The Cardinal Sins of Joshua Harris
Tuesday, August 16, 2011 at 4:33PM In Roman Catholic theology, there are three gradations of sin: venial, cardinal and mortal. I’m happy to report Joshua Harris has not committed any mortal or “killer” sins. Those destroy your acceptance by God and cause eternal separation in hell. But neither are his sins against C.J. and Sovereign Grace venial or minor. No, Joshua’s sins are cardinal and that means they are major. They haven’t destroyed his relationships but they have resulted in separation from each other. C.J., Mike, and Brian are gone from Covenant Life Church. That is “cardinal” because Joshua’s errors (and all the CLC pastors) are major! That is, in the eyes of the Mahaney’s, Bradshaw’s and Chesmore’s. We are not talking about “venial” disagreements.
What are these cardinal sins according to the evidence?
- The handling of “The Documents”
- Critical comments about C.J.
- Compassionate comments about me
- God is disciplining Sovereign Grace
- A different vision and direction for Covenant Life Church
- A lack of support for Sovereign Grace
The Handling of “The Documents”
At the Covenant Life Members Meeting on July 10, Joshua said the following.
“Can I just ask you a question? How many of you have read the [Brent’s] documents? I am grateful if you’ve read the documents. I just want to see how many people know what I am talking about. That’s great. If some of you are asking the question, “Should I read the documents?” This is another complicated thing. I would say, I think you should, in the sense that, not you have to. I won’t tell you, you shouldn’t, and I won’t tell you, you should. But I understand that as, in particular heads of households, you need to know what is going on to decide whether or not you want to be a part of this church and SGM and so I think you need to be informed of these things and grapple with these things [applause]. That being said I would just encourage you to read them with same discernment if you picked up any book…. These documents are not this authoritative statement of all that has taken place. They are one person’s interpretation of the events. There are a lot of facts in them. There are a lot of emails. Brent is a man of integrity. I want to state that. He has not doctored emails. He is not lying about these things but he is interpreting these things.” (Joshua Harris, Member’s Meeting, July 10)
Joshua commends the church for reading the documents. That is cardinal sin number one. According to SGM practice, people should have been warned not to read them. Why? Because C.J., Mike, Brian and the entire Board have determined for you that they are slander. Trust them! But here Joshua is telling the church they “need to be informed” and “grapple with these things” (which drew considerable applause). He actually encourages people to read but with discernment and not view the documents as an “authoritative statement” because it is “one’s person interpretation.” But these qualifications are not enough to appease Mike and Brian. The documents must be condemned by the CLC pastors because they are dangerous. People should remain uninformed and uninvolved in the process. It is a private matter. In these kinds of situations, ignorance and indifference are considered virtues in SGM. People don’t need to know about these critical issues, the leaders will discern truth for you and tell you what to think later. The less you know the better off you are.
But Joshua understands the seriousness of the issues at hand. He can’t dismiss the content of the documents. In fact, people need to know what has gone on because it may have a bearing on their involvement in CLC and SGM. That is true. Joshua is willing to let people know what is in the garbage can. Sovereign Grace on the other hand, is trying to keep the lid on things. They don’t want people to see and smell what is inside because it is unsightly and stinks.
Here is what Brian said last Tuesday night.
“I believe the pastors neglected to biblically define Brent’s documents as accusations against an elder and as slanderous (1 Tim. 5:19-21). Instead, Josh expressed sympathy for the documents and encouraged heads of households to read Brent’s accusations to see if they would want to be a part of Covenant Life Church and Sovereign Grace Ministries…. Our team’s failure to demonstrate adequate impartiality and to bring clear and specific biblical guidelines gave credibility to Brent’s accusations and this has resulted in speculation, gossip, and even slander of C.J.’s character…. The pastors of our church failed to lead at a critical time. I believe this has had a detrimental effect on our local church, and that our example has had a detrimental effect on churches beyond Covenant Life. I love these men dearly, but for the sake of the gospel, I cannot continue to serve where I have a growing concern about our direction and our adherence to God’s Word when leaders receive accusation.” (Brian Chesemore, Big Meeting, August 9)
I don’t have a problem if someone defines my documents as formal charges or accusations according to 1 Timothy 5:19; though I view my original writings as the pleadings and appeals of a friend who loves Sovereign Grace Ministries and C.J.
But Brian wants much more. According to him, there is no room to assign any credibility, or express any appreciation, for my slanderous documents. To do so is to be impartial. In other words, Joshua and the pastors sided with me when they should have sided with C.J. Moreover, the actions of Joshua and the pastors were due to a lack of adherence to God’s Word. Brian believes they have transgressed Scripture and sinned against the Savior.
Mike feels the same way.
“My primary reasons for resigning are as follows…the encouragement to read Brent’s documents and the blogs void of guidance and evaluation from the Scriptures; Josh’s specific encouragement for heads of households to read Brent’s documents to examine their desire to be a part of Covenant Life Church and Sovereign Grace Ministries – a statement that brought credibility to these slanderous documents.” (Mike Bradshaw, BIG Meeting, August 9)
Of course, Joshua gave some guidance on July 10 but that eludes Mike and Brian. They may feel it was inadequate but it was not lacking. For Mike also, the documents have no credibility and are slanderous by definition. Given his perspective, he expected Joshua to discredited the documents and warn people not to read them. Instead, Joshua did the opposite. He encouraged people to read them. Big trouble for Josh! For Mike and Brian anything short of labeling my writings as libelous was to miss the mark and disobey Scripture.
Critical Comments about C.J.
No one criticizes C.J. in public. That is a cardinal rule so this was a cardinal sin. At the Members Meeting on July 10, Joshua said the following about C.J.
“There are so many emotions that are crashing and conflicting feelings as I talk about these things. And I am sure that is going to come out because a part of me wants to defend C.J. and to argue with Brent about the way that he presents things or the things other people say about him. Part of me is mad at C.J. Part of me is frustrated with how this thing has unfolded. We have a real relationship just like any other real relationship you have with any other person. He is a father in the faith but if you ever wanted to strangle your father. Okay? [laughter] There is a reality behind that and so all of that can be at work.” (Joshua Harris, Member’s Meeting, July 10)
This came very close to mortal sin. People have earned a pauper’s grave in the Sovereign Grace graveyard for less serious statements. Joshua is mad at C.J.? Joshua wants to strangle C.J.? And all of this is a reality and not an exaggeration. I am grateful for Joshua’s transparency wrapped in some humor. It is very hard to correct or challenge C.J. “You have to approach him like a teenager” (see Part 2: A Final Appeal, p. 92). Dave Harvey summarized well the difficulties in working with C.J.
“To correct CJ, or to challenge his own self-perception, was to experience a reaction through e-mails, consistent disagreement (without seeking to sufficiently understand), a lack of sufficient follow-up and occasionally, relational withdrawal. Along with this, CJ was poor in volunteering areas of sin, temptation or weakness in himself.” (Part 2: A Final Appeal, p. 91)
These kinds of honest statements by Joshua forced Mike to resign. In his way of thinking, the accusations against C.J. and Sovereign Grace should have been concealed and/or rebutted. No one should know about this stuff. That’s why both C.J. and Dave told Joshua it was a mistake to even have the Members Meetings on July 10, 17, and 24.
“My reason is simple: I can no longer, in good conscience, support the leadership of the pastoral team on key issues, in particular how they have led our church in addressing the accusations brought against C.J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries…. I believed my voice, along with others, would be represented and honored at the member’s meetings. However, on the evening of July 10th it became clear that the questions I raised and perspective I brought had little impact on the direction Josh was taking in addressing these matters. When my subsequent appeals were ineffective in altering the course of the following members’ meetings, it became only more evident that I could not support the leadership of the pastoral team on these critical issues and therefore, must resign.” (Mike Bradshaw, BIG Meeting, August 9)
One of Mike’s primary reasons for resigning was “the misrepresentation of C.J. Mahaney’s character and growth in sanctification at the Members’ Meetings.” I agree with Mike. Joshua was far too easy on C.J. Did I miss his point?
Brian agrees with Mike.
“Our [pastoral] team’s failure to demonstrate adequate impartiality and to bring clear and specific biblical guidelines gave credibility to Brent’s accusations and this has resulted in speculation, gossip, and even slander of C.J.’s character.”
And of course, C.J. agrees with Mike and Brian. Or maybe that’s backwards. Mike and Brian agree with C.J. I think the old adage is true with a twist. Like father, like son (in-laws).
Joshua wrote on Wednesday, “C.J. has also expressed concerns and points of disagreement with how we have been leading during this season” I am sure he does.
Compassionate Comments about Me
Sympathy for Brent. Cardinal sin number three. Here’s Joshua.
“You are going to hear me sometimes answering with one feeling and sometimes answering with another. And it’s confusing. I can be angry at Brent for bringing so many people into these issues and just sharing his perspective and yet at the same time I can understand why he’s done what he’s done. And I can sympathize with him and I feel bad for him and I feel bad for the things he has experienced. I wish these relationships were restored. There is a jumbo of emotions and feelings as we talk about these things.” (Joshua Harris, Members Meeting, July 10)
Joshua feels for me and understands my actions. I appreciate these sentiments but he (and the rest of the world) only knows a small portion of what Jenny and I have been through. “Part 4: The Untold Story” is far from complete. What remains is a story of extraordinary pain and abuse that no one would believe if you told them. Someday I’ll try.
Well, the last thing on Mike and Brian’s minds is concern for what I’ve gone through at the hands of C.J., Dave, Bob Kauflin, Gene Emerson and Mickey Connolly. Their sole focus is C.J. Joshua should be feeling bad for C.J. not me. He’s the one getting a raw deal. And expressing understanding for why I sent out the documents to the SGM pastors? You’ve got to be kidding. That was an act of supreme treason. I make Benedict Arnold look like an American loyalist.
God Is Disciplining Sovereign Grace Ministries
Cardinal sin number four. Joshua carrying on like a prophet. I mean is Joshua “also among the prophets” (cf. 1 Sam 10:11f.)? How dare he interpret Providence for Sovereign Grace! The Board of Directors can do that with any help from Joshua. Just give them a millennium to figure out the obvious.
“I believe God would have your leaders humbly acknowledge that it is our sin and our failure and our faulty structures that have brought this trouble. I don’t believe that these events are an accident. I believe they are the loving discipline of our heavenly Father. And no matter whose fault this is, this is what we cannot get around. This is what is unavoidable. We cannot get around the fact that our church and our entire denomination is being publicly spanked. We are being humiliated. We are being brought low. God is getting our attention.” (Joshua Harris, The Father’s Discipline, July 10)
Tone it down Joshua. Follow Harvey’s lead and his shiny, brand spanking new, hand-picked Board.
“But we disagree [with Joshua] on some important matters too. For example, we disagree in our interpretation of this current season of ministry. Is God disciplining all of Sovereign Grace Ministries right now? Josh says yes, and we’re open to that conclusion. But before arriving at that conclusion we would want to walk through a process of evaluating all of SGM, which we have not done yet. (Dave Harvey, “Where We Differ and Where We Disagree,” July 14)
They express disagreement with Joshua’s interpretation, then slightly change course and express some openness to the possibility God might be disciplining Sovereign Grace Ministries. Folks, I am afraid a blind guide (Matthew 5:14) is leading the movement. Look out for the pit ahead. It doesn’t take a study from Ambassadors of Reconciliation to realize God is dealing with all of Sovereign Grace Ministries.
Joshua goes on to describe how God is disciplining Sovereign Grace Ministries.
“And so I just want to ask you a question. How could God discipline a whole church? How could God discipline a whole denomination? What possible set of circumstances could he create that would force entire family of churches to recognize, to acknowledge, to turn away from deeply entrenched and flawed patterns of leadership and practice and church government? What could God possibly do to get an entire movement to do that? Well let me just propose a scenario for you. He could allow a chorus of critics on the internet to point out the most glaring failures and inconsistencies of that movement in an unrelenting way. He could allow the issues that they didn’t want to deal with, or have the nerve to change, to be aired in public. He could allow a breakdown in a relationship and the stubbornness of leaders to culminate in a set of circumstances so that all the mistakes and all the relational sins at the top levels of leadership would be written down and posted on the internet for the entire world to read. Do you think that would work? God, and God alone, has brought this unthinkable sequence of events about. (Joshua Harris, The Father’s Discipline, July 10)
I wish Dave Harvey had half the wisdom (not pragmatism) of Joshua Harris. God is pointing out the obvious. Why can’t Sovereign Grace see it?
“In the midst of a crisis like this one, the temptation for a leader like me is to stand before the people that I’ve been called to lead and say two things. It is not as bad as it seems. And it’s not your leaders’ fault. But I can’t say that because it wouldn’t be true. It is as bad as it seems. And it is the fault of your leaders. And we desperately need the help of God and the wisdom and the accountability of the people who have looked to our leadership to sort through this mess.” (Joshua Harris, The Father’s Discipline, July 10)
Joshua is right. It is bad! And it is primarily C.J. and Dave’s fault. I don’t say that to hopelessly condemn them. It is simply true. And until these two men fully acknowledge their pride, hypocrisy, deceit, love of reputation and authoritarianism, there is no hope for true reformation. It must come from within their hearts.
And notice Joshua’s last comment. “We desperately need…the accountability of the people.” Is Joshua crazed? You mean C.J. and Dave need to be held accountable by the laity in order to do what is right? C.J. wasn’t accountable to the apostolic team. C.J. wasn’t accountable to the CLC pastors. You expect him to be accountable to ordinary people? He won’t even come back to Covenant Life Church to answer questions by the members at the request of the members. Only Joshua has the humility to say such a thing.
Joshua and the Covenant Life pastors understand what is at stake. It is a big deal and to deny that reality is to resist and take lightly the discipline of the Lord.
“So the first potential way that we can resist or wrongly respond to the discipline of the Lord is to regard it lightly. To not take it seriously. To not see it for what it is. To kind of blow it off and say, “Oh well, you know this is just happening, it’s not that big of deal. We’ll just get through this and we’ll just kind of go on with business as usual. We’ll just kind of keep on doing our thing and this will pass. There is no lesson for us in this. We just need to tweak a few things. Everything will be fine. That is taking the discipline of the Lord lightly.” (Joshua Harris, The Father’s Discipline, July 10)
I am for Sovereign Grace but it needs an internal overhaul and I don’t see that happening. I have studied every message, blog and announcement. They are tweaking polity but there is no deep work of the Spirit in their hearts that results in public repentance, profuse confession and the restitution of wrong doing. On the other hand, this has begun to happen at Covenant Life Church. Thank God!
A Different Vision and Direction for CLC
Mike and Bryan are also leaving because they cannot support the vision and direction of Covenant Life Church with a clear conscience under Joshua’s leadership. It is so errant it is a cardinal sin to remain. That’s a mouth full. I need help digesting this portion of liver and onions (which I hated as a kid).
What are the “areas of disagreement” that violate their consciences? That puts these differences in a moral category. That makes them a matter of right and wrong. We’re not talking about how to solve a complicated math problem using different methods but arriving at same answer. We are talking about not being able to work together because the disagreements are so vast. What does this entail? I have some ideas but I suspect Joshua will reveal them on Wednesday night at the CLC Member’s Meeting.
These “areas of disagreement” have existed for at least a year according to Brian. He speaks on behalf of Mike also. So as not to confuse you, the comments included in brackets [ ] below are statements made by Brian at the BIG Meeting that were not in his written notes.
“Kristin and I have considered a transition [in conversation as we have thought about these different disagreements and differences] for at least a year because we were becoming [more and more] increasingly convinced that [there is a difference in] the vision of the church in certain areas. [The differences was not one I could enthusiastically support and I tried to process that prayerfully and over time…. But we have these areas of disagreement. And it became clear [to me and it became clear to Mike] that I [we] cannot adhere to my [our] convictions and continue to pastor people with enthusiastic support for Josh and the team’s vision. It would hinder my conscience, and this would not honor God, no matter the length of time. So “why leave?” began to morph into “How can I stay [with a clear conscience]?” It became foremost an issue of principle. That’s hard when you have the relationships we have in the church. But in order to serve this church Mike and I believe we need to move out of the way so that the dear people who attend Covenant Life Church can be pastored by godly men who enthusiastically affirm and support the leadership and direction of Covenant Life.
A Lack of Support for Sovereign Grace
In his statement, Brian spends far more time on this reason for leaving than any other reason. Recent developments with me only solidified his decision to separate from Covenant Life which he contemplated for a year.
“I have made my decision prayerfully and soberly over the last year. My reasons for resigning are twofold. First, I have observed over the last two years an undeniably diminishing enthusiasm amongst members of our pastoral team for the partnership we share with Sovereign Grace Ministries.” (Brian Chesemore, BIG Meeting, August 9 )
This charge must really hurt, not only Joshua and the pastors, but the entire church. No one has served the movement more than the people of Covenant Life Church. There isn’t a close second. But Brian maintains his two year assessment is undeniable.
He continues and broadens his criticism of the pastors. Not only are the pastors unsupportive, they are unteachable and independent.
“Many discussions have led me to believe that the majority of our pastoral team seems to think there is little to learn from Sovereign Grace. Under our board’s leadership, we have spent far more time criticizing in matters of polity and mission than building up and partnering with SGM even though SGM has been in the laborious process of leading us in polity refinements for almost two years…. And our trajectory has been a steady move away from Sovereign Grace, which deeply disappoints me. I’m not suggesting that Covenant Life won’t remain a SGM church. I pray and have a strong hope that it will. But I believe our church has minimized and neglected the privilege of our long-standing partnership with our friends in Sovereign Grace.” (Brian Chesemore, BIG Meeting, August 9)
My friends at Covenant Life tell me they are pleased with the changes Joshua and the pastors have implemented over the last couple of years. These friends were ready to leave but have remained because of these changes. They love the new openness and freedom to express their perspective without fear. They appreciate the pastors’ willingness to confess sin and answer hard questions. They see the pastors owning the sins of the past and correcting bad practices and refining some doctrine. The pastors are not covering up. (Well, for the most part – there are still serious things they need to acknowledge but I hope it is only a matter of time.) They are involving the congregation.
Behind the scenes the Covenant Life pastors are challenging the Sovereign Grace Board. The Board must act upon, rather than resists, the input they are receiving. All of this needs to come out in the open. The CLC pastors are keenly aware of the deep, deep problems in Sovereign Grace. They are privy to at least some of the accusations being brought against C.J., Dave and Steve Shank from around the country. These have not been made public by the Board and are just the tip of the iceberg. Numerous men who were once pastors in the movement remain unwilling to speak up because of fear, exasperation, or the pain of reliving their experiences.
But Brian has a fundamentally different point of view. Covenant Life needs Sovereign Grace. Not the other way around.
“I would disagree with this direction and believe our partnership has been historically beneficial and should still be vital…. We don’t exist in this partnership solely to reform it. It is meant to be mutually beneficial, and I believe we impoverish ourselves when we neglect or minimize the wisdom, experience, and relationships that reside in Sovereign Grace. To go further, I believe Covenant Life’s recent history reveals that we need more help from Sovereign Grace, not less…. For twenty years I have had a passion to serve Sovereign Grace, our weaknesses notwithstanding, but I don’t believe I can sufficiently fulfill that desire here at Covenant Life. My decision to resign is rooted in this reality.
Mike feels similarly.
“The concern that Josh’s statements regarding Sovereign Grace Ministries were imbalanced, unnecessarily critical, and illegitimately applied to all of Sovereign Grace. Additionally, there has been the absence of appropriate appreciation for the vast fruitfulness of this ministry and our thirty year partnership in gospel advancing work both here and abroad.” (Mike Bradshaw, BIG Meeting, August 9)
Mike and Brian don’t see how serious the problems are in C.J.’s life or the ministry of Sovereign Grace. For them the pastors have a far greater need for the Board, not less of a need! But believe me, if the CLC pastors followed the SGM Board, my documents would have been exclusively condemned, nothing critical would have been whispered about C.J., no agreement with my actions or compassionate comments would have been expressed, Joshua would do what C.J. wants at CLC, and the CLC pastors would not be holding the Board accountable for change. Those are Joshua’s cardinal sins.
One further point. When Brian says, “I believe we impoverish ourselves when we neglect or minimize the wisdom, experience, and relationships that reside in Sovereign Grace,” who do you think he has primarily in mind? That’s right, C.J.! His role in Covenant Life has been neglected and minimized. Result. Poverty. Translation. Joshua and the pastors have differed with C.J. and not followed his advice, agreed with his counsel, or benefited from his superior wisdom on too many occasions. That is a big deal to Brian and one worth leaving CLC over.
Will Covenant Life Leave Sovereign Grace?
C.J., Mike and Brian have left Covenant Life Church over differences. Will the Covenant Life pastors leave Sovereign Grace Ministry over differences? I hope so unless the Sovereign Grace Board of Directors change their ways. What we have before us is largely a study in contrasts. Humility versus pride. Openness versus concealment. Repentance versus resistance. Sovereign Grace posts are morally neutral press releases, not statements of contrition and sorrow for sin that have harmed a lot of people. Instead they use the blog to defend C.J. and protect their self-interests.
Step one for Joshua was resigning from the Board of Directors. Remember from the documents, C.J. talked about turning the movement over to him next year at age 60. C.J. turns 59 on September 21.
Step two for Joshua. Start a new family of churches characterize by authentic humility. I’d like to join that movement but I probably don’t qualify and wouldn’t meet admittance requirements. If it happens, however, go with Joshua and the men that go with him.
Consider these statements. How refreshing. One day soon I hope to hear similar comments from C.J. and Dave and the other Directors.
“I just want to share with you some of the issues that God is beginning to reveal in my own heart. I am not seeking to speak for any other person but myself. In this season of shaking, these are the things I believe God wants us to let go of. I am seeing in my own life a spiritual pride and self-righteousness. You know for too long I had the attitude that we were the best church and the best family of churches, the best network of churches in the world. That we had a corner on sound doctrine. That we were both charismatic and Reformed. That we were the best at applying truth and living out our faith and I had a condescending attitude toward other churches. I remember having a condescending attitude toward my own parents and their church. And that is just pride. God is shaking that out of my hands. May God shake that out of all of our hands. I understand why people in our community have viewed CLC as elitist and exclusive because I think that has been in some of our hearts. I am not accusing all of you of this, but I think it is there. I think we need to cry out to God to help us, to reveal it if it is there.” (Joshua Harris, The Father’s Discipline, July 10)
“I am seeing overconfidence in leaders. Now don’t get me wrong. I believe we need leaders. God’s word clearly states that leadership and pastors are his idea. But I also believe in light of the doctrine of sin that we need appropriate checks and balances from the congregation. Our church government as a movement is broken and it is confused. And we have not moved quickly enough or decisively enough to fix it. And for too long we have assumed, as pastors, that we could handle everything on our own. And we have not recognized enough the gifts and the wisdom and the work of the Holy Spirit in the congregation to help us do the work and the leadership that God has called us to do. And that must change. That will change. (Joshua Harris, The Father’s Discipline, July 10)
Reader Comments (29)
I was pretty discouraged when I wrote my first comment in confrontation to some of the motives and heart issues you may be struggling with and it was never posted. From someone who has DEMANDED transparency and information on THEIR timetable even after not being in the SGM family for a number of years, it appears that it is somewhat hypocritical for Brent to not do the same. I will emphasize - APPEARS.
I have not disclosed my name on this blog and survivors because I don't want to in anyway represent my comments as being from my church. I also don't want to cause any more possible division in our church. I think revealing my name could affect others, so I will remain nameless for now. I'll gladly talk offline, Brent. You have my email. I don't know you well, but we have met a few times and even served together in a matter of ways.
Ok - to balance my opinion, I think what you have done in private in your confrontation is highly commendable. I think when you included non-current-SGM-pastors in your 'widening circle' was deplorable. If anything it should have gone to CLC. The only clear biblical place that CJ should have been been formally held accountable was by HIS local church. If not by the pastors (yes that's where it should have been and wasn't) then by the congregation. I am sure you know enough people that your could have brought this to at CLC. It still would have eventually spread, but it would have been a more biblical approach and thus I think God would have further blessed this process.
As far as you saying, "I will say more about my failings later" - is that the correct order according to scripture? Address CJ's sin in full detail of 600+ pages and then yours later?
I apologize for the intimidation. I didn't see it as clearly as that when I posted. To be honest, I AM thankful that you have done a lot of what you have done. I just would really like to see a level of control of your judgements being included with the evidence presented. It is blatant throughout your docs. I also think you need to seek approval before publicly publishing private conversations (like most recently your email exchanges with Joshua). If you did that, then there would be much more likely a chance that you may get answers to questions you've raised. And if your concern is REALLY for CJ and SGM, then it shouldn't matter who brings it to light.
I HAVE, by the way, read your docs, and I do agree with the level of seriousness and pervasiveness the problems are. I am glad (or at least hopeful) that they are being dealt with. I am especially grateful for Joshua and the CLC pastoral team in the way they are trying to lead by example and make hard decisions and real change. I hope that flows downstairs.
I think it would benefit the entire community of believers to let some things play out before continuing to make judgements (this is not solely directed at you!). I feel that was the biggest shortcoming of Brian and Mike's reasoning behind their departure. All discipline is painful at the time, but there will be fruit from this. I think they forgot about that. And I think we can all learn from their mistakes.
As far as your heart's alignment -- the heart is deceitful. I think you have 'valid' points of personal disappointment and hurt in your heart, and I would not discount that so easily in how you are addressing everyone involved in this situation. I do respect you - you are obviously gifted in discernment. And I am sure you've prayed through this, but sin remains and even our best intentions can be laced with sin (I know I am telling you nothing new).
@Janna - I am not seeking respect/approval of man. If you don't respect me, I am sorry. If I am not mistaken you've used a pseudonym as well up until recently. Please don't judge me for what I feel like is the best option for my family and my relationships at my church.
@Brent - I obviously offended you in my comments. I apologize. I am not a man of heavy conflict and my love for a lot of the involved parties could have clouded HOW I responded. I am deeply concerned about them, and how they (especially CJ/Mike/Brian) are walking out this process. I think the verdict is out on Dave, but the board member choices alone isn't encouraging (especially agreed with your analysis of that). I hope you are able to separate the wheat from the chaff in what I have said and there would be something helpful taken away from it. If my comments aren't helpful, I'll cease to make them here. Fair enough?
[anSGMmember. I don't have time to address everything. A few comments. I did take my concerns to the CLC pastors. I have not told that part of the story. I ended up not sending my documents to non-current SGM pastors with a few exceptions - i.e. men who are close friends. I've already commented regarding Joshua's correspondence. You'll have to look for it. You can easily disclose your name and say your comments don't represent your church. If you did, maybe friends might provide you some input also. That provides accountability you are requring everyone else. Thanks for your encouragment. I am not offended. Brent]
My sins are well documented. I am unfit for ministry. You can get C.J.'s letter from your SGM pastor for details.
In response to anSGMember.I think you are showing some unhealthy signs there. Mr Detwiler has repeatedly confessed to his share of the damage, and he is no longer in a position to influence the situation without some very serious help from somewhere. I guess Mr Mahaney will have already confessed much but he has a much more difficult task in demonstrating change as he remains so influential. He needs help too in effecting that change and that's just what he is getting. God will be kind to him but not necessarily take him out of his circumstances. I'm expecting to see Detwiler & Mahaney in heaven, in a much better condition than they presently are. It is easy to see all this in personal terms but let's not discredit God in such a way. Mr Mahaney is clearly God's initial conduit for change, Mr Detwiler has been God's catalyst, but one is no better than the other so let's not be silly cheer leaders for either.
Likewise blogs have been a nightmare for some and a blessing for others. Sometimes we see a post that condemns all SGMers and sometimes you will hear a SGM leader condemn all the blogging. One is no better or worse than the other but both are rushing to the 'high ground' of stupid self righteousness.
I think a natural chain of events is developing and is easily recognisable by anyone that thinks about church history(Most leaders would know this, as Mr Harris does). God does eventually bring this sort of thing out into the open for his own purposes. He will use strong men in their lies and deceit, even ones who are saved, and he raises up new men and women. He does destroy reputations and he does tear down or change church groupings. There is not one denomination in church history that has not received appropriate rebuke and correction from God. Some have disappeared forever, most are 'weakened' in good ways.
My hope is that the Holy Spirit is all over this ( there is lots of evidence that is the case) doing the will of God in pointing sinners galore towards trusting their Lord and Saviour and away from that which they still have a tendency to enjoy, self importance. Likewise I pray that many other leaders and ordinary church members (inc. me) are taking stock and that they shudder in their boots at what God can and will do. It doesn't happen often for he is patient with his people, but it does happen.
In Christchurch (SGM) Wales, UK (We're safe to post our names and addresses here and I think most people in the USA are too)
anSGM member:
Thank you for your considered thoughts to Brent above. I'd say that if you don't want to be judged, don't blog. :-)
With a few exceptions I have posted under my real first name or my real full name for some time. In my case, this is significant as my name is not Susan Jones. I'm the only Janna L. Chan on the internet and therefore get some flack for being the same person on the web and in real life as people can track me down easily.
I don't judge anyone's motives for using a pseudonym when generally making comments. What I do judge is someone's decision to attack people like Brent and myself, who have chosen to be open about who we really are, while hiding behind fake names.
If someone wants to comment politely on something I've written from behind a pseudonym, fine. However, if someone wants to accuse me of slander, deliberately misquote me, or even just rudely criticize me then I do let them know what I think of their decision to throw peanuts from the cheap seats instead of getting in the ring.
This is especially true on this blog given SGM's historic emphasis on complementarianism and godly masculinity. Most of my detractors appear to be men. What does that then indicate about SGM's true interpretation of gender roles when a man who claims to believe that men should be brave leaders uses a fake name when attacking or undermining a woman using her real name?
;-)
clcsupporter - You wrote the following:
"And even before this took place, Josh had a members meeting where he asked forgiveness of the congregation for past errors, all of which took place under CJ's reign. Immediately after the meeting we looked at each other and said..."Where was CJ?"...Josh had to ask forgiveness for the sins CJ was responsible for. It was a very awkward meeting. We heard that Josh did this because CJ did not agree with Josh doing this. He did not feel it was necessary."
When was that? Was that this year? How specific was this? This makes me wonder how much of CJ's past horrid management of SGM/CLC came back to bite Joshua in the butt. Make me wonder how much of Joshua's response to make things right are because of all that he's seen first hand done wrong.
I mean, in the case of one family nine children suffered terribly because of the hard hearted response of the church leaders (lead by CJ.) How does anyone with a heart walk away from that not angry as all get out?
I wouldn't characterize my comments as attacks, especially in regards to you, Janna.
But I would characterize them as being unhelpful. I am truly sorry.
So with that, I bid you all farewell. I may continue to read, but I had decided to end my blog commenting probably both here and at Survivors.
"Step two for Joshua. Start a new family of churches characterize by authentic humility. I’d like to join that movement but I probably don’t qualify and wouldn’t meet admittance requirements. If it happens, however, go with Joshua and the men that go with him."
Brent, if a new family of churches started, what type of church government system would you want it to have? Also, because you were there from the begining... what was foundationally wrong with the form of governance that is now SGM?
[Paul. I'd love to update my Master's thesis on Eldership in the NT and publish it. But the fundamental problem is not church government or polity. The problem is pride, hypocrisy, deceit and self interest. Where these are present in leaders hearts, no form of church government will protect the people of God. Brent].
An SGM member
Thank you for apologizing. I wouldn't say that you attacked me either; I was making a general commentary on how I react to attacks to from people hiding behind a barrel as opposed to duking it out in the ring. This comment is NOT directed at you.
I was also making the point that we all make trade-offs regarding anonymity. For instance, my decision to use my real name has attracted the attention of a few bona fide misogynists. I can't say they really bother me as I must be doing something right or a I wouldn't bother them! Yet I do become the subject of anti-women comments from time-to-time which isn't real pleasant.
But that's okay. I can handle that at this point in my life and if even one person considers the implications of some craven men attacking a woman anonymously online and then claiming to embrace godly masculinity offline that makes it all worthwhile.
:-)
Brent,
This posting, like your documents, will take more time to digest. I do thank you for taking the obvious job hours to chronicle all that has been going on now and over the years. There were a great many things that I had witnessed inside CLC, most of which I thought were odd, even strange, but I (to my shame) never questioned them. Sadly, most of what puzzled me now has name.
I pray that Joshua really does have the integrity of heart to lead CLC through the time to come. He has shown, possibly at his own personal cost, a willingness to proclaim that the emperor has no clothes rather than just going with whatever comes out of the head office. If I were still living in Maryland very likely I would be willing to follow Joshua as a Senior Pastor for just a little while longer because he is willing to let C.J. and his sons in law to leave for other churches rather than bow down to SGM protocol. I know from experience that other pastors of local churches are men of God and of integrity, but it would appear that most are falling within established party lines...at their own (and their congregation's) peril.
My wife and I have since moved to a new city and we are looking for a new church. SGM has lost all credibility as an organization, so the local SGM church is flatly off the radar for us. There is no way that I would ever tolerate this style of leadership ever again, and there is no way I would ever sign a covenant with a church ever again authorizing them to pursue "discipline" if they saw fit, let along allowing myself to be carried along from meeting to meeting without having all of my questions answered.
As much as doctrine and teaching is important, of equal importance is church government. It will be hard for us to find a single church out of the literally HUNDREDS available that have good teaching combined with a government by members environnment that prevents leadership vacuums from forming. Your documents and postings have left me, shall we say 'jaded', but they have served a great purpose in as much as this is a wakeup call to know God for myself and to remain lucid enough to notice what is happening around me.
All the best,
former CLC Member
Brent, this inquiry is costing me some dollars on paper, looseleaf binders (yes, plural), and multiple inkjets, but it is worthy. This inquiry may have benefits beyond any potential SGM reforms. It may extend wider to the holy, catholic and universal church. It has multi-disciplinary points of concern.
This was posted at Mr. Challies's blog. It may have a short shelf-life, given that others have complained that Mr. Challies refuses some posts.
For the record, here was mine, posted moments ago.
An interjection to the flow of the thread, but this scribe posted at Mr. Challies’s forum. I am not sure it will survive, but we’ll see.
“Tim:
1. There is warranted “probable cause” that “social harm” resulted as a result of Mr. Mahaney’s leadership over many years. The probative evidence suggests inquiry is warranted for the “public good” and, in some cases, physical safety.
2. As to Mt. 18, there was an 18-month effort to interact with the evidence with minimal rebuttal by Mr. Mahaney. This goes to your question of “tell it to the church.” Local church? CLC, a local church? SGM, a pararchurch? The holy, catholic, and universal church? You’ll need to define “church” in your quest.
3. As to widespread dissemination, this–itself, widespread dissemination–was practiced by Mr. Mahaney–himself–re: a Philadelphia pastor who was “degifted” (their language for defrocked) over an anafractuous son. The morning the Pastor was removed, Mr. Mahaney sent an email to “all” SGM Pastors (although the accounts vary from 70 to 100 churches).
4. In my arena of inquiry, the implied motion to dismiss and suppress is not recognized.
5. For the public good, even possible safety, the inquiry is warranted.”
And so it is. On the 5th reading of Mr. Detwiler’s documents. It may be arguable and defensible that Mr. Detwiler has helped the wider church world.