"Strip away all of the commentary and whining, and you are left with a picture of a pastor who is running an organization, and some associates who feel slighted."
Alex, thanks for spelling it out a bit more. I understand your point better, I think. A few comments…
SGMsurvivors certainly makes some very damaging allegations. But it is certainly not authoritative. There is one fellow posting there who appears to have been married into a prominent SGM family. His story is apparently featured in one of Josh Harris’s books about courtship. Now, to read the guy, who is either already divorced or on the way to being divorced from his wife, you would think that the SGM people were guilt of the most heinous crimes. However, the wife posted an article that was posted on the SGMsurvivors site. It paints a much different picture and sounds a lot more believable than her husband’s postings, at least to me. Her post was only a few weeks ago, not hard to find for those interested.
I raise that to raise this caution… just because people are screaming abuse doesn’t mean abuse is happening. Now I am no fan of SGM. I am quite critical of them. In fact, the more I learn about them, the more I am opposed to them. But I just want to caution people reading the “Survivors” website and others like it. These people have an axe to grind and the internet is not a court of law. So be VERY discerning when you read.
In fact, I find it really astonishing that the T4G crowd are rallying around Mahaney. There is enough revealed even in this thread here on SI that should have warned them to stay away, stay far, far, far away, long before any of this fiasco came out.
It is astonishing that they seemingly see no cause for alarm.
That ought to alarm anyone who thinks these men are leaders worth following.
[Alex Guggenheim] One fundamental difference between my article and Johnson’s is the leading comment and its function to minimize, if not out right deny, the valid grievances of injured parties. In fact, I’d say this lead statement is a form of continued abuse via antagonism toward those who have suffered a perpetual and systematic abuse. And I realize he is mainly addressing the material by Brent but his conclusive statement, in its design, ropes in all others who have been abused and reduces them in this manner without ever addressing their issues or engaging in any real discovery.Well, OK, I see this point of difference. I have not read much of Brent’s documents. The first few pages seemed as petty as Jesse Johnson describes and if that is all that this controversy is about, then I think JJ’s article is spot on. I acknowledge that the charges on the SGMsurvivor’s site are more serious. I have read a good deal of these pages and found it quite shocking. I blogged about that site when everyone was hyperventilating about fundamentalism and our ‘systemic’ problems with child abuse, etc.
SGMsurvivors certainly makes some very damaging allegations. But it is certainly not authoritative. There is one fellow posting there who appears to have been married into a prominent SGM family. His story is apparently featured in one of Josh Harris’s books about courtship. Now, to read the guy, who is either already divorced or on the way to being divorced from his wife, you would think that the SGM people were guilt of the most heinous crimes. However, the wife posted an article that was posted on the SGMsurvivors site. It paints a much different picture and sounds a lot more believable than her husband’s postings, at least to me. Her post was only a few weeks ago, not hard to find for those interested.
I raise that to raise this caution… just because people are screaming abuse doesn’t mean abuse is happening. Now I am no fan of SGM. I am quite critical of them. In fact, the more I learn about them, the more I am opposed to them. But I just want to caution people reading the “Survivors” website and others like it. These people have an axe to grind and the internet is not a court of law. So be VERY discerning when you read.
[Alex Guggenheim] Now it is true that Jesse Johnson recognized the aberrations of CJ and SGM but even in doing so he blamed the victims for choosing to attend a church with such a system. Yes, they are to blame for their decisions but that does not mitigate CJ and SGM’s culpability in establishing long-term abusive leadership which Johnson, apparently, refuses to address with any scrutiny as well as the begged questions of how allegedly insightful men such as Piper (I somewhat understand Piper’s reasons due to the charismaticism), Mohler, Keller and MacArthur would not only embrace but promote (as vetted in both doctrine and practice) such a theological novice and one whose eccentric and proprietary view and practice of Apostlism would have raised red flags to even a first semester freshman at Fuller. But then you might want to follow the money trail with CJ and learn how, as his giving to Southern Seminary increased (should I say SGM’s under CJ) his stature with TGC/T4G rose, an issue I alluded to as well in the article. So, I would say they are quite different but if you believe they are not I do invite you to demonstrate how their similarities outweigh their differences.I agree with you here, about Jesse Johnson’s ‘blame the victim’ approach. I can see the problem with that.
In fact, I find it really astonishing that the T4G crowd are rallying around Mahaney. There is enough revealed even in this thread here on SI that should have warned them to stay away, stay far, far, far away, long before any of this fiasco came out.
It is astonishing that they seemingly see no cause for alarm.
That ought to alarm anyone who thinks these men are leaders worth following.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Susan,
See what I mean? My garage band just played, it is a terrible fault of mind. I could have played that one off as a pun but it wasn’t, just more poor editing.
Don,
BTW I do acknowledge the high degree of pettiness in the itemized infractions. Of course the main architect of this system from whom Brent learned its value? CJ. And I do not take, without awareness and scrutiny, all claims of injury. No doubt one will discover some percentage being either fictitious or embellished.
See what I mean? My garage band just played, it is a terrible fault of mind. I could have played that one off as a pun but it wasn’t, just more poor editing.
Don,
BTW I do acknowledge the high degree of pettiness in the itemized infractions. Of course the main architect of this system from whom Brent learned its value? CJ. And I do not take, without awareness and scrutiny, all claims of injury. No doubt one will discover some percentage being either fictitious or embellished.
Discussion