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

[Greg Linscott]

Question: have any of the individuals accused of being perpetrators ever been convicted in a court of law of any of the charges mentioned?

Yes, Greg. This is from my quote above:

• Bill O’Neil says 3 defendants have been brought to the attention of the authorities. Two have already been convicted and 1 proceeded in the juvenile system. One trial is pending in Montgomery Co., MD.
Roughly 1/3 of the defendants have been convicted. (starts at minute 31:00)


@Greg—I have to go back through and read everything again, but I recall at least one instance also of someone who was convicted, served time, and then was “considered cured” and “repented” and put back in a children’s ministry type role in a SGM ministry church. When I have time, I will find and post.

Anyway, the other thing to consider is that much of the court paperwork states that people were highly pressured and spiritually coerced into NOT reporting these crimes, to the point that many are past the statute of limitations.

That does clarify it to some degree. Thank you.

Brent Detwiler calls out Carson, DeYoung, et al.

SharperIron, why don’t you post Detwiler’s Response as its own separate article just like you did for The Gospel Coalition.

Thanks and blessings.

http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/don-carson-kevin-deyoung-…

http://5ptsalt.com/2013/05/24/mohler-dever-duncan-carson-taylor-deyoung…

JULES’ DINERMAY 26, 2013
Albert Mohler speaks:
“Both men had credible knowledge that young boys were being sexually abused, and neither did anything effective to stop it. Most crucially, neither man did what they should have done within minutes of hearing the first report — contact law enforcement immediately.”
Oh, wait…he said this about Joe Paterno and Jerry Sandusky in regard to the child sexual abuse at Penn State.
I guess the standard for coaches is different than the one for pastors.

The whole thing is terribly disappointing. No thinking person can read through all the information and come out in support of CJ or SGM or T4G or TGC (as far as T4G and TGC’s stances on this issue).

Furthermore, why is it that cover-ups of abuse in “Christian circles” seem to make the secular cover-ups seem mild? Why? I could list five cover-ups of scandals in various denominations and circles right off the top of my head…all from the same general era. Why was this? Why did it happen? How can we prevent it from happening again? Of all people, those who name Christ (the Christ who loved little children) ought not to be tolerating this among ourselves.

And shame on the leaders who won’t speak out. I have completely lost any respect I might have had for you. This is why, as a whole, I stopped putting Christian leaders on pedestals a long time ago.

[CindyZ]

Furthermore, why is it that cover-ups of abuse in “Christian circles” seem to make the secular cover-ups seem mild? Why? I could list five cover-ups of scandals in various denominations and circles right off the top of my head…all from the same general era. Why was this? Why did it happen? How can we prevent it from happening again? Of all people, those who name Christ (the Christ who loved little children) ought not to be tolerating this among ourselves.

My first instinct is to say that nothing about child abuse is ‘mild’. Whether the cover up is in a public school, private school, church, or in a family (where most abuse and child deaths occur), the victimization of children in our culture is an abomination- and it is pervasive. There is an ongoing war on the age of consent sponsored mostly by Hollywood and LGBT groups- anyone who is outraged by SGM et al going to boycott their TV?

Didn’t think so. Nevermind.

There are not more cover ups in religious circles than in secular ones, even if it might seem that way to us. I read education news regularly, and schools are often the scene of sexual molestation and violence against children. Schools have been passing the trash for decades, but I don’t expect to hear all that much in the way of outcry against public education, which is America’s sacredest of sacred cows. People usually dismiss the discussion of child sexual abuse and molestation in schools with “it isn’t a problem at my child’s school.”

Unfortunately, people are outraged when they want to be, and not outraged when they don’t, especially when the situation doesn’t require them to make a change. “It happened way over there, so I can get mad and bluster all I want from the relative safety of my home computer.” This tactic seems to be working well for a lot of people.

Yes, we are and should be incensed because schools and churches are places that parents want to assume are safe for their child. Both are supposed to be dedicated to the care and nurturing of families- one in academics, the other in spiritual things. We who know what the Bible teaches and want to honor God and help people feel the sting of this kind of perversion in ‘our circles’, however large or small those circles might be.

But where there are gazelles, there will be lions. The predators go where the prey is, which is why parents must educate themselves and their children. The responsibility to protect ourselves is actually in our hands. THAT is what we can do to prevent it from happening again.

As much as church leaders have a duty to protect the sheep, the sheep need to exercise their own sense of discernment, as well as teaching their kids how to avoid problematic situations and read the signs of danger. We can’t walk into any situation with a baby-on-the-doorstep attitude and expect others to take care of us. Predator types- religious and otherwise- count on the naïveté of those under their influence to allow them to groom their victims.

If we put our leaders on a pedestal, then we are the foolish ones. Scripture warns us against putting men on par with God in our lives. And that is exactly what we are doing when we don’t read and study Scripture and develop our own relationship with God, and allow ourselves to be spoonfed by pastors, professors, and commentary authors.

I started reading Brent Detwiler’s article (Don Sailer linked to it). What struck me - before I really got into the article - was the tone of what he wrote:

Theologian Don Carson, pastor Kevin DeYoung and blogger Justin Taylor must have passed the bar examination. Yesterday they became defense lawyers for C.J. Mahaney on behalf of The Gospel Coalition. In their first case, they used their inscrutable legal genius to absolve him of all crimes in the SGM sex scandal and all transgressions in the SGM leadership scandal. It turns out C.J. is the victim according to these spiritual leaders turned legal jurists.

But wait, let’s examine their arguments before we accept their rulings!

…

Don, Kevin and Justin, why do you start off the first sentence with the focus on the “alleged conspiracy?” It should be on the heinous crimes found in the factual allegations. Here’s a suggestion for how you should have begun your statement that reflects reality.

“John Loftness, C.J.’s close friend, staunch supporter, personal pastor and the SGM Chairman of the Board until recently is under criminal investigation for heinous sex crimes! Some of these inhuman acts are alleged to have been carried out in conjunction with Stephen Griney, who also worked for C.J. and was a longstanding friend.”

When I took Old Testament 1 in seminary 37 years ago, I was required to read through the Pentateuch five times. It was a great assignment. Before reading this post, I have a suggestion. Read through the Second Amended Complaint five times. Then cry, weep, howl and pray for justice! That will put things in proper focus.

I’m don’t really want to talk a lot more about this, but Brent’s attitude towards Don, Kevin, and Justin just screamed out at me. There were all kinds of ways that Brent could have replied to their post. But to open up by mocking them as ‘inscrutable legal genius[es] ’ that ‘absolved him of all crimes’ and ‘all transgressions in the SGM leadership scandal’ is both unkind and a misrepresentation of their article. He doesn’t even give them the courtesy of linking back to what they actually wrote. He actually misrepresents their argument to his audience…whether of passion, ignorance, or deliberate maliciousness, I cannot say. That’s a real issue.

Carson, DeYoung and Taylor actually said:

It needs to be said in no uncertain terms that the actual acts alleged in the lawsuit are utterly evil—an offense against a holy God and an act of hatred against innocent children. They are horrifying and revolting. Apart from repentance, they are damning. There is no excuse, at any time or in any place or for any reason, for the use of children for sexual pleasure…

So the entire legal strategy was dependent on a theory of conspiracy that was more hearsay than anything like reasonable demonstration of culpability. As to the specific matter of C. J. participating in some massive cover-up, the legal evidence was so paltry (more like non-existent) that the judge did not think a trial was even warranted.

…We are not ashamed to call C. J. a friend. Our relationship with C. J. is like that with any good friend—full of laughter and sober reflection, encouragement and mutual correction. He has regularly invited—even pursued—correction, and we have given him our perspective when it is warranted. While the admission of friendship may render this entire statement tainted in the eyes of some, we hope most Christians will understand that while friends should never cover for each others’ sins, neither do friends quickly accept the accusations of others when they run counter to everything they have come to see and know about their friend.

Now, I don’t know all of what is going on between the two - but I do know that it took me all of five minutes to do a compare and contrast between the two posts and demonstrate flaws in Brent’s article. Stuff like that really bugs me personally, and it makes Brent look bad to anyone that’s not already in his corner. I’d be more willing to give Detwiler a break or listen to what he said if he left the vitriol out and said that there was still areas of disagreement and that he presented his case (which seems to be strong) a little calmer and in a more reasonable manner. It seems to happen a lot with Detwiler’s writings, and that makes me reticent to really get into what he’s written.

Now, I don’t know all of what is going on between the two - but I do know that it took me all of five minutes to do a compare and contrast between the two posts and demonstrate flaws in Brent’s article. Stuff like that really bugs me personally, and it makes Brent look bad to anyone that’s not already in his corner. I’d be more willing to give Detwiler a break or listen to what he said if he left the vitriol out and said that there was still areas of disagreement and that he presented his case (which seems to be strong) a little calmer and in a more reasonable manner. It seems to happen a lot with Detwiler’s writings, and that makes me reticent to really get into what he’s written.

I agree with Jay that Detwiler has his own thing going and I agree it shows up in his tone. It comes across as latching onto anything that will make CJ Mahaney look bad. Clearly he was personally hurt by being removed from apostolic office and is striking back.

That said, many critics of SGM also view his motives with skepticism as someone who has never admitted his role in causing so much grief to the saints over the many years he was Mr. Mahaney’s right hand man. But the more balanced critics of SGM also see him as someone God raised up providentially to expose things because Detwiler is a fastidious documentarian. He keeps everything, and has notes , e-mails, and accounts of much of what transpired behind the scenes. As far as I know, none of his documentation has been denied by any “side.” You do have to look past his bitterness. But past it is a lot of information.

[Wayne Wilson] That said, many critics of SGM also view his motives with skepticism as someone who has never admitted his role in causing so much grief to the saints over the many years he was Mr. Mahaney’s right hand man. But the more balanced critics of SGM also see him as someone God raised up providentially to expose things because Detwiler is a fastidious documentarian. He keeps everything, and has notes, e-mails, and accounts of much of what transpired behind the scenes. As far as I know, none of his documentation has been denied by any “side.” You do have to look past his bitterness. But past it is a lot of information.

Yeah, and that’s what makes his claims credible in the first place. I didn’t read through the entire 600 page file that he released on his website a while ago, but I did think, “Man, that’s a LOT of evidence to back his claims”, and it’s a big reason why I haven’t blown him off entirely.

Sometimes sarcasm and hyperbole actually help one make their case. I occasionally have fun with this myself at my blog.

But some of Detwiler’s articles don’t come across as witty or pointed, and this can detract instead of bolster his case. Personally, I think he does well enough without the distraction of bitter ranting.

I think when topics of such an important and delicate nature as this are discussed, we keep firm goals in mind of being on topic, to the point, helpful and productive. This is a serious matter that shouldn’t be diminished in any way by grandstanding, hysteria, or baiting each other.

Kevin DeYoung, one of CJ’s friends, issued a statement of support and posted it on his blog and did not allow comments. On a following post, an unrelated topic, the comments were open and commenter, Tom, issued this incredible reflection on the SGM situation. I am very surprised the comment was not removed (as is the typical MO on these blogs - ask me how I know). It’s long, but worth the read:

It is concerning that the post, “Why We Have Been Silent About SGM Lawsuit,” published on The Gospel Coalition website by DA Carson, Kevin DeYoung, and Justin Taylor blocked readers from posting comments. The history of the lawsuits against SGM is complicated with numerous examples of the depravity of men. The number of electrons burdened with ill reasoned, slanderous, and cowardly accusations pertaining to SGM over the past several years could fill a NASA supercomputer (before sequestration). It makes practical and Biblical sense not to open another electronic forum that may encourage the continuation of a trial that has been disallowed by the appropriate civil authorities. Disallowing comments to these authors’ letter is an altogether different consideration.

Disabling reader’s ability to respond to the author’s letter is akin to traffic enforcement officers telling the witnesses to a horrific car wreck that their testimonies are not worth collecting. Are inappropriate comments and observations going to be posted by readers? Yes. That is why this web site has content editors and mediators. Are these authors implicating the site’s editors with incompetence and inadequate skill in determining what is appropriate and what is not?

Many of this site’s readers are concerned about the multitude of faith issues inherent in the SGM tragedy and want to learn from Scripture and faithful teachers how to respond if these events arise in their own worshipping community. No matter where someone sets down in thought about the events surrounding SGM over the past five years or more, there is much to be discussed for the health of individual saints and the greater body of believers.

When a subordinate officer in US Army GEN Stanley McChrystal’s command made offhanded comments about President Barak Obama to a Rolling Stone reporter, GEN McChrystal resigned his position as ISAF commander and Commander, US Forces Afghanistan. He immediately retired from active military duty in order to return America’s focus to the mission of protecting this country and prosecuting the war in Afghanistan. GEN McChrystal, West Point graduate, Special Forces qualified, Ranger qualified, Airborne qualified, former commander of US Special forces Command, subordinated his career, personal goals, and professional calling to the greater mission. Did GEN McChrystal do anything wrong or behave in a way that brought dishonor to the United States of America? No he did not. GEN McChrystal took personal responsibility for the failings of subordinates under his command and removed himself as a distraction to the successful accomplishment of a greater goal.

GEN David Petreaus, West Point graduate, former commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, author of American counter insurgency doctrine, head of the CIA, resigned when his personal leadership failings distracted from the mission for which he had been hired to execute. At the time of his personal moral failure was he still eminently qualified to successfully perform the task for which he was paid? Yes. Did his personal role in the prosecution of the mission for which he was hired require him to be above reproach? Yes it did?

The head of the IRS resigns after six months on the job in order to mitigate the distraction his personal involvement in alleged misconduct may present to the return of integrity to this country’s tax collecting agency.

And on and on it goes. In business, government, and the American military, leaders get out of the way of the mission when their involvement becomes a distraction. Why does there seem to be more integrity among the secular leader’s prosecution of the missions of business and government than among the men entrusted with Gospel proclamation? Is not Gospel proclamation a greater undertaking than any of the tasks entrusted to these military, business, and civic leaders? Does the value of vocational ministry friendships and relationships override the integrity of the Gospel? Do preachers, church leaders, and anyone of us not have to die to ourselves when we become a more compelling story than Jesus The Messiah and His Redemptive suffering and death?

If the leader’s of this country’s wars understand that leadership integrity must never be undermined, why are we so willing to accept a lesser standard within the church? Maybe the Church is not at war.

I encourage DA Carson to discuss with his son, a US Marine, what must be sacrificed personally in terms of ambition, self-reliance, and independence when a man goes to war. Kevin, if the thoughts you express in this post have veracity, open up the comments so that the world will see that faithful brothers and sisters can undertake the hard conversations that make up much of life this side of all Glory.

Open up the comment section and let the uncomfortable discussion of the tragedy that surrounds SGM begin so that we never repeat these same mistakes.

It occurred to me last night that if a church is going to invest so much authority in their leadership—as SGM has—that when trouble comes, that same leadership must be the first to take responsibility for it. This is a basic privilege/responsibility dynamic—one that is so basic that I regularly use it in teaching my children. If nothing else, Mahaney must own what happened under his watch because the leadership paradigm placed him as the authority over his congregation. You cannot structure your organization to allow you the privilege of leading only to distance yourself when problems come by saying “I had nothing to do with it.”

Last night I was sent a copy of the court filing: Motion to Reconsider which was filed by the plaintiffs in the SGM lawsuit. The filing appears to be a couple of days ago. I have only skimmed it, but my understanding is this Motion is basically an appeal of the recent ruling in which 9 of the 11 cases were dismissed because of Statute of Limitations. Maryland has different time lengths on statute of limitations between civil and criminal cases. This case is a civil lawsuit. I’ll try to report more on this when I get a chance, but wanted to update.