A Brief Response to Tim Challies
Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 1:35PM Hello Tim.
At some point I hope to provide a more thorough response to what you have written. In the meantime, I hope you will read all of my documents and also my posts at BrentDetwiler.com. That's required reading if you are going to post about me.
What you fail to realize is the pervasive and profound nature of problems in SGM. Hundreds, if not thousands of people have been mishandled and mistreated. You don't have two anti SGM blogs, Sovereign Grace Survivors and SGM Refuge, because of disagreements between C.J. and me. You really must get educated about the depth and breadth of ungodly practices that have existed in the movement. You haven't done your homework.
You also fail to recognize the long term and serious nature of C.J.'s sins. Many men have brought many charges for many years against C.J. In each case, with little or no success. I love C.J. I love SGM. I count it a privilege to have been one of four founders. I served on the Board of Directors for 25 years. Few men know C.J. as well as I do. Dave Harvey is interim President of SGM. Here is his description of C.J. which is the experience of many others.
“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.” --Dave Harvey
In spite of this, no one has been shown more mercy or patience in our movement. He has been treated with kindness and shown great respect.
That's why this is not a Brent and C.J. thing. It is much bigger. This is not about slander, it is about truth. There is a time to address corporate sin. That's why we have an entire section of the Bible called The Prophets. There is also a time to "tell it to the church" when sin is not repented of, confession is not forthcoming, and restitution of wrong not pursued. I sent my documents to the SGM pastors on July 6 after several deceitful and misleading statements and actions by C.J. and SGM. I didn't want to and tried not to. Once again, you are uninformed and therefore misguided in your comments.
Lastly for now, you failed to state that which is repeatedly stated in my documents. Time and time and time again, I expressed my willingness to meet with C.J. and pursue mediation if necessary, if only he would give me open, honest and accountable answers in print and in advance of our meeting. I wanted to know his thoughts, prepare for our time, and formulate an agenda. All that would greatly assist our conversation and interaction. I never intended to publish his response (something slanderously asserted by SGM and contrary to the evidence). But C.J. refused to respond in a thorough going manner even though he promised me he would do so. It is for good reason, C.J. and the Board cannot be trusted.
You appear oblivious to the fact that there has been lying, spin and cover up by them. You recognize faith by works, roots by fruits, and the heart by the mouth. These are not grotesque judgments. What I say is clearly born out. A just verdict is pleasing to God. Acquitting evil is not. That is why I hope C.J. will one day give transparent answers to the questions I asked, the points I raised, and the illustrations I shared. I want him to have his day in court. But for now, he is in contempt. I have repeatedly asked C.J. and the Board to correct any inaccuracy (which is clear in the documents and not mentioned by you) and defend freely against any charge. What I have written is not tabloid journalism. They have provided me no input except that which I include in the documents.
Tim, there are serious issues of deceit, hypocrisy, arrogance, authoritarianism in C.J.'s life and the ministry of SGM. Now, thanks to your post, your audience is oblige to read my 600 pages of documentation (I mean slander) and access my blog in order to know the truth because they have not gotten it from you.
Brent Detwiler
Brent Detwiler
MY ANSWER TO TIM'S CHALLIES REPONSE
This is the only comment I received from Mr. Challies. "What you have not done is make a convincing biblical case that your actions are sanctioned by Scripture."
Well, what you have done is ignore everything I wrote. But to your lonely comment above.
You should start with Isaiah and don't stop until you get to the end of the gospels. At least for starters. Are you suggesting there is no place to warn others of harm or correct corporate sin or adjust an individual who influences all the leaders/churches in the movement? This is a constant theme or refrain in Scripture.
The first two steps of Matthew 18:15-17 have been followed countless times with C.J. There should have been a public appeal for repentance a long time ago. Some form of discipline should have been implemented. We were cowards.
Everyone who is part of the inner circle realizes we've been soft on C.J. and did not follow 1 Tim 5:19-21. We treated him with favoritism and partiality. And most egregiously, a long list of men have been removed from ministry by C.J. for far lesser sins. Men like Joshua Harris have recently and publicly confessed they did not hold C.J. accountable due to fear. He and others did not want to anger C.J. or fall out of his favor. For good reason, this has often happened in our history.
Tim, C.J. s not above reproach (1 Tim 3:1-7; Tit 1:5-9). He should not be President of SGM.
Tragically, we have disobeyed these four passages of holy Scripture (and others) and many people have suffered as a result. That's why the Covenant Life Church pastors are demanding change on behalf of C.J. and SGM. That is one of the reasons Joshua Harris recently resigned from the SGM Board..
You should read all of my documents. For example, Parts 5: In Need of a Corporate Rebuke, 6: Tell It to the Church, and Part 7: Is C.J. Above Reproach. They are available on my blog under "File" and "The Documents."
By the way, people have asked if you ever talked to me or wrote me before you rebuked me this morning. Of course, the answer is no. If you had I could have helped you from erring. So do you have a "convincing biblical case" in support of your action?
This is my last comment on your blog. If you'd like to interact further please comment on BrentDetwiler.com.
Thanks
Brent Detwiler
Reader Comments (27)
From what I have read, there is little doubt something needed to be done to address this situtation (or string of situations, if you will) revolving around Mahaney's life and ministry.
But here is my question/concern: Why did it have to be published on the internet? I know Mahaney's name only through Joshua Harris and a few book titles I've seen over the years. I've never heard of Brent Detwiler until today. I don't need to know about the personal sins of my brother, C.J. Mahaney. And neither do the billions of other people who now have access to these documents.
I understand that you have made your attempts directly to Mahaney and he has rejected. But was there not some other group of individuals that you could have gone to in attempt to keep him accountable? I will grant that you have probably tried to do this in some fashion. But I still fail to see how publishing these documents on the internet help in any way to promote the kingdom of Christ.
Perhaps you are in purely good conscience in doing this; I don't know. But I do know that you will stand before our Lord one day and account for this. I certainly can't speak for Him, but I can foresee Him asking a question akin to this: "How did your actions help to build my church?"
[Neil. I sent the documents to all the SGM pastors so they could appeal to C.J. and SGM to repent after the Board took no action and the CLC pastors took limited actions. The sins which I address in the documents are not limited to C.J. and affect the entire movement. For 11 years I worked in private trying to address these but with little success. The deceit and manipulation of SGM necessitated going to the pastors. The documents ended up on the internet as a result. Brent]
As I have prayed through the CLC SGM situation over the weeks, I have felt that CJ and SGM would do all they could do to marginalize you, your 'papers' and your call of repentance to CJ and SGM. I don’t believe for a second that CJ and SGM’s desire is about what is right (righteous) or to honor to God but to protect CJ, SGM, their doctrines (methodologies) and their way of doing business in the name of the Savior. They have seriously put the SGM playbook into action: Acknowledge (sin, wrong doing, mistakes), Deflect, Damage Control and Business as Usual. They are going to make it all about you, the one who is bringing the criticism and correction. They will make it about your sin (gossip and slander) and CJ’s willingness to meet with you face to face which you would not do; not about truth and CJ and SGM’s sin(s) that are being exposed through your life and testimony. (Classic SGM/PDI procedure and polity)
But as I have prayed through this a few times in the last few days, I am now of the opinion that CJ/ SGM are not just thinking of marginalizing you but the need to destroy and bury you. I hope that I am totally wrong but I think the chances of being wrong are much less than being right. As I have read the opinions of the men who many would consider as men of God and the bearers of truth (Challies, DeYoung, Ortlund, Trueman, Mohler, etc.), it is clear they have fallen on their face, wouldn’t know truth if it bit them on the nose and will possibly fall the sword of CJ and SGM before they will acknowledge truth. It will be to their detriment in the end if they continue on this path.
What these men have said and written in support of CJ and to your detriment have emboldened CJ and SGM. I also believe their comments and evaluations have emboldened the SGM pastors to agree with SGM and CJ because it is easier and more comfortable to destroy you rather than deal with the truth of what you have brought. They can’t just marginalize you because you were one of the founders of all this. They cannot just marginalize you anymore to survive this, they must destroy you.
CJ and SGM exposed themselves through their dealing with Larry that they will protect themselves at all costs. It is clear to me that they are willing to do anything (sacrifice anyone) to protect themselves and their man-made kingdom (my viewpoint) in the name of Christ. CJ and his team were willing to coerce (blackmail) Larry to control and marginalize him. Larry went fairly quietly. But even then Larry actively pursued CJ to reconcile for 13 (THIRTEEN) years until CJ met with them in recent history.
They didn’t hear the Lord then and they don’t want to hear Him now. Brent, you are not going quietly because you are a principled man. Personally as you and I have discussed, I would disagree vehemently to some of the principles that you had a hand in building into PDI/SGM that have hurt a lot of people (by your own admission), but I would say unequivocally you are one of the most principled men I know.
In light of CJ’s latest decisions, I have to believe that he would not have responded to Larry’s appeal for reconciliation if you had not sent him your ‘papers’ first and then to SGM. I hope to God I am wrong but everything points to what I am seeing is truth. Because of my experience with CJ and SGM, I have to believe that CJ and SGM have been working diligently behind the scenes, including the timely resignation of his sons in law; which was calculated and scripted as part of their plan to control CLC, to destroy you and what God is doing through you. Unfortunately, they don’t know to do anything differently because it is what they (SGM and you – while part of SGM) have always done.
I cannot help but believe that in their minds if they can destroy and bury you and your documents all will be well in their world. As much as I believe that the leaders at CLC want to walk in truth, to please God and to follow the Holy Spirit, I am not confident they can (or will) stand up for truth against CJ and the SGM machine. I personally have never thought there would be or could be reform in SGM. I only see more SGM smoke and mirrors so they can carry on with what they have always done. They have too much at stake to do otherwise. I have been praying and believing that Josh and the pastors at CLC could and would stand for truth against the CJ/SGM machine but I now have my doubts.
Brent, you and I have had our skirmishes with respects to your being one of the founders of SGM and a major contributor of the systemic problems in PDI/SGM. I believe that through these skirmishes we have had a meeting of the minds and our spirits. At this point, those things are settled between us and we can move forward together in the unity of the Spirit in a bond of peace and I am personally pleased about that.
SGM is not about truth but their commitment to protect themselves, their doctrines and their personal SGM/CJ kingdom in the name of truth and the Savior. With all soberness and seriousness, I would petition the saints of God involved in all this to pray diligently for Brent and that regardless of what they see or think about CJ and SGM that our King and His kingdom take precedent. Brent you said something to me that has provoked my heart and my spirit when you said “that in it all it is not about success (human victory) but (our) faithfulness to God. I was not only convicted by the Holy Spirit on a personal level but encouraged and reminded once again that “it is not about us but only about Him”.
I want to express my love and respect for you and Jenny but also for the Lord and His will to be fulfilled in our lives, that “He who began a good work in us will perfect it until the day of Christ”. Thank you for your example of desiring truth and the glory of God to your own detriment.
Keith Rushing, D.Min. AKA Irv
[Silverboy. My remarks are in brackets and underlined. I hope you find them helpful. Brent]
Hi Brent, I usually post under another pseudonym, but I changed it for this one out of a desire to remain (even more) anonymous, as this post consists of an e-mail from another. For the past couple of days I have been dialoging with an SMG pastor at one of my previous churches. I had been expressing my lack of satisfaction regarding the, in my opinion, less-than-serious nature of SGM's approach to all of the problems in the organization. The topic of the motive behind your documents arose, and to one of my responses, this pastor sent me this. I was wondering if you would be comfortable commenting on his perspective/accusations against your documents. There is information in there that I have not heard and that I think would be good to hear your side on (I've omitted and changed names to preserve anonymity; otherwise, I have not edited any part of this pastor's response):
Silverboy,
I'm in total agreement that Brent and CJ as ecclesiastical figures in SGM have everything to do with us. CJ as a leader of the board and president of the ministry certainly has a role in our lives.
[Then he should understand why it is necessary to go public. C.J.’s sins and actions have adversely affected many pastors, many people and the entire movement. They should have been acknowledged a long time ago. Instead they were covered up. No one could get away with this except C.J.]
Therefore, if Brent wants to make formal charges against CJ, he is free to do that, and should do that, and you and I will likely be affected by the outcome. What he has done is to bypass any due process and gone straight to email inboxes and now to blogs. This is not due process.
[Your pastor has no idea what he is talking about. For 11 years I went to C.J. in private. So did others. He was basically unrepentant and resistant. In 2004 he took over a process of discipline and turned men against me and Dave. In addition, he acting abusively and sent men to condemned me for the righteous and truthful actions I took. In more recent times, the SGM Board failed to act in obedience to 1 Tim 5:19-21 when I appealed to them. The CLC pastors also took limited action when I approached them. Instead, SGM acted deceitfully in their actions and labeled my documents slanderous - the very documents they said were extremely helpful. They also posted inaccurate and libelous statements about me and supposed actions I would take. Much more will be said in the future. If we were not cowards for so many years, due process would have resulted in C.J. making a public confession of sin and experience righteous consequences like so many other men in our history under his leadership.]
Further, if Brent wanted to restrict his documents to only situations concerning himself and CJ I would see that as a (distant) second best. Unfortunately, he has dragged about two dozen non-staff people into the mud just so he can "make his case." He brings into the wide open personal confessions of sin (meant only for Brent, not wikileaks), he has discussed the marriage problems of well-meaning volunteer leaders, he has talked about the sins of two teenagers, he has called the salvation of a leader into question. This is not calling a witness to the stand in a due process. This is slandering innocent bystanders by spreading evil reports about their private lives across the web. It is perhaps the grossest act of a shepherd uncovering his sheep I've ever heard of.
[I haven’t dragged people into the mud. Any non-staff people mentioned in the documents are people who were throwing mud with rocks in my face in the form of betrayal, lying, deceitful actions, sinful judgments and the like. They have never repented. They destroyed a church. They have mislead many others. These people should have been rebuked by SGM. Instead SGM gladly received their accusations against me on repeated occasion with no opportunity for defense. Much has been made about not receiving accusations against C.J. More times than I can count, C.J., Harvey, Emerson, Kauflin, Connolly, etc. believed all manner of evil against with no due process. So it is necessary to “make my case” using these people who made a libelous case against me. These false witnesses are referenced in the letter send out by C.J. to all the pastors in SGM in 2009 declaring me unfit for ministry. SGM made it a national issue. Not me. SGM covered up the truth. Protected false witnesses. I have protected C.J. and SGM and so many other people for so long. Too long.]
It is for this reason that Josh Harris is apologizing to his people and all the people mentioned for recommending that his church read Brent's documents.
[Just let your leaders read them. They will tell you what to think. That approach has often produced disastrous results in SGM churches.]
No one is dismissing any of the accusations or charges, by the blogs or Brent. Leaders throughout our entire movement are spending hours and hours and hours and hours and hours talking to affected individuals, working toward reconciliation, even processing matters legally.
[If that is true, then you see why it is so important for people to read the documents because they have experienced what I describe. So many people have been afraid to speak up or didn’t know how to speak up until they read the documents. It has helped them immeasurably. Over a thousand people have written me to tell me.]
I would caution you about seeing Brent's docs as objective. The first reason is the basic one: he is giving you emails mostly, and before you read an email he is telling you why it represents sin, and then as you read the email he is underlining the offensive element, and then if you missed all of this he is providing footnotes to help you "interpret" things more clearly.
[So? People can read them “with discernment.” Yes, I am highlighting the most important stuff. What’s wrong with that? So read them anyway you want to read them. They are largely objective. That is a simple fact. I make subjective comments based upon objective evidence. For example, read the notes leading into the August 20, 2004 meeting. See what Joshua, Grant and Kenneth said. Read the official minutes of the meeting. There is no interpretation necessary. As the sr. pastor of CLC and the President of SGM, C.J. was unaccountable contrary to all his teaching. That is a fact. He was on his own.]
The second reason is more troubling. He isn't including all of the facts.
[Really. I’d like to know who this expert is.]
As an example, Mooresville.
If all you have is Brent's story, you would assume Brent was removed as a pastor because Dave and Gene hate him (or whatever the proper verb).
[Don’t downplay the hatred Dave and Gene demonstrated and I have not begun to share what they said and did. This pastor should be outraged at these two men for the actions.]
The reality is that Brent was given a church filled with pro-Brent people from Crossway. All of them left Crossway because they wanted a church pastured specifically by Brent. For this reason, it was a virtual church split.
However, almost from the first weeks, the leaders that went with him began to have concerns about his leadership, feeling that he lacked grace and that he was lording over them. This is not the assessment of anyone at Crossway, but the sense of the leaders in his church.
[That is absolutely not the case in any way, shape or form. Talk about slander with a capital “S”. Really, this guy has no idea what he is talking about. No leader including Ray and Eric ever accused me of lording or lacking grace. None of the other leaders had concerns for me. They all commended me. That continued until the very end. Some turned against me without grounds because of Eric and Ray’s slander but none of these men had personal concerns for me based upon personal observations. I know because I asked them. Read the Untold Story for the truth.]
As these concerns escalated, serious blunders occurred. His resignation was forced upon him most unwisely. I'm not ready to call it sinful, but certainly unwisely and too hastily.
[Blunders? Unwisely? All morally neutral words. There was serious abuse, lying, betrayal and cover-up. Horrors you would not believe. SGM counseled that all this be kept from the church which it was.]
Yet, all that simply enabled the assessment team to begin their work. Brent says nothing about the Mooresville once the assessment team begins. The reason is that they were unaffected by anything that happened between Brent and SGM in the past. They were not there to decide about SGM and Brent, but simply about Brent and the people within his church.
[Bob was exceedingly biased. His heart was full of previous judgments about me. He was not neutral. Read the documents. I asked that he not be on the assessment team but SGM appointed him to head the team. That represented C.J.’s bias. The cards were stacked against me from the beginning. I never expected a fair evaluation under Bob and I wasn’t disappointed. Dave and Gene were also having a terrible impact upon the Assessment Team and the leaders in the church and all behind my back.]
They talked to Brent for 80 hours to get his side of the story.
[This is a totally inaccurate portrayal. Not nearly that much time was given to hearing my side of the story. This pastor is lost when it comes to the facts. This statement, like many others, is so distorted. It is added motivation to finish “The Untold Story.” The long and the short of it, I was not told in large measure what others were saying about me. I couldn’t give my side of the story because I didn’t know the story (lies) that were being told especially by Eric and Gene.]
They talked to every leader in the church multiple times for another 50 hours.
[The leaders were largely kept in the dark on the matters they really need to hear about. I was never given any opportunity to talk to them. Many of them have gotten back to me and said they hardly knew what was truly going on. They were kept in the dark by SGM. They were not being informed impartially. Some of the Care Group leaders have told me that only upon reading “The Untold Story” have they been able to make any sense out of things.]
In the end their assessment was not that "Brent was proud and should resign." Their assessment was that "Brent's pride has prevented him from building a team of leaders that will work with him, and his pride has affected his pastoral care for his flock." Thus, he was not removed for pride. He was removed because he could not build a team of leaders to work with him or a church that would follow him.
[This is absurd. The church loved me and was following me wonderfully. There were a few exceptions but those were people who had serious issues in their lives. Eric thought I was the best thing since sliced bread for the longest time until I had to confront him on a couple things at the very end in May 2009. He constantly commended me for my humility and team work. He was extremely pleased with me and told everyone and his brother. Only at the very end did he turned against me. As a leadership team, Jonathan my son, felt I was overly deferential to him, Ray and Eric. Eric, Jonathan and I worked well as a team. It was good Ray resigned. He was demanding and impossible to work with as Eric said on several occasions. But even with Ray, we had many great meetings and I appreciated his input. And we had a great time working with all the Care Group leaders and their wives. There was great team work and camaraderie.]
Thus, in August of 2009 the entire group of home group leaders (not the 1-2 man leadership team) voted for his resignation. They felt that the assessment team represented their feelings and thinking well and their recommendations should be followed.
[I think this is false statement. Not all of the leaders were in favor of my resignation based upon what I’ve heard. Most egregiously, over the seven week evaluation, I never had a chance to answer these leaders questions, share my perspective, attend any of their meetings with the Assessment Team, participate in any phone calls, know what was being covered, find out what was being said about me, etc. It was horrendous miscarriage of justice. Accusations by Eric and Ray and even the Assessment Team based upon erroneous information went unchallenged by me. I didn’t even know what they were sharing about me. Someday I will tell the whole story. The other men were badly manipulated by Eric and Ray and SGM.]
This side of the story is simply not present in Brent's documents.
[What side of the story? That all the leaders were manipulated. That I didn’t know what was going on. That I was kept in the dark. I will get to this “side of the story” but it will not reflect well upon SGM and others.]
The great difference between Brent and CJ, is that Brent received due process before he resigned. He is asking for CJ's resignation without any due process. He simply does not have the right to do that.
[I just pulled out all my hair and screamed bloody murder. This pastor has got it all wrong. This is why people must read the documents. Pastors like this are a terrible disservice to the truth. What I experienced was a kangaroo court. There was no due process. It was a sham trial comprised of false witnesses, a rigged jury, and a biased judge. In contrast, I asked for C.J.’s resignation as President based upon 11 years of failed attempts in private and in groups to see him repent of serious and long standing sin. He has been defending himself and fighting off correction for a very long time. And others have shielded him. Leaders throughout the history of SGM have been removed from ministry for far less serious sins that C.J.]
It is for these reasons that I think Brent's material is "gossip." Gossip does not mean a lie, un-factual, or biased. Gossip means I'm not part of the group that needs to hear this.
[You are a part of the group that needs to hear this. All of SGM needs to hear what I am saying because the problems in SGM are widespread. And it is not just me who says so. SGM has not revealed the ton of feedback they have been receiving regarding spiritual abuse, hypocrisy, control, manipulation, unjust actions, etc. It is not just C.J. but that would be enough since his example and leadership affects everyone else. There are problems everywhere like this pastor who is so completely duped. This letter is an example of extraordinary bias that is not grounded in the truth. It results in deception. It is manipulative.]
For me to hear it will likely be cancerous to my soul because I will never get the full other side of the story. I will never hear whether Ray is actually converted or not or whether Eric's marriage is doing well now or not, or whether Justin has repented of the sins he committed as a teenager, or whether Gene has had victory over the areas of pride that he confessed to in 1997. Brent has told one side of these stories. Sadly, these men will never get to tell me whether there is a happier, holier, other side.
[The true cancer in this pastor’s soul is the stuff he’s heard about me. Like C.J., I welcome any correction or defense. I’m glad to make it public. The information about Ray was relevant. Eric was so concerned for him he wondered about his conversion. Eric was wrong in his assessment and I believe I said so in the documents. Listen, if this pastor knows them, he can asked them about their lives. Otherwise, I doubt he’ll remember their names in 6 months. In a similar way, the information about Eric is relevant. These men were all given many opportunities to repent and make things right in public. I asked for Eric and Ray to get back to the church. The Assessment Team never required any public confession. Their actions were covered up. Unrepeated sin has consequences. It is told to the church. Their sin was also a part of SGM sin. Hence they are including in the story. The information about Justin was already made public by his father not me. Read the docs. Gene should not be leading a church. The abuse I suffered at his hands is almost inconceivable. I’ve never see anything like it. I’ve yet to tell the whole story. Once again, SGM has been negligent. More than four hundred people have left his church. Less than 250 remain. If Gene ever comes to repentance I’ll be the first to tell the world. I’ve appealed to him time and time again. Gene is part of what is wrong with SGM. He was a regional leader. It must be part of the public record. I am happy to let these men make their case and I will be happy to let the world know if they repent and change.]
The whole situation illustrates great dysfunction in our movement. About that we are in full agreement. As for Brent's material being a "loving" rebuke, I cannot agree. I hope you see where I'm coming from more clearly. I am not at all assuming CJ is innocent or should be president of SGM or didn't commit some level of "blackmail" back in the mid-90s. It's possible his sins are even worse than Brent says. But, it's also possible that his sins are not as great as Brent paints. I will only know this by getting CJ's side of the story. The blogs will certainly not help me think more carefully.
[I repeatedly asked C.J. and the SGM Board to respond to my points, questions and illustrations and feel the total freedom to disagree. I encouraged them to defend themselves at any point. I repeatedly asked them to correct anything I wrote that was in error. I’ve pleaded, begged, beseeched them to provide me an open, honest, and accountable response. C.J. promised he would do this but then he broke his word. They have not been transparent and revealing in many important respects. If all my documents are so “judgmental” and “slanderous” then prove it. That should be easy to do. Give answers that can be cross examined. If they ever do I will happily post them for the world to read. But I don’t’ believe they will ever answer me because it is hard to defend matters that are indefensible. SGM posted that I’ve been unwilling to meet. That is utterly untrue. Read the docs. I’ve been eager to meet. I simply asked them to supply answers to what I’ve written in a thorough going fashion. That refusal is the reason we have not met. The fault is theirs not mine.]
It is a painful agony that is like watching (and experiencing) a slow-motion train wreck. I do believe that God's church will prevail--with or without SGM and SGC. I think SGM will be there, but not without a great deal of additional work.
Thank you, for the dialogue. These are hard matters. They are also ones we aren't used to handling well in SGM. We're all learning.
Take care
To all but especially Mr. Rushing:
I enjoyed reading your nuanced and considered response above. It seems that certain individuals have been out to destroy Brent for a while. But I'm not worried that they'll have any success in doing so for the following reason:
I did not understand why so many members of the SGM leadership were unwilling to confront Brent directly until I saw him knock out hypocrisy and one person in particular for the count in round one. Heavens, Brent, if I do anything to offend you please give me a chance to "fall on my sword" before you reveal to the world how ridiculous whatever I did was. :-)
The me the truly horrifying SGM issues pertain to cover-ups of issues that Brent has responsibly decided not to cover on his blog so I won't elaborate on them. The issues in question can easily be found on this source: http://sgmsurvivors.com
To me, as a non-SGMer and someone who does not believe that the reputation of the church is more important than the well being of its congregants, the question becomes as follows: If a church is covering up what society and the secular legal system would consider heinous crimes at what point does a good citizen need to notify the secular media of what's afoot even if that may scare victims into going underground?
Fortunately, I no longer have to worry about this issue as several reliable sources have now announced that the Washington Post is taking an interest in SGM's story. Needless to say, many people are not happy about the Post investigating SGM yet in my view the public has a right to know about the issues that can be found in reference above.
Please stay strong, Brent. Someone with your courage and your talent is a rarity.
In order for this blog to be worth a frequent visit you are going to have to post more than 2-3 times per week. I would suggest a substantial post 4 times per week. I have been disappointed in checking in for three days now to find nothing new. Im on the verge of stopping unless I see an uptik in your content....content that I like. T
[Tom. I'm a slow writer with few insights so blog posts are infrequent. Sorry to disappoint you. Sign up for the automatic notification. Then you don't have to check back Brent]
Relevant to the central theme of the post, there are reports of Mr. Challies refusing to post rebuttals to his view. Several are saying this. Mr. Challies also refused my tame, but fair, post. Further, it would appear that there has been a disbarrment from any and all comments, not just at the relevant post, but others. Noted.
Hello Donald:
I don't know if you saw my post earlier but Mr. Challies appears to have both a formal and informal business relationship with SGM that likely affects his judgement, all protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
As you indicated in the very tame comment I saw by you, the article in question was so poorly written and poorly researched that it's probably not worth worrying about.