SGM-Mahaneygate: More SGM Board-Harvey-Connolly Madness Mars Advent 2011 Story

SGM Strategies and Tactics 101

Close observers, readers and analysts will see this for what it is.  3 SGM panels staffed by three senior clerics with limited scopes and substantial conflicts of interest raises eyebrows.  Ted Kober erred in passing this back and off to SGM. Imagine if one had--in their ecclesiastical resume--this to confess:  "I am a former SGM member" or "I am an SGMer." Both are problematic and embarrassing although the former is the better of the two.  How can or could anybody be hoodwinked by their Chief-Mountebank?  Mahaney?  Chief-Handwaving Enthusiast with the Toronto revivals on Mahaney's resume? One of my final conclusions is a strengthened one, but the same as the very early suspicion--Mahaney is an ignorant enthusiast and mountebank.  He fools vulnerable, non-Confessional, non-liturgical and naive people.  He's manipulative and highly exploitative.  He still does too, including Mohler and others.  Anyway, the story goes on and mars the wonder, joy, caution, even silence, awe, prayer, praise and petition in the wondrous season of Advent 2012. Only in America do they invest so much in one or two heroes and get so very little in return.  Here's another post from Brent.

http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/2011/11/28/sovereign-grace-panels-are-of-little-worth-in-determining-cj.html

Sovereign Grace Panels Are of Little Worth In Determining C.J.’s Fitness for Ministry

Monday, November 28, 2011 at 1:20PM

This is addressed to C.J. but serves as an important update on the work of three panels that begins this week.

C.J.,

I received the following letter from Bryce Thomas just 10 days ago. As you know, he is the trial lawyer Ambassadors of Reconciliation asked to serve as facilitator for the three review panels. I’ve interacted with Bryce. He is a good and godly man. He is also required to follow the directives of the Sovereign Grace Board. He is not accountable to me or looking to me for advice. All my advice to him appears to have been rejected. He is accountable to them. They govern all his actions.

From: Bryce Thomas
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 7:36 PM
To: Brent Detwiler
Subject: Review Procedure

Greetings Brent,

The Board of Directors of Sovereign Grace Ministries is requesting that you, along with others, participate in a review procedure. A subcommittee of 3 members of the Sovereign Grace Ministries family consisting of one Board Member and 2 Senior Pastors would like to listen to information (and review if written) that you may have concerning this issue:

“Did CJ Mahaney wrongly influence the process of Brent Detwiler’s dismissal from his church in Mooresville, NC?”

Given this is the issue this subcommittee is addressing, you will be asked for information that pertains to this issue only. And we ask that you likewise direct the information that you share--to this issue only.

Although the information from you may be used, confidentiality as to the source will be respected. This review will be closed to the public. The dates for this review procedure are Thursday evening (12/1/11)—Saturday noon (12/3/11) and it will be held at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Concord, NC. Your reasonable expenses will be reimbursed—travel, meals and lodging if needed.

The goal of this procedure is to provide a fair, Biblical, safe process to address issues that have arisen, to put this Panel in a position to understand it from all sides, to make recommendations, and to write a reasoned report of its findings, conclusions and recommendations to be forwarded to the Board of Directors of Sovereign Grace Ministries. This report will be shared with the Sovereign Grace Ministries Member Churches. As this involves important matters to Sovereign Grace Ministries, its leadership and its member churches, I believe your prayerful consideration to participate serves our Lord.

If you know you are able to participate, please immediately contact Tommy Hill at SGM (thill@sovgracemin.org) to assist in arranging transportation, etc.

I am the Facilitator of this review procedure. My job is to help make it work for you and the panel members as easily as I can. This is my email address. My cell is XXX. I would welcome any questions you have by email or by phone. I will attempt to follow up with you in a few days, unless you have already contacted me. I appreciate your willingness to help in this important matter.

Blessings Brent and I look forward to meeting you,

Bryce Thomas, Facilitator

I talked to Bryce the next day. I asked him who was responsible for framing the question under review (i.e., “Did CJ Mahaney wrongly influence the process of Brent Detwiler’s dismissal from his church in Mooresville, NC?”). He told me the SGM Board assigned him the question. He had no say in the matter.

I also pointed out how Dave Harvey, on behalf of you and the Board, was breaking his word once again in a deceptive manner.

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2011 11:33 AM
To: Bryce Thomas
Subject: Another Broken Promise

Here is the section of Dave's blog post on the SGM website that I quoted.

Evaluating Brent Detwiler's allegations.

October 28, 2011 by Dave Harvey

The board will also commission three panels (1 board member and 2 senior pastors per panel), each guided by Bryce Thomas, for an internal review. Each of these panels will review one of the three major events around which Brent builds his allegations: Larry Tomczak’s departure from SGM in 1998, C.J.’s conflict with other SGM leaders in 2004, and Brent’s removal from ministry by his local church’s leaders in 2009. The panels will interview the key witnesses of these events, evaluate their testimonies for consistency with Brent’s interpretation of events, and determine if and where Brent’s allegations and conclusions have merit. These panels will then issue their findings and recommendations to the board, who in turn will publish them online and make a final determination on C.J.’s future in ministry with SGM.

The question for the panel doesn’t begin to address “Brent’s removal from ministry.”

C.J. Still Unwilling to Make a Defense

At the Pastors Conference two weeks ago, you said the following to all the SGM pastors.

“Finally, in relation to my confession, I wish I had defended myself. I think I briefly, at the outset, possibly at the conclusion, referenced my disagreements with Brent’s narratives and accusations. But I wrongly concluded that it wouldn’t be humble of me to defend myself. I am now convinced that this really reveals an ignorance of, a misunderstanding, a wrong application of humility. I had no category for an appropriate defense against criticisms and accusations, especially public ones. I think not having a category didn’t serve me.” (C.J. Mahaney, Pastors Conference, November 9, 2011)

For the last 20 months (see RRF&D, March 11, 2010), I have begged you to defend yourself. I’ve repeatedly gave you categories for an appropriate defense in my documents and correspondence. Instead, you purposely avoided my tough questions. I pled for a hearing where I could make my case and you could defend yourself. I still want you to defend yourself.

In this regard, I went out of my way to make allowances for you to defend yourself at the adjudication hearing when I capitulated to all the Board’s demands. Still you refused. You still haven’t stated your case and you will not allow me to make my case. At the Pastors Conference, you dismissed me with broad condemnations but presented no evidence. You never have. That is wrong. If you want to reject what I’ve written, you need to show up for a hearing. Don’t be cowardly and use the bully pulpit like you did at the Conference.

“However, it does appear that some assumed or concluded that I agree with Brent’s narrative, his accusations and interpretations and judgments of my motives, and this simply wouldn’t be true and it never has been true. Brent’s docs construct a narrative that I disagree with. That narrative portrays my sins as scandalous, calculated and deceptive, and uncommonly intentionally hypocritical, and pervasively so, and this is false.” (C.J. Mahaney, Pastors Conference, November 9, 2011)

This is not a defense. This doesn’t deal with the evidence. This doesn’t address any of the issues, answer any of my questions, or speak to the scores of illustrations I have presented in 1,000 pages of documentation. You remain unaccountable. You continue to be evasive. You choose manipulation over debate. This kind of statement should only be made by an objective panel, if warranted, after a full and complete review. Defend yourself but not with a microphone behind a pulpit where you cannot be challenged and you don’t present any kind of case. In all seriousness, you need to defend yourself! You must defend yourself. Stop hiding behind the SGM Board and panels where no cross examination will occur.

I initially rejected the terms for the adjudication hearing as a matter of conscience because they violated a host of promises you, Dave, Jeff and Joshua made to me over 12 months regarding a just proceeding. A little later, upon further consideration, I decided to accept the terms. I figured a hearing of any kind was better than no hearing; so I agreed to follow all the terms you imposed upon me. This went nowhere. You and the SGM Board killed my request for a hearing and deceitfully justified your action by quoting me out of context regarding the hearing being “unjust” or “bogus.” That was pure deceit. You had absolutely no reason not to hold a hearing and of course, the SGM Board never called me or wrote me to discuss any of my concerns for the adjudication hearing. You have never involved me in any process. You have never negotiated with me. You have never adopted any of my suggestions. You just impose your will without discussion and then purposefully misrepresent me. So in this case, you ended the possibility of a hearing and blamed it on me. Let’s be clear, you are the ones who were unwilling to meet, not me.

And now we have another novelty that doesn’t address the widespread abuses by you, the SGM Board or other people like Bob, Gene or Mickey. The new proposal for three panels to investigate a narrow range of issues related to three events does not do justice to the issues or events in any way, shape or form. I have talked to Bryce Thomas about this travesty. Therefore, I appeal once more for a full and complete examination of the issues, illustrations, and questions I have raised in my documents. C.J., you and the Board repeatedly promised such an opportunity would be created. You have not lived up to your word.

Letter to Covenant Life Church (November 22, 2011)

On Tuesday of last week the pastors at Covenant Life sent out a letter to all the church members. Here is what they said regarding their understanding of the work assigned to the three panels.

“We’ve been informed that the three panels, each comprised of two SGM pastors and one SGM board member (for a description, see the “Pastoral review” section of this blog post on the SGM website), have been constituted and will immediately begin to evaluate the documents written by Brent Detwiler. We understand that the panels will not only be evaluating C.J.‘s fitness for the role of President but also concerns for Sovereign Grace as a whole.” (Pastors’ Letter to CLC Members, November 22)

I have no reason to believe this is not an accurate portrayal of what the SGM Board has told them about the breath of the three panels’ work. If true, the SGM Board has misled the CLC pastors. The panels are not evaluating my documents. Far from it! They are looking at tiny portions of the documents. And they certainly are not evaluating “Sovereign Grace as a whole.” What the CLC pastors have been told by the SGM Board is entirely bogus.

Until you allow for such a hearing, the truth will never be heard or judged and that includes your defense. My request is simple; I want the opportunity to present all my concerns for you, the SGM Board and SGM in general to a group of objective evaluators. Based upon your actions, I think you and the SGM Board are afraid to defend yourselves against my charges. I don’t believe you and the Board want this to go to trial because the evidence and witnesses are overwhelming. If I am wrong, you can easily prove it by allowing for such a proceeding. The half measures (and that is an overstatement) you are taking now are designed to vindicated, protect and favor you, not hear the full array of evidence against you.

Dave Harvey’s Deceptive Post

It is bad enough the CLC pastors were misled, it is even worse misleading all of Sovereign Grace Ministries. Here is what Dave wrote on the SGM website on Wednesday.

“Now, this doesn’t mean that we aren’t closely examining the charges brought against C.J. or the sins to which he has confessed. In fact, we have created several panels for that sole purpose. We aren’t simply dismissing the issues. As AoR said in their report, “While God’s forgiveness assures us that the consequence of eternal death has been paid in full, such proclamation does not necessarily remove earthly consequences.” But even as we examine these charges, we need to let the free forgiveness of the gospel ring. The gospel is what breathes life into us, and I want it to permeate this entire process.” (Dave Harvey, A note about online confessions, November 23, 2011)

The three panels have been given narrow assignments. Their “sole purpose” is NOT to “closely examining the charges brought against C.J. or the sins to which he has confessed.” That’s a bunch of buffalo steaks. The original adjudication hearing was designed to do that but the SGM Board killed my appeal to meet. Instead, they came up with this crafty strategy that examines very little. Dave is once again deceiving all of Sovereign Grace Ministries.

I pointed this out to Bryce Thomas on November 19. He sent you a summary of my thoughts from our discussion.

Summary of Main Ideas Brent Shared with Bryce Thomas

From: Bryce Thomas
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 11:05 AM
To: Edgar Keinath; Ted Kober; Tommy Hill
Subject: Questions Regarding Work of Panels

Ted & Ed,

Brent and I talked this past Saturday, 11/19. Brent asked me to pass onto to you and others his thoughts. I attempted to reduce to writing what he shared with me and asked him to proof it to ensure the accuracy of what he told me. He did that. Enclosed is what Brent shared with me and I am now passing this on per Brent’s request to you and to Tommy to share it with the others Brent requested below.

Bryce

Summary of Conversation

The way the issue (“Did CJ Mahaney wrongfully influence the process of Brent Detwiler’s dismissal from his church in Mooresville, NC?”) is framed shows no regard for, no empathy for me (Brent) and does not address the real concerns I have for the unfair, abusive treatment of me by others (e.g. Dave, Bob, Gene, Eric) and the cover up by SGM Board. There is no concern to learn the truth of what happen in Mooresville and benefit from my input. Instead this approach is designed to make C.J. look good and me look bad.
The SGM Board is violating its word once again. This is another example of control, manipulation and deceit. They promised to review the “major event” of my “removal from ministry.” Instead they reduce the hearing to one secondary issue which is a tiny sliver because they focus on one question related to CJ and none on others and what they did to me. They do not care about me. They are not concerned about the truth. This will be about vindicating CJ and nothing will be learned from the process.

It is just like Dave Harvey’s letter to SGM Pastors before the Pastors Conference. It was a preemptive strike against Joshua and CLC. It that was full of misinformation, exaggeration and deceit.

This would be a good way to proceed: have SGM write me and indicate they messed up in Mooresville and really want to listen, learn and hear without further retribution, without viewing itself as the victim (they are the perpetrators), without being self-righteous. Have them show a little humility!

The reason I initially rejected the adjudication process was a matter of conscience. Over 12 months I was repeatedly promised by the leaders of SGM (CJ, Jeff, Dave, Josh) that there would be an evaluation by a third party outsider with no history with SG. Then I got the adjudication procedure from you. All those promises were broken without any discussion or negotiation with me. Just imposed upon me. Upon further consideration, I decided any hearing was better than no hearing. I agreed to all their terms but they shut me down by using a lame excuse that I said the process was “unjust” and “bogus.” This was a distortion of my meaning and deceitful way to kill the hearing.

Bryce explained to me he understood it was Ted Kober who felt people from SG should be used to evaluate because of theological issues. Bryce used the example of Baptists being asked to evaluate theological issues of Lutherans. (meaning no disrespect to Baptists—just pointing out there are theological as well as other differences in denominations).

Thus it was Ted’s recommendation independent of SG to use SG people to evaluate the issues of SG, but to be structured and overseen by outsiders (AoR).

I think Ted is a great and smart person, but I think he was wrong on this recommendation. The SGM Board is not objective. You can lose your job if you disagree with CJ, if you find him guilty of something and take action. I told the SGM Board to do what they promised me—use outside people to evaluate. Instead they hid behind Ted’s recommendation. They did not ask for my input, there was no contact with me. I asked the Board to reject Ted’s recommendation, that it was only a recommendation, and honor their word instead. They never responded to me.

Now the SGM Board could demonstrate humility. They could set up this panel in order to learn everything possible from the abuses I suffered in being declared unfit for ministry by the SGM Board. But this will be another kangaroo court with no due process. On Dave Harvey’s blog he points out each of the 3 panels has a board member. All the board members have already declared C.J. fit for ministry. They should not be sitting on these panels. That is not impartiality.

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2011 1:53 PM
To: Bryce Thomas
Subject: Please Inform Others of My Reproof

Dear Bryce,

Thanks for talking with me this morning!

Please convey everything I shared with Ted Kober, Ed Keinath, Ken Sande, the SGM Board of Directors including C.J. Mahaney, the two senior pastors on the panel, and all the Covenant Life pastors.

I sincerely appreciate your assistance.
Brent

The Investigation of One Narrow and Secondary Issue

You and the SGM Board have reduced a major event, my removal from ministry, to one narrow and secondary issue about you. That is beyond absurd.

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 8:03 AM
To: Bryce Thomas
Subject: RE: Please Inform Others of My Reproof

That is fine Bryce. I am glad to review your summary.

Confidentially for now, I will not be participating in the hearing if the 3 man panel is only authorized to examine this narrow and secondary question. “Did CJ Mahaney wrongly influence the process of Brent Detwiler’s dismissal from his church in Mooresville, NC?”

This is another imposition of terms by the SGM Board without discussion, that violates their promise to examine the entire process regarding their declaration that I was disqualified from ministry. This narrow investigation is also contrary to the SGM Board’s statement on October 28. What they propose is completely unacceptable.

This three man panel must be authorized to examine all the people and abuses surrounding my removal from ministry.

Appeal to Confront the SGM Board and Broaden Investigation

I asked Bryce, Ted Kober, Ed Keinath, and Ken Sande to address your duplicity.

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 3:36 PM
To: Bryce Thomas
Cc: Edgar Keinath; Ted Kober; Ken Sande
Subject: RE: Please Inform Others of My Reproof

I am sorry I was not clear. I meant you could forward my Nov 21 8:03 AM email to Ted and Ed. I want your summary of our conversation from Saturday to go to everyone including Dave Harvey. I would also like to ask you, Ted, Ed and Ken to confront the SGM Board. They are in violation of their word once again. Dave Harvey wrote all of SGM the following on Oct 28 regarding an internal review of my removal from ministry.

“The board will also commission three panels… Each of these panels will review one of the three major events around which Brent builds his allegations…Brent’s removal from ministry by his local church’s leaders in 2009. The panels will interview the key witnesses of these events, evaluate their testimonies for consistency with Brent’s interpretation of events, and determine if and where Brent’s allegations and conclusions have merit.” (Dave Harvey, October 28, 2011)

The SGM Board has reduced this evaluation to one question. “Did CJ Mahaney wrongly influence the process of Brent Detwiler’s dismissal from his church in Mooresville, NC?” As I’ve said, that is a secondary issue. That is not a “review” of “one of the three major events.” This question doesn’t begin to address my removal from ministry. Please ask C.J., Dave and the Board to allow for evaluation of all persons and issues related to this abusive action.

Additional Questions for Bryce Thomas

I also had additional questions regarding the three panels.

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2011 8:28 AM
To: Bryce Thomas
Cc: Edgar Keinath; Ted Kober; Ken Sande
Subject: Questions Regarding Work of Panels
Importance: High

Bryce,

I hope you had a pleasant Thanksgiving! Would you please help me out and answer some questions related to Dave’s statement.

The board will also commission three panels (1 board member and 2 senior pastors per panel), each guided by Bryce Thomas, for an internal review. Each of these panels will review one of the three major events around which Brent builds his allegations: Larry Tomczak’s departure from SGM in 1998, C.J.’s conflict with other SGM leaders in 2004, and Brent’s removal from ministry by his local church’s leaders in 2009. The panels will interview the key witnesses of these events, evaluate their testimonies for consistency with Brent’s interpretation of events, and determine if and where Brent’s allegations and conclusions have merit. These panels will then issue their findings and recommendations to the board, who in turn will publish them online and make a final determination on C.J.’s future in ministry with SGM. (Dave Harvey, Evaluating Brent Detwiler’s allegations, October 28, 2011)

Questions

1. 1. Will I be invited to give testimony regarding Larry Tomczak’s departure from SGM in 1998 and C.J.’s conflict with other SGM leaders in 2004? Far and away, I have the most complete record of anyone in SGM regarding these events. For example, 1,000 pages of documentation regarding Larry. My oral testimony is also vital.
   
   
   1. Would you please send me the purpose statement for the other two panels regarding Larry’s departure and C.J.’s conflict with other leaders? Have they been reduced to a tiny sliver of the whole like “Did CJ Mahaney wrongly influence the process of Brent Detwiler’s dismissal from his church in Mooresville, NC”?
   2. Who have you invited as witnesses to each of the three panels? I should verify the SGM Board has provided you an accurate list of those who should participate in each panel and not left anyone important out of the process. That is very important.
   3. Did you, Ted, Ed, and Ken have time yet to confront the SGM Board for breaking their promise to do a thorough review of my removal from ministry and not reduce it to just one secondary question about C.J.? If so, how did the Board respond? If not, when do you plan to follow up with them?

I’ve heard from two of the men you invited as witnesses regarding my removal from ministry or really just the question about C.J. They both said the same thing. Here is an email from one of them and my response.

From: [Leader from Grace Community Church]
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 9:23 PM
To: Brent Detwiler
Subject: Review Committee

So what is this review committee about? I know nothing of C.J.’s personal involvement, only his henchmen, Kauflin, Harvey, Emerson, et. al. who did the job. All [pathetic] in my estimation.

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2011 8:37 AM
To: [Leader from Grace Community Church]
Subject: RE: Review Committee

The review committee is a sham. Their assignment doesn’t begin to address the issues. All that happened is reduced to “Did CJ Mahaney wrongly influence the process of Brent Detwiler’s dismissal from his church in Mooresville, NC?” It should read did Harvey, Kauflin, Emerson, Kircher, Mulligan wrongly influence the process. I may participate in the hearing but I will not agree to their restrictions. I will make a case against all these men. Here is what I told Bryce [the notes from our Nov 19 conversation].

Hope you have a great Thanksgiving.

Brent

Bryce, I have expressed my concerns for deceit in SGM from the very beginning. Here is what I told C.J. 20 months ago in my first document. To the best of my knowledge, no one else has been willing to get in there and address lying, spin, and cover-up (to mention a few) with C.J. and the Board of Directors. I hope you, Ted, Ed and Ken will do so.

I’d love to see our friendship restored. I’d love to see some acknowledgment of wrong-doing. I’d love to see issues from the past resolved. I’d love to be in good standing with Sovereign Grace Ministries. But all of these hopes and desires are very secondary!

Primarily, I hope and desire to see a restoration of integrity, truth telling and justice in Sovereign Grace so there is no lying, spin, manipulation, lording, cover-up, or partiality. I am concerned for the movement. Some men have followed sinful aspects of your example and leadership – the kind referenced in this response. These men have acted deceitfully, judgmentally, unbiblically, and hypocritically. Their example in turn, has harmed others and been corrosive in its effect. (Response Regarding Friendship and Doctrine, March 11, 2010, p. 128)

Thanks for getting back to me with answers to my questions.

Love in Christ,

Brent

Some Answers to Some Questions

I just received some answers this morning from Bryce to some of my questions. I’ve included some of the background.

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 7:54 AM
To: Bryce Thomas
Subject: Answers to Questions
Importance: High

Can you provide answers to my questions today?

Thanks

Brent

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 5:36 PM
To: Bryce Thomas
Subject: Answers to Questions

Hi Bryce,

I am wondering if the SGM Board has prohibited you from answering my questions since I’ve not heard back from you. I hope you can answer me this evening.

Thanks

Brent

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 8:08 AM
To: 'Bryce Thomas'
Subject: RE: Answers to Questions
Importance: High

What day and time is my session this week?

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 9:39 AM
To: 'Bryce Thomas'
Subject: Participation
Importance: High

I plan to participate whether I hear from you are not. If I remember correctly, you told me my appointment was on Friday, December 2 at 9 am. That is when I plan to appear unless I hear from you otherwise. Thanks for the work you’ve done in putting this together. See you soon.

Brent

From: Bryce Thomas
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 9:50 AM
To: Brent Detwiler
Subject: Re: Answers to Questions

Brent,

The panel handling the issue you have been requested to provide live testimony on meets Thursday evening through Saturday noon. You indicated to me that confidentially you were likely not going to participate. If you change your mind, let Tommy Hill know and every effort will be made to include you at hopefully a time that best works for you. This is the only panel you have been requested to appear before live. The panels have been provided with written documents to review, including your material. I am not revealing the names of the panel members or the witness list to protect the integrity of the process. Each panel member will have his name attached to the produced reasoned report. The 3 issues are to be published this week, I am told, on the SG web site. I forwarded your statement for disseminations to those you requested.

I hope you will reconsider and participate. I look forward to meeting you in person.

Blessings,

Bryce

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 10:40 AM
To: 'Bryce Thomas'
Cc: Tommy Hill
Subject: RE: Answers to Questions

I was waiting to hear back from you before deciding but I plan to participate. Tommy, let me know when I should show up.

Thanks for answering two of my questions. Would you please answer the remaining three?

Bryce did not answer questions 1 and 3. I don’t know why. I missed his answer to question 2 and included in my response unnecessarily.

No Due Process

Here again is what Dave said about the issues to be addressed by the three panels.

Each of these panels will review one of the three major events around which Brent builds his allegations: Larry Tomczak’s departure from SGM in 1998, C.J.’s conflict with other SGM leaders in 2004, and Brent’s removal from ministry by his local church’s leaders in 2009. The panels will interview the key witnesses of these events, evaluate their testimonies for consistency with Brent’s interpretation of events, and determine if and where Brent’s allegations and conclusions have merit. (Dave Harvey)

The SGM Board has excluded me from participating in Panels 1 and 2. Yet, I know the complete story about Larry’s departure better than anyone else. I don’t have confidence some people will represent my allegations justly. I should be there to provide clarifications, answer questions, provide additional information from my 1,000 pages of documentation, and challenge faulty presentations or material. Instead I have no part and was consulted about nothing.

In the same manner and for the same reasons, I should be present for Panel 2 regarding “C.J.’s conflict with other SGM leaders in 2004.” I headed up the process which occurred over four years. No one has the first-hand knowledge or documentation that I possess. I should be able to defend against charges since “The panels will interview the key witnesses of these events, evaluate their testimonies for consistency with Brent’s interpretation of events, and determine if and where Brent’s allegations and conclusions have merit.” I have no voice.

I should have been given the witness list for all three panels. In each case, I know who should be present. The SGM Board should be concerned about getting my input. In addition, it does not appear any cross examination will be allowed. That is a fatal flaw if you’re interested in justice. People should not be allowed to make assertions without being challenged.

C.J., I want you to hear my presentation. I want you to defend against it. And I want to hear your presentation and cross examine it. But this will never happen in this three panel sham. This is no way to examine the charges against you and others.

Conclusion

You and the SGM Board are trying to pull off a fast one again. These three panels don’t begin to address the important issues regarding you and your agents. The work of the three panels covers about 5% of my "allegations and conclusions." That is no way to evaluate your fitness for ministry.
I made my case against you in “Response Regarding Friendship and Doctrine” (March 17, 2010), “A Final Appeal” (October 8, 2010) and “Concluding Remarks” (June 8, 2011) not in “The Untold Story” (June 25, 2011) which is about my removal from ministry. The substance of those three documents should be thoroughly examined, not simply your influence upon my firing. I’ve never made your influence on others a big issue because I didn’t have documented evidence. It figures that is why you are making it the only issue to be examined.

But this is clear. You appointed Bob to head up my assessment contrary to my wishes because of his bias, knew about the unjust process as it unfolded, were part of the cover up, agreed with the one sided assessment, concluded I was disqualified from ministry, and sent a letter to all the pastors in SGM regarding the same. I don’t know exactly what your influence was upon others, but I do know you were involved and as President of SGM the buck stops with you.

Once again, you and the Board make it appear as though you are interested in being evaluated but in reality you are breaking promises, severely limiting the scope of the investigation, and showing no interest in learning about my abusive removal from ministry. If you were concerned about the truth, learning, growing, and changing; the panel dealing with my removal wouldn’t be answering one question that is all about you!