Letter from SGM Board to SGM Pastors

Brent Detwiler has published a letter from the SGM Board (read Mahaney and Harvey I guess) to the current SGM pastors and it is VERY detailed in significant changes in SGM polity.

I haven't reprinted it here in detail due to length but the link is here.

What is useful is that Brent has annotated the letter with his own comments and insights which are useful (while taken with a pinch of salt due to his obvious and understandable bias). What particularly struck me was his comments on the understanding of Ephesians 4 Ministries. I think that issue has been the one big downfall for SGM. I understand why they changed their use of the term "apostle" due to their desire to become more acceptable to reformed big dogs like Al Mohler and Mark Dever - but the crunch for me is this;

They still treat the "SGM Board" like they are apostles - even though the current Board may not be gifted and anointed from the risen Christ to act in that capacity.

My contact with the SGM Board member in sorting out my problems was pretty much irrelevant because he would not act or acknowledge any involvement or authority in the church I had problems with. Meeting the church pastors was MUCH more useful because they could and did (but confusingly still referred to the excommunication happening on the advice/instruction of the SGM Board member).

So I would insist and argue that SGM need to decide - what place does a secular term like "Board members" have in an allegedly Christian organisation/movement of churches? Are they apostles or aren't they? I for one agree with Brent;

Personal Theology

I believe in apostles, prophets, evangelist, pastors and teachers (Eph 4:11). This five-fold ministry is the God ordained means for building mature churches and evangelizing the world. I made sure all five were included in the Statement of Faith. The evangelical world believes in pastors and teachings and theoretically in evangelists. I don’t know what SGM believes in. Their theology changes from week to week. It also remains open ended so they can fill in the blanks as they see fit according to the need of the moment.

Martin Luther-style Letter to SGM Board

I'm a bit behind friends at SGM Survivors, Refuge, Wartburt Watch and SGM Nation (a new blog "representing SGM members calling for reform in SGM" - (is it me or is the list of blogs watching SGM growing?) and of course Brent Detwiler himself - at posting this - but it is still of importance and interest.

One of my greatest encouragements is that my former church - Grace Church in Bristol - has signed the letter. My very personal longing was that they would not blindly follow Mahaney/Harvey et al in celebrity pastor worship but would care and love (particularly my family!) but also the precious family there. And every sign so far this year seems to be they are indeed doing just that.

Here's the letter - originating from Sovereign Grace Fairfax Church (founder SGM church);

March 7th Cover Email from SGC Pastoral Team to SGM Interim Board Members (copies went to C.J. Mahaney, the permanent Board nominees, and the SGM Pastoral Team)

Dear Interim Board members,

Attached is the response of the Sovereign Grace Church (SGC) Fairfax Pastoral Team to your February 27th request for our affirmations or expressions of concern about the nine nominees to the Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM) Board. Thank you for the enormous sacrifices each of you has made over the past months to serve our family of churches. Though we need to express our disagreement with some of what is being proposed, we want to assure you that we do so as friends who deeply desire to lean in and work together with you. We are eager to preserve the unity of the Spirit and the bond of peace, and to continue our mission together.

As you read our response, please hear the spirit that undergirds all that we say, including the tremendous appreciation we have for our long history together. On page three of the response you will also see the names of a number of SGM churches and pastors who share our concerns and have let us know that they would like to be included in our response. Collectively, we represent 13 churches, including three of the founding churches of SGM. Each one of us shares our goal of providing a reasoned, Biblically sound appeal to you, the Interim Board members, which reflects the love we share for our family of churches and our hope for reform in the movement.

We want you to know that we have no plans to leave SGM and strongly desire constructive dialogue with you. I welcome a chance to speak to you in person and can be reached at 703.691.0600 (office).

Mark, on behalf of the SGC Fairfax Pastoral Team

##

March 7, 2012

Dear members of the SGM Interim Board,

“May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Romans 15:5-6 ESV)

We write to you on behalf of the Pastoral Team of Sovereign Grace Church (SGC) Fairfax in response to “An Update from the Board,” that we received on February 27, 2012. These have been very troubling times for our family of churches, and we thank God for you, as you have labored many hours serving as Interim Board members. We continue to pray that the Lord himself will preserve your souls in peace and that as fellow brothers in Christ, we all will remain focused on glorifying God our Savior.

When we received your update, the SGC Fairfax Pastoral Team discussed the changes in the leadership structure, the functions of the permanent Board, and the nomination and affirmation processes. We also reviewed the list of nominees for Board membership. In the light of our discussions, we are declining to participate in the process of affirming these nominees because we believe the process is premature and unwise.

Our Concerns

The process is unnecessarily rushed.

You ask that the online feedback form with affirmations and concerns be submitted by March 7, just 10 days after we received the update. You do not explain your rationale for the urgent timeline. We suggest that it would be better to wait until after Ambassadors of Reconciliation releases its report of findings. We understand that this report will include key weaknesses and strengths in SGM’s cultural norms, polity, and structure, all of which could inform the way we move forward in seating a Board.

Ongoing lack of or contradictory communications

We see an established pattern of a lack of communications, including the absence of regional meetings, over the last several years. The most recent example is that we received your February 27th update without any meaningful conversation about the process involved or the contents of the update. Within the update itself, there is very little explanation about how and why the new Board nominees were selected.

In addition, we have received contradictory communications that make it difficult to know what to believe about the actions being taken by the Interim Board. For example, you had explained in “Sovereign Grace Board’s Response to the [Panel] Reports that your “mandate as an interim Board was to evaluate Brent’s allegations,” leaving a “thorough examination of SGM’s leadership structure … to the next Board.” With your latest update, however, it is clear that you have made determinations about polity outside of your self-described scope.

Lack of diversity among the nominees

There is no doubt that the nominees are upright and godly men. However, the lack of diversity of opinions is of great concern. Such diversity would come by including broader perspectives on polity from all of our churches, as well as representation from the international churches, and would greatly enhance the pursuit of much-needed reforms in our family of churches.

Ongoing polity problems

SGM’s new Board, like the previous and Interim Board, will have great authority without strengthened accountability. In effect, the Board remains self-appointed and self-perpetuating because we have no commitment that you will act on the concerns that SGM pastors express.

In addition, there is a lack of sufficient clarity about SGM as an entity. There needs to be a theological document that lays out the Biblical explanation of SGM that is published, peer-reviewed by those outside our movement, and discussed as a whole by all SGM pastors.

Proposed Way Forward

The plans of the diligent lead surely to abundance, but everyone who is hasty comes only to poverty. (Proverbs 21:5 ESV)

Our dear brothers, we appeal to you to slow down. Please stop and listen to the churches you are connected to and emerge from; create forums for pastors to speak together and with you; and call a council of pastors from each church together to discuss our future and make decisions together.

We make these appeals as one of the founding churches in our family of churches and as fellow followers of Jesus Christ, our Savior, who can redeem all circumstances and make right all relationships. Also attached is a list of churches and their Pastoral Teams who agree with our concerns and proposed way forward.

Please receive this letter as an expression of the desire we all share for the reform of our family of churches. For over three decades, we all have been walking together for the sake and advancement of the gospel. We hope to continue doing so fruitfully for decades to come.

The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you,

Lou Gallo, David Hinders, Vince Hinders, Luke Middleton, Mark Mullery, and Seita Sakaguchi

Sovereign Grace Church Fairfax

##

The Pastoral Teams of the following Sovereign Grace churches have reviewed, and are in general agreement with, the concerns expressed in the March 7, 2012 response letter from the Sovereign Grace Church Fairfax Pastoral Team to the Sovereign Grace Ministries Interim Board:

Christ Church – San Francisco, CA

Toby Kurth, Tim Chao, Jeff Locke, Jon-Paul Momsen

Christ Our Redeemer Church – Vancouver, WA

Daniel Morse

Covenant Life Church – Gaithersburg, MD

Joshua Harris, Robin Boisvert, Dave Brewer, Don DeVries, Braden Greer, Isaac Hydoski, Grant Layman, Jamie Leach, Joe Lee, Matt Maka, Adam Malcolm, Kenneth Maresco, Corby Megorden, Mark Mitchell, Kevin Rogers, Eric Sheffer, Jon Smith, Ben Wikner

Crossway Community Church – Vancouver, BC

Pat Sczebel, Fred Eaton, Marty Jones, David Smith

Grace Christian Fellowship – Spokane, WA

William Farley, David Farley, John Kershinar, Dave Nelson, Jim Spurgetis, Mark Williams

Grace Covenant Church – Jacksonville, FL

Joe Calabello, Craig Eddy Sr., Ed Edwards

Gulf Coast Community Church – St. Petersburg, FL

Jerry Cisar, Steven Brunson, Daryn Kinney

Sovereign Grace Church – Cleveland, OH

Darren Lander, Roman Bibyk, Bob Digney, Eric Grover, Jonathan Putnam, Brian Reebel, Keith Schifano

Sovereign Grace Church – Greenville, SC

Matt Rawlings

Sovereign Grace Church – Indiana, PA

Mark Altrogge, Stephen Altrogge, Joe Ryer

Sovereign Grace Church – Oswego, IL

Josh Fenska, Jamie Maxim, Tab Trainor

Wellspring Church – Pleasanton, CA

Sam Shin, Justin Chang, Chris Feng, Dan Kim, Thomas Ki


Churches Added - March 8, 2011

Grace Church - Bristol, England

Nathan Smith, Peter Bowley

Grace Community Church – Bradenton, FL

Luan Nguyen

Redeemer Church at Lake Nona – Orlando, FL

Benny Phillips

Big Day of Change in SGM

So new change of surroundings for returned President C J and a new Board too. "Constant change is indeed here to stay" (as C J always liked to say). As I have learned in work emails - it's always good to highlight key points of note for those who don't have time or inclination to read the details.

• C J and Jeff Purswell have "asked to have their names removed from consideration".

• Dave Harvey has "become convinced that Board membership is an unwise commitment right now".

It should be noted that "the Board" (a strange business term that I among others have struggled to place in a biblical context of ANY Christian leadership) is distinct from "the Leadership Team" (at present I'm not sure who they are - apart from guessing it involves C J). So I guess we continue to wait and watch and pray.

Here's the details;

An update from the Board

Dear pastors,

Thank you for bearing with us in patience as we have finalized details for the upcoming Board transition. We appreciate your encouragement, input, and prayers that have played such a significant role for us over the last several months.

This letter is to explain to you the significant changes in leadership structure that are represented in the new Board we hope to install in March, and to solicit your involvement in the process. For a quick reference, we’ve also included at the end of this document a table comparing the old and proposed configurations.

This represents the next step in our polity and leadership refinements that have been in process for the past couple of years. Before we get to the specifics of this step, we want to clarify a few preliminary points. As we’ve stated at the conference and in our various polity meetings, we continue to affirm and celebrate our existence together as a family of churches. Although this letter speaks in terms of “the Board,” that is simply a functional term for the governing body of Sovereign Grace Ministries and not an abandonment of biblical principle. Based upon the precedent of the New Testament, SGM is an expression of extra-local ministry that is connected to local churches, emerging out of local churches, endorsed by local churches, and working with local churches, with the goal of planting churches and serving those churches as they grow toward maturity. As such (and as will be noted further below), participants in the new Board will comprise both men serving extra-locally as well as elders of churches partnering with SGM.

Thus, we will maintain our historical commitment to the pervasive biblical pattern of gifted men leading the church in its mission—planting churches, nurturing churches, and uniting churches in a common mission (e.g., Acts 13:1-3; 15:39-40; 18:27-28; 1 Cor. 16:10-12; Phil. 2:19-30; Col 1:7-8, 4:12; Titus 1:5; et al). The inclusion of church elders on the board will also honor the biblical precedent of local elders partnering with extra-local workers in leadership and mission (e.g., Acts 13:1-3; 15:6).


1. Function of the Board

As noted above, the Board is the governing body of SGM. As such, it is not intended to be involved in the day-to-day affairs of the ministry, which are the purview of the Leadership Team (the president and other senior staff selected by the Board). Rather, it provides oversight and accountability for the organization. For example, the Board:
• Determines the vision and values for the ministry
• Sets priorities and conducts annual performance reviews for the president, and holds the authority to hire/fire him
• Provides financial and legal oversight for the ministry, ensuring an appropriate level of transparency, approving annual budgets, and setting policy
• Defines the Statement of Faith—changes to which will also require a vote of ordained SGM pastors when our polity is revised
Although these are not new responsibilities for the Board, our hope is that they receive more concentrated attention now that the Board (as a governing body) will be distinct from the Leadership Team.

Because of the unique season we are in, this new Board also has a number of special responsibilities awaiting it:
• Finalizing SGM’s polity—something that will likely include a subcommittee of pastors from SGM churches who are not Board members (this will include the development of a book of church order, a defined grievance policy, etc)
• Evaluating recommendations from AOR’s Group Reconciliation report
• Evaluating recommendations from the panels that evaluated Brent Detwiler’s allegations
• Installing a replacement for C.J. Mahaney as president
As we have communicated before, the interim Board’s role was not to finalize polity but to evaluate the charges against C.J. With the seating of a new board, these other important priorities can move forward.


2. Nomination process

SGM’s by-laws provide that the Board of Directors shall make subsequent appointments to the Board. Both in the appointment process for and the composition of the new Board, we are changing how this has been done historically. Given the interim status of this Board and pending finalization of our polity, however, we had to be careful not to set precedents that unduly obligated the future Board, which can further modify this process in light of the ongoing polity refinements in the future. One significant change we believed was important to make immediately was to provide a process for ordained SGM pastors to have input about nominees before they are confirmed. We will explain that affirmation process later in this letter.

The first step in seating the new Board was for the interim Board to nominate a list of men for membership. All of these men individually must meet certain criteria we established. Each man:
1. Is an ordained elder in an SGM church with at least five years of pastoral experience, or a member of the SGM leadership team
2. Has been endorsed to us by his local team for his leadership, wisdom, and character, especially his ability to work well in plurality
3. Possesses a proven grasp of biblical, systematic, and practical theology as well as biblical ethics, and a proven ability to reason biblically and to apply scripture to varied circumstances
4. Has a distinctive gift of leadership, especially the capacity to think strategically and solve problems
5. Has a proven commitment to and passion for SGM’s mission to plant and care for local churches
6. Is in agreement with SGM’s statement of faith and membership agreement with local churches
Other significant changes to the Board include group criteria we set: an expanded roster of at least nine men, at least half of whom are SGM church elders rather than primarily SGM staff (to avoid the dynamics of an insider Board). This change provides a broader perspective, a deeper pool of wisdom, a greater connection with and accountability to churches, and clears the primary obstacle SGM has to joining the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. (There are other measures meant to help SGM benefit from accountability to local churches that we expect will be reflected in the new Partnership Agreement. These include providing recourse for elders in the form of a grievance policy, the requirement that changes in the Statement of Faith be voted on by ordained elders, and the requirement that SGM executive staff serve on the staff of a local church.)

The men below have been nominated for Board membership and have been affirmed by their local teams for the role.
1. Al Pino
2. Craig Cabaniss
3. Ian McConnell
4. John Loftness
5. Ken Mellinger
6. Mickey Connolly
7. Paul Buckley
8. Phil Sasser
9. Ron Boomsma
Short bios of these men are included in the feedback form we created for the affirmation process.

Some of you are surely wondering why C.J. Mahaney, Dave Harvey, and Jeff Purswell aren’t on the list. C.J. and Jeff were both unanimously nominated for the Board but asked to have their names removed from consideration. Both thought they would be able to better serve SGM at present if they were able to specialize in particular areas of their calling. Dave Harvey was also unanimously nominated for Board membership, but after considering the demands of the last eight months, the emergence of some family matters, and the care and counsel of his local eldership, Dave became convinced that Board membership was an unwise commitment right now. This does not mean the Board will not include full-time SGM staff in the future. The Board may nominate new Board members at their discretion and in keeping with the needs of leadership. As with the nominees at hand, new nominations will be submitted to SGM elders for affirmation.

We have instituted a three-year term for Board members. The Board may renew the participation of a member when his term expires, but the renewal will be subject to the affirmation process described below. To avoid a situation in which all nine men are up for renewal or replacement at the same time, the initial slate of men will have staggered terms—three men with two-year terms, three men with three-year terms, and three men with four-year terms. Those terms will be assigned to nominees by the Board once the affirmation process is complete.

This new Board process represents a significant change from the way any SGM board has been formed in the past. We believe that these changes—a larger board, the inclusion of more SGM church elders, a majority non-SGM staff, explicit Board qualifications, approval of Board nominees by their local team, and particularly the affirmation of Board nominees by SGM church elders—will provide us a strong group of gifted men to provide wise and biblical leadership for our future together.


3. Affirmation process

We are submitting these nominees to all ordained elders in SGM churches with the request that they communicate to us their affirmation or concerns for each nominee. Feedback should be based upon the stated qualifications for Board membership.

The interim Board will review and discuss the feedback we receive on each man (recusing the nominees where applicable). If the affirmation process makes it clear that a particular nominee does not meet the stated qualifications, we will find an alternate nominee. If any of you men has questions concerning the feedback we receive on a particular nominee, we will be happy to handle that over the phone.

If you are an ordained SGM pastor, please use the online feedback form to submit your affirmation or concerns. We request that this be done by the end of the day on Wednesday, March 7. Before doing so, you may wish to review the summary of changes (PDF) represented in the new Board structure.

We are encouraged about these changes and believe they will strengthen both our governance and our partnership as we pursue our mission together. We appreciate the feedback we have received from many of you, which has helped to inform the shaping of this process. We never tire of thanking you for your partnership in the gospel, which we trust will only strengthen and prosper in the days ahead.

The SGM Board

C J Moves Church Membership ... Again.

I scarcely know how to pass comment on these swiftly moving events anymore. Other than to say my profound respect for Josh Harris and the people of CLC continues to increase. Are you allowed to "transfer" your membership just because you hit difficulties with your current one? Would I have been allowed to "transfer" my membership say to Christchurch Newport just because of my difficulties with the church in Bristol? Or is that a privilege reserved for the President-returned? I don't know. It doesn't help with the confusion in my mind regarding church life at present. But here it is:

Below is a message sent to Covenant Life Church members today:

———————-

Dear Members of Covenant Life,

We are writing to update you regarding another important moment in the events of the last eight months.

Last month when his leave of absence as President of Sovereign Grace Ministries ended, C.J. Mahaney wrote the elders of Covenant Life informing us of his decision to transfer his membership to Solid Rock Church. At that time we told C.J. that the elders would like to meet with him and discuss several concerns that we had for him, as well as hear his questions and concerns for us.

This past Friday, Grant, Josh and Robin met with C.J. along with two members of the Sovereign Grace Board and had an honest conversation. We began by asking C.J. to share his concerns and disagreements with our leadership over the past eight months, and then we shared our concerns and questions for some of his actions and statements during that same time. We felt the Lord gave grace for everyone to speak forthrightly and listen to each other. We believe this meeting was an important step, though it confirmed that we have different perspectives on what has unfolded since last July.

Having had the opportunity to meet with C.J., we have agreed, with sadness, to accept and support his membership transfer. C.J. has communicated to us that he no longer thinks the formal mediation he requested last fall is needed (this mediation was going to be led by Ted Kober and was to address differences C.J. had with the pastors’ public leadership in response to the release of Brent Detwiler’s documents). We are grateful that we’ve been able to talk together, and we expect there will be further dialogue. Because we understand there will be questions on these matters, we have scheduled another “Coffee and Questions” night for [Time & Date Edited]. We’ve created a simple form to allow you to submit your questions in advance of the meeting.

C.J. has communicated his love and appreciation for Covenant Life and that he believes God is leading him into a new season of pastoral ministry. C.J. has told us that his time at Solid Rock will be brief as he plans to plant a new church in another state later this year. Details of those plans will be announced by Sovereign Grace in the coming months.

We pray God’s blessing on C.J. and his family. We will always be grateful for his service to this church.

If you want to talk further about this, we hope you can come to the “Coffee and Questions” night on [Date], and as always, feel free to contact your pastor.

Sincerely,

The pastors of Covenant Life

Covenant Life Church's Response to C J Mahaney's Return

This was recently emailed to all CLC members. It's an interesting and encouraging take;

We’re writing to share our thoughts concerning the recent panels’ findings released by the Board of Sovereign Grace Ministries. Thank you for your patience and encouragement during this unique season in our church. Many of you have shared your questions and concerns with us for which we are grateful. We value your ongoing partnership in the gospel.

As a pastoral team, we’ve spent significant time considering the difficult issues addressed by the panels. As you will recall, last summer hundreds of pages of documents were released by Brent Detwiler. We sought to care for our members through the initial shock caused by this release. Given the charges he made against our friend and former Senior Pastor, C.J. Mahaney, we asked the church to allow a thorough process of evaluation to unfold.

The hope of having a completely independent, outside organization review and adjudicate Brent’s charges against C.J. never materialized, but based on the counsel of Ambassadors of Reconciliation, the Sovereign Grace Board did establish an internal process to evaluate the charges and have now released findings from three panels. Each was made up of two Sovereign Grace pastors and one SGM Board member along with a facilitator, Bryce Thomas. While we wish the questions assigned the panels had been broader in scope and would have preferred a selection process for the panel members that avoided any appearance of partiality (e.g., a blind draw instead of ones chosen by the Board), we view these panel reports as a good step toward more openly addressing questions raised by the documents.

We believe the men selected for these panels acted with integrity to address the questions assigned them by the SGM Board, and we thank these men for their sacrificial efforts.
In regard to the first panel, those of us who were directly involved with these events (Kenneth, Grant and Joshua) each communicated to the panel when they interviewed us that we felt C.J.’s written confession to Brent in the fall of 2010 (referenced in the first panel report) was a specific, humble acknowledgement of his sins. We also agree with the panel’s recommendations and trust they will be followed. (We’ve appended all the recommendations from the three panels to this letter.)

In regard to the second panel, Covenant Life had no personal involvement with Brent’s dismissal, and we are not in a position to question the panel’s findings. But we hope that improvements in polity and procedures may help prevent future occurrences of the types of problems the report describes. And it is our prayer that reconciliation among offended brothers will be pursued.

The third panel’s findings regarding Larry Tomczak were arguably the most important of the three panels because of the seriousness of the charges leveled against C.J., Steve Shank and Dave Harvey, and because Larry was a founding pastor of Covenant Life. Reading this report left us deeply grieved by the sin committed against the Tomczak family. We regard the panel’s report to be a rebuke of the men involved in this action. We are grateful that the panel did not gloss over the sin but acknowledged the damage created by the coercive threat and lack of pursuing reconciliation. We agree that honoring the Tomczaks would be appropriate. We also agree that this panel’s recommendations for further reconciliation between C.J., Steve, Dave and Larry should be pursued as a good faith effort in assuring member churches that this type of sin will not be tolerated in the future.

While the Board was functioning within its purview to reinstate C.J. as President, we believe that it would have been better for the Board to have carried out the panel’s recommendations prior to reinstating C.J. and forming a new Board.
We share these points of disagreement out of desire to participate in a constructive dialogue about the future of our movement. We love all the men involved and count them as brothers and gospel partners.
It’s important for us to state that the ways that we disagree about the Board’s handling of this process are distinct from issues of personal forgiveness. God’s forgiveness has been purchased for us by the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. Whether or not we agree on all the details of these matters, may we all remember that our God has shown each of us undeserved mercy and grace in pardoning our sins.

Extending personal forgiveness toward our brothers is vital as followers of Jesus Christ (Col. 3:13). But it does not mean that we can’t respectfully disagree with the decisions of an organization or express concerns about how leaders are appointed and positioned or ask questions about what authority they hold. Right now for example, the SGM Board is working on a new membership agreement for the churches. They are also appointing a new permanent Board. Both of these issues are very important to us as a church. While we strongly desire to maintain our connection and relationship with other Sovereign Grace churches, we won’t feel comfortable signing a new membership agreement with SGM until the Board has clearly defined how it is accountable to member churches and the nature of its authority and relationship to them. The Board has stated its commitment to clarifying these issues, and we are grateful.
Some additional factors are also in play:

We expect the report from Ambassadors of Reconciliation scheduled to be released in March will give further opportunity to clarify how God is calling for reform in our movement.
We have asked the SGM Board to publish benchmarks for follow-through on the panel’s recommendations.

We want to close this letter with a call to pray for your pastors in Covenant Life and all of the leaders of SGM, asking the Lord to continue to bring conviction and reform any sinful patterns of leadership in the past or present, while also praising God for the good fruit in our church and across the movement as we partner together in days ahead. We believe God wants to do a reviving work among us and position us for greater fruitfulness for his glory.
We appreciate you taking the time to read through this and welcome your thoughts. Feel free to contact your pastor if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
The Pastors of Covenant Life Church

Why Do We Keep Remembering what God Forgets?

This post was recently written by a US pastor called Wade Burleson in response to SGM's emphasis on "indwelling sin". He quotes an example I have heard John Piper and Sam Storms use in relation to this issue - that of Jason and the Argonauts. It's a great post. Many of us ex-SGMers are now resorting to contacting counselors (something C J Mahaney adamantly was against) because many of us are near nervous breakdowns trying to work through this teaching and it's impact.

Why Do We Keep Remembering What God Forgets?

“As we mature personally, as our families mature, and as our churches mature, we need the doctrine of sin more, not less; and we need to keep growing in rightly understanding and applying this doctrine. Be assured that this is no less true if you’re a pastor or teacher or ministry worker. There’s no pastoral privilege in relation to sin. There’s no ministry exemption from the opposition of the flesh. There’s only a heightened responsibility to oppose sin and to weaken the flesh, as an example to the flock.” -C.J. Mahaney, Humility (Sisters, OR: Multnomah, 2005), page 133.

The movement C.J. Mahaney founded, Sovereign Grace Ministries, is one that is supposedly built on an understanding and application of God's grace. I recently listened to several messages by Mahaney and read a couple of his books, including the one quoted from above. I find myself rather surprised. SGM seems to focus God's people on the subject of 'sin' much more than they do Christ. Rather than an emphasis on growing in grace within the body of Christ, there is a stated goal by SGM's founder of 'growing in the doctrine of sin.' That, to me, is quite shocking.

In Hebrews 10:17-18 the Lord says, “This is the covenant I will make with them (us)… I will remember their sins no more.”

For the life of me I can't understand why pastors would put emphasis on remembering what God forgets.

There’s no denial Christians struggle with ‘indwelling sin.’ There's also no denial that sin is destructive. The question, though, is "How does a believer defeat indwelling sin?" I am absolutely, positively, one-hundred-percent convinced that every Christian leader who places more emphasis in his ministry to Christians on indwelling sin than he does Jesus Christ, will ultimately lead his people down the path of religious bondage, emotional pain and spiritual abuse. Sin's power and influence are only diminished by displaying the beauty of Jesus Christ. Focus on sin and it entices you; focus on Christ and He enraptures you. An easy way to remember this axiom of the faith is: "There's no high like the Most High!" When God's people regular taste of Him "and see that He is good," every false high that sin brings will be recognized as a sorry substitute for the real thing. The ancient people said as much when they asked of Philip, "Sir, we would see Jesus" (John 12:21).

Focusing on sin may 'sound' spiritual, but it is in essence anti-Christ. Binding God's people to
various religious rituals (church attendance, quiet time, devotionals, 30-minute morning prayers, promises, commitments, accountability, etc...) in order to overcome indwelling sin is completely missing Christ.

Focus on Christ, not your performance or lack thereof. Focus on Christ, not your accountability or lack thereof. Focus on Christ, not your church attendance or lack thereof. When Christ is your focus, you will find growing satisfaction and delight in Him! When that happens, indwelling sin loses its power because it loses its enticement.

Religious bondage may lead you to THINK the power of sin is gone in your life, but in reality, you haven't changed a lick by the bondage. All that's happened to you is you've been tied down by religion's rituals. If somebody were to cut the ropes that tie you to the institution of the church, you'd be sin's dead meat. But as you taste of the sweetness of Christ, sin begins to lose its power.

I've already quoted Hebrews 10:17-18 as the biblical basis for the good practice of NOT remembering (or focusing) on what God forgets, but let me see if I can illustrate this principle from ancient Greek mythology.

Odysseus and his mighty sailors sailed the Aegean Sea. The sorceress Circe had warned Odysseus and his men to be wary of the beautiful but deadly Sirens. These half-woman, half-beast creatures would entice sailors with their beautiful music, compelling the men to sail closer to the island of the Sirens. Without warning, the Sirens would swoop down, kill and canabilize the sailors who had sailed too close to the island of the Sirens. The sorceress told Odysseus that he and his sailors should have their ears filled with wax to block the Sirens' songs from being heard. Odysseus complied with the instructions by ordering his men to fill their ears with wax. He, however, wanted to hear the Sirens' beautiful songs for himself. So he told his sailors to tie him up to the mast with strong ropes so that when the Sirens began to sing, he could focus on the singing, but he could not jump ship and swim toward the enticing but deadly island. The sailors complied and bound their captain to the ship's mast. When the ship sailed near the island of the Sirens, music began to fill the air, and Odysseus focused on the beautiful songs and found himself enraptured. He began to fight the ropes and chains that bound him, longing to draw closer to the Sirens. He struggled with all his might to free himself from the bondage. He wanted to free himself, but he was trapped and held by the ropes and men on his ship. His battle with bondage was bloody and ugly. Odysseus avoided death at the hands of the Sirens, but he was a miserable wretch as his shipmates sought to hold Odysseus "accountable" and keep him safe.

On the other hand, Jason and the Argonauts dealt with the Sirens in a different manner. They too sailed the Aegean, but unlike Odysseus, they refused the ear wax, the strong ropes, and all attempts to "bind" anyone to the mast of the ship. Instead, they brought the greatest musician in the land onto their ship, a Muse named Orpheus, and they ordered him to play his beautiful music. The music from Orpheus' lyre and harp was so much sweeter, so far better, so incredibly more beautiful than the songs of the Sirens that Jason and the Argonauts had no desire to listen to the Sirens' songs when their ship passed by the island of the Sirens. What kept Jason and the Argonauts on the ship was the greater pleasure and beauty of Orpheus' music.

Odysseus and Jason serve as parabolic illustrations for the modern church. The great mistake of many Christian leaders, including many associated with SGM, is that they are attempting the Odysseus approach to indwelling sin in their people. They wish to expose sin (confess it), focus on sin (analyze it), control sin ('by binding people'), as they put more and more emphasis on sin as "God's people 'mature.'"

The only thing that this particular emphasis brings is tired, worn out people who collapse under the weight of 'authoritative leaders' and their edicts on how to be 'more holy.'

Pastors need to be more like Jason and the Argonauts. We need to bring Jesus into the church like Jason brought Orpheus onto the boat. Talk of Christ. Preach of Christ. Tell of Christ. Magnify Christ. Exalt Christ. Honor Christ. Uplift Christ. Sing of Christ. Speak of Christ. Point to Christ. Focus on Christ. The sweet music of Christ as written in the sacred hymn of Scripture is sufficient. The Holy Spirit does a pretty convincing job of guiding His people by the island of sin when the sweet song of the Savior is being played.

Coming Soon ..... A Grace "Super-Manual"

HOW excited am I!?

Stay tuned ...

E@Church - Yay or Nay?!

There's a fascinating development going on at one of my favourite sites in the USA - Wartburg Watch. They have begun what's called an "E@Church" where anyone on the internet can follow their services and be ministered to by a pastor guy called Wade Burleson.

The premise of this new development is;

"In our three years of writing this blog, we have become aware that a fair number of people have been so hurt and disillusioned by the church that they have dropped out of attending church altogether. After reading story after story about painful experiences, we don’t blame them. We both have been there.

Yet, many of these folks want to be around other Christians as evidenced by the numbers who visit blogs. Most of these have maintained their faith, but some have walked away or are seriously questioning if this faith is real.

So we wanted to provide a place in which a reader could get some of the benefits of church without the requirements that are often inherent in church attendance. We look at this place as a kind of halfway point between no church and church".

Probably even three or more years ago, I would have turned my perfect little Reformed nose up at this and quoted Calvin et al as insisting that a "church" must be a "local body". Hurt or not hurt - I would have insisted - believers MUST go to church whether they like it or not. And let's face it - many don't.

But I think the experiences I have gone through personally since university have softened my heart somewhat to this approach. I think (like the WW girls organisers) that local church which acts like a real family - centered on trust - would surely be ideal. But I have never encountered so many hurting, broken souls in the religious world since my encounters with Sovereign Grace Ministries and their churches. And I think a "half way point" is actually not a bad idea anymore while many of us still continue to search for a new home (or even a place we CAN call home - not a pew we slip into quietly and run before the Welcome Team find us).

One comment that really struck me after E@Church's first "service" was by a dear lady called "Happymom" - who has suffered some horrendous abuse at a large SGM church after her little child was sexually abuse. Happymom wrote that she had never encountered such a "hope-filled message". And the issue of "indwelling sin" came up. Wade Burleson - the pastor - wrote;

"Interesting that you wrote “no mention of indwelling sin.” I just finished preparing a word of encouragement from Hebrews 10:17-18 for a week from Sunday. Those verses say, “This is the covenant … I will remember their sins no more.”

The message is entitled “Divine Amnesia” and it has challenged me to ask the question why so many churches put the emphasis on remembering what God forgets. There’s no denial I struggle with ‘indwelling sin.’ The question is how is it dealt with. I believe the teaching of the New Testament puts the focus on Christ and not the sinner, and until the sinner discovers the greatest ‘high’ is the most High, he will continually fall for the false high sin gives".

I agree with your assessment of Sovereign Grace Ministries. I had never listened to much teaching from SGM until I recently heard testimonies from people who have attended. I went back and listened to some of Mahaney’s messages, and others, who are in leadership at SGM.

You shall know the Truth and He sets you FREE!

I was shocked.

The emphases of their messages are all wrong. It’s as if they use grace to entice sinners into the church and then use ‘law’ and the exposure of sin to keep believers dependent on their church".

While I continue to remain eternally optimistic and hopeful for SGM and their future - I think the AoR report MUST continue to insist on this truth being put right - for the good of the thousands of hurting, needy souls still within SGM.