The Gospel Coalition: Why We Have Been Silent about the SGM Lawsuit

…but I think I will let Boz Tchividjian do my talking for now.

http://netgrace.org/where-are-the-voices-the-continued-culture-of-silence-and-protection-in-american-evangelicalism/

[Wayne Wilson]

From a PR point of view, I think erasing, then disallowing comments is wise…worldly wise. I would say letting people comment says you’re position is so strong that it can take criticism. They rarely deny commenters a chance to respond. But they have a habit of shutting things down in defense of a celebrity pastor friend. Personally I think they should let people comment on that thing the Bible calls being “above reproach.”

Julie Anne, thanks for the screen shot link. That says a lot about why they shut it down. The voice of the sheep must not rise to the discomfort of shepherds.

Hey Wayne -

I was talking about allowing comments on the TGC website, not the FB stuff. You’re right - they should have either left the comments on FB or turned them off - not erase them and then lock it down.

with groups like The Gospel Coalition and Together 4 the Gospel? They are thoroughly New Evangelical groups?

I think most of them would call themselves New Calvinist.

Here is an excellent comment by Pastor Jeff Crippen with regard to the SGM situation.

As the pastor of a very small church (55 people) for the past 20 years our here on the edge of the world at the Oregon coast, I wonder just how long I would be allowed to continue in my position if I were 1) charged with coverup of sexual abuse, 2) the charges came from, let’s see, 11 people is it? 3) numbers of the abuse perpetrators were or had been in my church, 4) a lawsuit was filed against me alleging coverup of horrific and shocking abuse….??? Would it be good enough for my congregation to continue to trust me if the case was dismissed only because the statute of limitations had run out?

So what is the difference? Why would I be packing up my books on a Monday morning and people like Mahaney not only continue in ministry but are even invited to come and speak at conferences, and to have their books published? Sorry, but I have to conclude that the reasons come down to money and power and hanging with cohorts who have money and power.

Even if I had ever known people like Dever and Piper and company, does anyone really think that they would keep standing with me like they have with Mahaney? Why not? Why would they distance themselves right quick from me? It is because I would be no loss to them.

It is long past time for genuine followers of Jesus Christ to heed His words about “it shall not be so with you” in regard to power and position in His kingdom. If the least are the greatest, then WHY do we keep oohing and aahing over the great ones of our day? There is only one best-selling Author we must look to, and in fact His Book is the all-time best seller in history anyway.
I wonder if we can get His autograph when we see Him?

Even if CJ Mahaney was at best ignorant of all forms of a abuse and malfeasance by subordinates such a level of incompetence itself not only disqualifies him but places him as one whom other good Teachers of the Word must not call upon for teaching of doctrine and general ecclesiastical leadership.

I would hope you’d apply this standard to everyone whether they be Roman Catholic (fire the Pope?) or fundamentalist.

[Ron Bean]

Even if CJ Mahaney was at best ignorant of all forms of a abuse and malfeasance by subordinates such a level of incompetence itself not only disqualifies him but places him as one whom other good Teachers of the Word must not call upon for teaching of doctrine and general ecclesiastical leadership.

I would hope you’d apply this standard to everyone whether they be Roman Catholic (fire the Pope?) or fundamentalist.

Truthfully, I think the issues are deeper than whether or not SGM covered up the abuse—as heinous as that is—we’re talking about a form of church government that has little historical precedent and is more a result of their roots in the charismatic Shepherding Movement than classically reformed doctrine. SGM embraces a form of Calvinsim that emphasizes strong leadership paradigm without also embracing a strong understanding of the priesthood of the believer.

I wonder if this contributes to other Calvinistic evangelicals misunderstanding their paradigm and assuming that they all mean the same thing when they talk about how church leadership plays out. There was a telling statement from Trueman, DeYoung, and Ortlund about two years ago when they investigated allegations against Mahaney for being intractable and proud. http://www.sovereigngraceministries.org/blogs/sgm/post/Findings-from-ou…

To varying degrees, the three of us have wondered at times whether this present controversy was made worse by well-meaning but unwise leadership structures, by the lack of an established disciplinary process, by a lack of communication, and by an over-emphasis on introspection and confession. We were not asked to render judgment on these matters, nor are we in a position to do so. But in our minds it is hard not to look at the task before us without noting the possibility that these broader factors may have played a role in this crisis.

I think that the leadership paradigm is also the very thing that makes the public outcry fall on deaf ears today.

[handerson]

Truthfully, I think the issues are deeper than whether or not SGM covered up the abuse—as heinous as that is—we’re talking about a form of church government that has little historical precedent and is more a result of their roots in the charismatic Shepherding Movement than classically reformed doctrine. SGM embraces a form of Calvinsim that emphasizes strong leadership paradigm without also embracing a strong understanding of the priesthood of the believer.

I wonder if this contributes to other Calvinistic evangelicals misunderstanding their paradigm and assuming that they all mean the same thing when they talk about how church leadership plays out. There was a telling statement from Trueman, DeYoung, and Ortlund about two years ago when they investigated allegations against Mahaney for being intractable and proud. http://www.sovereigngraceministries.org/blogs/sgm/post/Findings-from-ou…

To varying degrees, the three of us have wondered at times whether this present controversy was made worse by well-meaning but unwise leadership structures, by the lack of an established disciplinary process, by a lack of communication, and by an over-emphasis on introspection and confession. We were not asked to render judgment on these matters, nor are we in a position to do so. But in our minds it is hard not to look at the task before us without noting the possibility that these broader factors may have played a role in this crisis.

I think that the leadership paradigm is also the very thing that makes the public outcry fall on deaf ears today.

This “form of government” did not arise anecdotally or incidentally, rather it was an extension, a direct extension, of CJ Mahaney and others and was embraced, employed and defended as sound rather robustly.

But as I said, I believe there is truth to the fact that their form of government may have aided the context of abuse but it is far from the culprit.

When I hear all this talk about what caused this problem, taking a look at the doctrine is good and I definitely think that plays a big part in it (handerson mentioned priesthood of the believer which is an excellent point). And yet it strikes me that all of this is mere talk, but still no action.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, I get to hear what the plaintiffs are doing - how their lives are turned upside down because of the lawsuit. It has affected schooling/work choices (because they need to be available to go to MD). Many suffer PTSD, have difficulty trusting, have difficulty with their relationship with God and desiring to go to church. And then there are many more who because they are in weak/vulnerable state, have elected to not join the civil lawsuit. It is just too much for them.

Has the abuse left these folks? No, they are working through it each day. Think of a bad car accident in which you are left with physical injuries. You have scars to show, but there may be life-long residual effects. They are the forgotten ones.

I get that many of you say that you aren’t connected to SGM, that you have no relationship with them. But that’s wrong. You do. You are part of the Body of Christ. Look what happened with the Penn State case. People outside of Penn State were outraged. That outrage forced action. Shouldn’t Christians behave better than a secular university?

Alex,

I don’t disagree with what you’ve said. And I certainly did not mean to minimize what the victims have endured or the ensuing cover-up. I was simply trying to explain how such a cover-up could occur. In my mind, the doctrinal novelties (which I agree were taught and put in place by Mahaney) don’t absolve him of responsibility—they actually increase his responsibility. And make it all the more necessary to highlight the abnormalities of this type of culture. I know SGM is going through a time of intense reflection and several prominent churches have left over precisely these issues.

And to Julie Anne— I appreciate the disconnect between talk and action, but apart from actual relationship with SGM, I’m not sure what the folks here could do. Public statements—even those condemning such actions—are only as meaningful and effective as the actual relationship. Which is precisely why those closest to the situation (TGC and T4G) had such an opportunity to speak truth while the rest of us do not.

I get that many of you say that you aren’t connected to SGM, that you have no relationship with them. But that’s wrong. You do. You are part of the Body of Christ. Look what happened with the Penn State case. People outside of Penn State were outraged. That outrage forced action. Shouldn’t Christians behave better than a secular university?

I think that the disagreement between us is that I don’t think that being a part of the body of Christ doesn’t give me license to go to SGM and demand changes. Do I hope they change it? Yes. Is this whole issue a mess? Absolutely. Should they institute changes so that abuse can never happen again? Of course. Now - Can I demand that they conform to what I believe is Scriptural - not until I actually know someone who is able to make that kind of change and I can actually approach them about it.

Justice for being sinned against is a legitimate demand (Revelation 6:9-11) - but God is the one that brings that justice. It’s worth noting that Jesus did not downplay their deaths or excuse the crime. He told the martyrs to continue to wait for God to act. Abuse is a horrible thing, a crime, and a sin that brings very, very real ramifications on the victim. I don’t think anyone is minimizing that.

Furthermore, there is a real element of Proverbs 26:17 here, which tells me that “Whoever meddles in a quarrel not his own is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears.”

I can (should) get involved with the FBFI / Phelps / NIU issues of different kinds (to grab some random topics from SI) because those were / are the circles that I grew up in, went to school in, and am familiar with in the hopes of affecting real change. SGM? Well, I know a guy who goes to an SGM church. That’s it for personal contact between myself and any one individual at SGM.

What I can do is look at how we can prevent it from happening in our churches. That’s where the discussion is good and helpful and I think we can learn from this. But I’m not in favor of acting like the Holy Spirit’s pararescue team for an organization that I have very little involvement with (unless you count reading a book or listening to their music as ‘involvement’ - which I don’t).

[handerson]

Alex,

I don’t disagree with what you’ve said. And I certainly did not mean to minimize what the victims have endured or the ensuing cover-up. I was simply trying to explain how such a cover-up could occur. In my mind, the doctrinal novelties (which I agree were taught and put in place by Mahaney) don’t absolve him of responsibility—they actually increase his responsibility. And make it all the more necessary to highlight the abnormalities of this type of culture. I know SGM is going through a time of intense reflection and several prominent churches have left over precisely these issues.

And to Julie Anne— I appreciate the disconnect between talk and action, but apart from actual relationship with SGM, I’m not sure what the folks here could do. Public statements—even those condemning such actions—are only as meaningful and effective as the actual relationship. Which is precisely why those closest to the situation (TGC and T4G) had such an opportunity to speak truth while the rest of us do not.