about SGM (this is friendly sarcasm…please relax):
I’m still seeing flat defenses, flat denials, flat everything. Time to get some air into the tires. This is a tough love exercise that will no doubt get criticized. I don’t care.
If I were to simplify my thoughts and concerns regarding the implied–whether conscious or not–characterization of those on this blog who have had a bad experience with SGM, here it is…
While polity may not be a major doctrine of the universal church, bad polity can certainly create, seriously distort, mangle or participate in adding to major doctrines. Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM), in my opinion, is an organization that is so absorbed with the pastoral realm, training pastors and defending SGM missiological practices that this absorption is to the serious, wide-sweeping and morbid neglect of the sheep/laity. Compounding this is a form of polity (or lack thereof) that is at best pyramid in shape (with echoes of an episcoalian form and even some practices), if it can be graphed at all, with the dregs left for the laity by the time anything good rolls downhill. The fact that some (or even if it is a lot) of the laity or leadership are blind to this does not mean the issues and the man-centered focus that hallmarks SGM does not exist. For those who do not experience the brunt of the bad things that go on in SGM, I would beg you as brothers and sisters in Christ to not negate into non-existence the concerns and realities of those who have gone through the bad and even the worst of it. You are simply going to have to live with this fact, that there is a big fat blemish on SGM’s portrayal of Christ’s church. Defending SGM is your perogative. All I wish for here–but in pessimistic honesty don’t believe I’ll ever get it–in dialogue on the ‘fuge is that there be at least some type of acknowledgement of the aforementioned blemish and not flat denials and wide-stroking of everyone on this blog–not to mention the hundreds who’ve been burned at varying degrees–with scarlet letters when they remember or have experienced history different than you have.
I beg of you to start dealing with the realities of these issues rather than stereotyping a really large group of good folks–Christ’s own, I might add.
You do not have the corner on the Gospel. Whether you have said this or not is irrelevant. SGM has conveyed this attitude for years. I know it because I was there for 22+ years. Nobody has a corner on the Gospel except God himself.
In Christ because of Christ,
–pk
ps: PDIWHO: I will take the request for what I think about how modern day polity and/or the 2st century church should look under advisement; right now personal issues need to cool down before I tackle something mammoth like that. For you I highly recommend the book Spurgeon vs. Hyper-Calvinism; it will really help in the concerns, issues, turmoil you may be feeling in terms of the hyper-Calvinism thing. Nothing will quench a fire or concern like the Word, but the Spurgeon book is just a suggestion.–pk
Thank you PK, It has been very troubling to me coming out of SGM to find where i stand on issues like Calvinism verses Luther and Arminianism. And all three againts each other throw in Owen’s, Edwards, Spurgeon and Wesly whoops you have WW3 of doctrine going on. I completely agree with you and thanks for the words of wisdom.
Outstanding posts Stunned, RT, etc. – I guess it is welcome back (again) 30 years. I don’t mean to pick on you but you do leave it out there for it to happen
.
30 years – “only the pastoral staff have all authority” — That is such a revealing statement. Before I comment on that one, is that really what you are wanting to say or is that a satirical statement?
30 years – “But when someone shares their experience here, it is subject to personal bias” — When pastors continue to exploit the members of the church through their authority and they tell their story – is it so totally objective that they not be challenged? And if they have all the authority who has the authority to challenge them?
30 years – “I believe you need to hear from all persons involved, including the pastor in order to determine the truth of what really happened” — your statement is incredulous with all the ‘stuff’ the pastors, apostles, etc. etc have hidden from the churches all these years. Recently I was with some leaders that I had a significant impact in their lives over the years (a long time ago). They naturally believed what was told them as to why I resigned the church and left PDI. Not once in 14 years did they bother to ask me why I left. They finally asked when we were face to face a few weeks ago. The positive thing I see from your perspective is you believe what you are told to believe without getting the other’s perspective – which is why I guess you struggle with the posts on this site.
30 years – ‘now seen through cynical-colored glasses’ — what color are your glasses brother?? SGM Pink?
30 years – “reconciliation is difficult” – just for the record it has been nearly impossible unless the confrontee acknowledges his or her sin and they humble themselves because those “over them” will not or have not. Only recently have I seen and heard reconciliation taking place with pastors owning their responsibility and it has made a difference with a few (so far) — and thankfully, I have been a recipient of reconciliation with CJ, Steve and others as well. It meant a lot to me.
Following Stunned’s using an “extreme example”. I will illustrate the reason why so many are untrusting of trying to work through reconciliation with SGM leaders. The pain of a sexually molested child by a parent is very very bad but if the parent is confronted and there is denial the hurt and wounds become off the charts.
Christians trust their lives and hearts to church leaders, perhaps too much so. When they are violated by a pastors authority it is very very bad but when the pastor is confronted and not only is there denial but more blame and responsibility put on the church member the hurts and wounds are off the chart. This does not invite reconciliation.
I think you make way too light the power of those in authority to hurt people as well as help people. Thank God you have been on the help side but there are way too many that have been on the hurt side.
PK – another brilliant post (almost as good as Stunned’s and RT’s)
Irv
You made some real good points in your last statement.
In some of the recent emails I have seen where people were trying to confront abuses in SGM the leaders above them were quick to drop any involvement in the issue at the first sign that the abusive pastor was willing to talk with the person etc. This includes the SGM Leaders not wanting to mediate the conflict etc. It is as if an abusive pastor can honestly now see the wrong he has done.
This type of approach certainly seems quite lacking.
Furthermore, if abuse happened one should ask why and what type of environment there was for this to happen etc. For example what type of environment would there be that would allow an “apostle’s” wife to think she should and had the right to “treat” a woman for anorexia (who was at a normal weight for height and body size)? This would include maybe the pastor’s actions have shown they may no longer should be serving as a pastor or should step down for a time period.
I am sure part of this is what can happen in organizations where the people will working for the same group for quite a while. In one situation I saw they always said to be careful with anyone you dealt with in the group including the person who was working for you. You never know when you might be working for them.
This type of situation makes people fearful of making too many waves or criticizing another person that much since one day the tables may be turned etc. I am sure this helps explain the group think and not making waves mentality that seems to exist in the group. Of course what has been shared before that most of these men would have a hard time supporting their family if they suddenly lost their job with SGM is another factor in this mentality.
RT — I’m salivating at the mention of White House rolls. And laughing at the facebook message story. Same old same old. A friend of mine once wrote a long letter to her SGM Sr. Pastor. He gave it to one of his underlings to “handle.” Underling called her and said SrPastor didn’t have time to talk to her, and that the letter was now in his possession. Sr.P didn’t have the common courtesy to even ask if it would be ok to share her private correspondence with the underling.
She was going into great detail about her conversations with underling. I held up my hand and said, “Stop, STOP! Tell me, first of all, why you would agree to talk with underling about any of this. — how did it become his business? After all, in SGM, wouldn’t that be gossip or slander? You didn’t write your letter to him!”
The PC might be well served to include a course in manners and common courtesy.
PK,
Truly, I would love for every member of Sovereign Grace Ministries to receive a copy of your post above at 6:49 pm.
And to quote segments of your post and emphasize:
“……….Sovereign Grace Ministries,in my opinion,is an organization that is so absorbed with the pastoral realm, training pastors, and defending sgm missiological practices that this absorption is to the serious, wide-sweeping and morbid neglect of the sheep/laity.”
and: “……For those who donot experience the brunt of the bad things that go on in sgm,I would beg you as brothers and sisters in Christ TO NOT NEGATE INTO NON-EXISTENCE the concerns and realities of those who have gone through the bad and even the worst of it. You are simply going to have to live with this fact, “THAT THERE IS A BIG FAT BLEMISH ON SGM’S PORTRAYAL OF CHRISTS CHURCH.”
PK, I am also very concerned and, I confess, discouraged, because I’m beginning to wonder if many of Gods people in sgm are CHOOSING to remain asleep and/or negate the realities of sgm’s destructive unChristlike polity and manipulative control.
I too, am troubled as PDIWHO stated (and am getting the book you suggested).
Mostly, I continue to run….to flee…to Jesus……….to hear Him above all others, to recall that “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness didnot comprehend it….
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:1-5,14)
Thankyou, Lord, for the powerful work of Holy Spirit——cause us all to be changed—
glory by glory……into the image of our Savior Redeemer, Jesus the Christ………
Steve,
I know the situation you’re referring to, but I’m seeing the opposite happen. There are men in SGM who are willing to go the distance to see reconciliation occur.
Jim
I am glad to hear you seeing cases where those leaders in SGM are “are willing to go the distance to see reconciliation occur.” I do hope you see my point of wanting to get to the root of why or what lead SGM Leaders to do certain abusive practices such as what environment or bad character traits of the leader lead to this happening.
I have been involved with one case of something that happened in England and so far the reports aren’t good. It doesn’t appear the leadership over there is that “willing to go the distance.” This is especially sad with what affect it had on one family and one particular individual in that family.
I imagine one thing that makes it harder for reconciliation is how public the leader’s actions were. When a leader digs a large hole and having to admit that his actions were wrong, especially to a large group of people, requires a lot of humility. With that being the case, I am sure it makes it hard for a lot of leaders to want to see the error of their ways. Thus it is easier for the leader to justify their actions vs. be “willing to go the distance.”
Along with Jim, I do celebrate and rejoice in the reconciliations.
I am admittedly pessimistic in regard to seeing outward evidence that SGM will seriously examine and change the very practices that created the devastation which in turn lead to the necessity of reconciliation.
This can only be seen over time, however impatient any of us are in regard to it.
–jw
PK
It is good to hear that there is some reconciliation happening with SGM. I hope neither you or Jim are painting the picture that this reconciliation is that widespread or that most cases of abuse have resulted in reconciliation. It isn’t as if there is a real push from the upper headquarters for this happen from what I have seen. It is more like the group was forced into this due to embarrassment etc.
I am sure whether reconciliation happens depends a lot on the heart the SGM Leader involved including, as stated before, their humility to reexamine what they did. Sadly there are a number of leaders that don’t have that.
Steve240:
In re: to May 28th, 2010 at 11:06 am you said, “I hope neither you or Jim are painting the picture that this reconciliation is that widespread or that most cases of abuse have resulted in reconciliation.”
At what point did I ever paint that picture, even in the remotest sense? I simply said I was rejoicing along with Jim in those reconcialitions that have taken place. In fact, I carefully qualified it in the same post, May 28th, 2010 at 10:50 am, when I said, “I am admittedly pessimistic in regard to seeing outward evidence that SGM will seriously examine and change the very practices that created the devastation which in turn lead to the necessity of reconciliation.”
Hopefully this re-clarifies anything that I have said…please don’t get the impression that I was parading reconciliations as evidence that everything is all better now or that these reconciliations still justify maintaining the status quo within SGM.
In Christ,
–pk
PK
I wasn’t meaning to say you were painting that type of picture. I was just clarifying this. I was more concerned with what Jim recently said.
In summary it is good to see some action on their part but this action doesn’t mean the group has any type of epiphany let alone the group making necessary changes.
I am glad we are both thinking along the same lines.
Jim,PK, and Steve,
We have been on the receiving end (as you know,Jim) of JBritt, as the “sgm headquarters ambassador” (my term) for our case/pastoral abuse story. JB was a compassionate listener and “in-the-fight” advocate for our case–he would fit Jims description as one in sgm who is “willing to go the distance to see reconciliation occur.” CJM also expressed his sincere apologies and was, we believe, genuinely saddened for all that had transpired and was brought to light.—- In our case, the offending pastor refused interraction with JB and others and denied he had “missed” anything and had done nothing ”inappropriately” etc etc—he has since, left his Grace church and Sovereign Grace ministries altogether .
Our personal peace has come about by: forgiving all involved—pastors, apostles (some whom we have know for 20 years), and on a continuous basis, Brethren who decide to see us as “slanderers” for speaking the truth of our story. However, we have reconciled in the definition of ‘to settle a difference’—-but not reconciled in walking in harmony.
Because we were a part of sgm for almost 20 years and have close friendships in several churches and family member who entered the pastoral position — many people know our story. The Lord directs people– as recently as 3 days ago– to contact us as they are the aghast and mauled recipient of abusive unGodly sgm pastoral ‘counsel’.— From our perspective and experience, this points to the fact that leaders—all the way up to cjm can be genuinely sorry for abusive pastoral actions and make attempts to reconcile/make things better etc etc etc. Polity is being discussed and debated etc etc etc.. HOWEVER, until there is a clear recognition/responsiblity/painful remorse and true repentance for the source of all they have in place—from the top of training pastors to the culture they have created—– the leaven/pollution of religous choking will continue.
We love Gods people,including those still in sgm —and so, we pray that avenues such as Refuge and sgmsurvivors will continue to bring to light the far-reaching destructive tentacles of sgm. Praying for a scene similar to when the prophet Nathan entered King Davids court,giving him an illustration of a positioned wealthy man taking a beloved sheep–(I can only think of the many many mauled sheep here)—-and as David was aghast and mortified and angry that a man would do such a thing—-then Nathan points his finger in Davids face—and says “YOU are the man”— and David the King falls on his face before God and his court—- openly confesses——-and repents………
Keepin on prayin’…………….
Waters: re: May 28th, 2010 at 12:40 pm; So deeply encouraging, and thank you for sharing this!
Steve240: Gotcha, and the clarification is appreciated. No worries, brother.
–pk
Waters,
I’m not completely caught up with all the comments on this thread yet, but I wanted to encourage you on how clearly you express yourself. You also seem to have found a balance where you can speak the truth graciously, yet be firm when you need to. I’m learning much from reading your perspective.
P.K.,
I can imagine how painful it must be to present the truths you have to people you love who don’t seem to want to hear. There are many of us who ARE listening, and learning from what you are teaching. You are like a watchman on the tower, shouting out that danger is on its way. Imagine how frustrated that soldier would become if the people inside the walls completely ignored his warning when he could see with his own eyes that the enemy was approaching the gates?
I guess many of us have felt this frustration. Anyway, thanks for all you have done to help us understand. I pray that you and your wife are standing strong during this difficult time. There are many standing with you.
Irv,
You are a true pastoral voice on this blog. It is very comforting to