SGM-Mahaneygate (Detwiler): Flagship Church Leaving SGM

C. J. Mahaney, Founder and President of Sovereign Grace Ministries
Co-defendant in Child Sex Abuse Case of Coverup

http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/2012/11/5/flagship-church-of-sovereign-grace-ministries-announces-plan.html

Flagship Church of Sovereign Grace Ministries Announces Plans to Leave

Monday, November 5, 2012 at 1:23PM

 

No church has loved C.J. and Sovereign Grace Ministries more than Covenant Life Church in Gaithersburg, MD. From its inception in 1977, CLC has served as the model church for all the churches in SGM. The members of CLC have worked harder and given more to serve the interests of C.J. and SGM than any other church. What the Jerusalem, Antioch, and Ephesian churches were in NT times; Gaithersburg has been throughout the 30 year history of SGM.

Starting in 2002, the headquarters for SGM was housed in the newly expanded CLC facility. So too the Pastors College. In addition, conference after conference was held in their building. The members of CLC have always sacrificed their time, used their talents, and given their money to make Sovereign Grace Ministries a success for the glory of God. CLC has a church population of approximately 5,000 persons.

Joshua Harris moved to CLC in 1997 in order to be trained by C.J. He lived with the Mahaney’s up until he was married. After 8 years of discipleship, C.J. turned the church over to Joshua and installed him as the sr. pastor. In 2007, C.J. added Joshua to the SGM Board of Directors. He planned to turn the ministry over to Joshua next year when he turns 60. Joshua was C.J.’s chosen replacement. 
   
All that has changed. In July 2011, C.J. abruptly left Covenant Life Church without talking to any of his pastors about his decision. In April 2012, he abruptly decided to relocate the SGM headquarters to Louisville, KY without talking to any of the pastors. In September 2012, he started a new church even though he was unreconciled to his old church and the pastors. Tens of thousands of people have watched C.J. destroy the ministry we began in 1982. Friends and supporters throughout nation and many parts of the world have been shocked as they’ve observed C.J.’s pride, deceit and hypocrisy over the past year and a half.

After being ever so patient and forbearing with C.J., Joshua recommended last night that Covenant Life Church end their partnership with Sovereign Grace Ministries. All 18 pastors were in complete agreement with Josh. This is in stark contrast to July 2011 when Dave Harvey, the Interim President of SGM at the time, said the following when Josh stepped down from the Board of Directors.

“The important thing is that Josh and the [SGM] board continue to affirm our ministry partnership together. Josh’s resignation from the board is not a grand statement about our future together. It’s not even an indication that we disagree on most things. We don’t. In fact Josh and the board agree on about 98% of things, especially on our shared mission we have been given to see churches planted and built in this country and around the world.” (Dave Harvey, “Where we differ, where we agree,” July 14, 2011)

 

Only someone who has been a part of Sovereign Grace for a long time can fully appreciate the magnitude of this action by the CLC pastors. These 18 men were all loyal and devoted friends and followers of C.J. Their lives and ministries were largely built around C.J. and his leadership. None of them ever imagined having to leave SGM because they no longer trusted C.J. or the Board of Directors given their abusive leadership practices and unethical conduct. Many other churches in SGM feel the same way. A few have left. Many more will follow.

Last night, Joshua provided detailed explanations to the church for why the separation from SGM was necessary. He covered seven different areas. It must have been the hardest and easiest thing Joshua has ever done. Hardest, because of his deep love for C.J. Easiest, because the reasons were compelling and the choice obvious. It was time to leave.

The pastors have taken this action now because they don’t need to wait for a final SG Book of Church Order. They have set this direction primarily because the moral problems in SGM are flagrant and C.J. remains unrepentant. Over the past 18 months, they have experienced up close and personal, the same C.J. described in my documents. They’ve also experienced the trickery of Dave Harvey, the heavy handedness of Mickey Connolly, and the partiality of John Loftness. Churches in SGM are going to leave in large numbers for two reasons. Unethical conduct and unbiblical polity.
      
Per the CLC constitution, the entire church must vote on this recommendation. That’s why the pastors announced a direction, not a decision, to separate from SGM. They will hold two “Coffee and Conversation” meetings on November 11 and 18 to answer questions. Two weeks later, an online vote will be taken over a three week period. Then the votes will be tallied. A 51% majority is needed in order to sever ties with SGM. The pastors hope to wrap things up by mid-December.
From my perspective, C.J. began to build a “Tower of Babel” around 1996. The Sovereign Grace tower reached to the heavens by 2010. But now in 2012, the Lord has come down and begun to scattered it over the earth.

Genesis 11:4, 8

[4] Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”… [8] So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city.
Making a name for one’s self always invites God’s judgment. It is this love of reputation and desire for greatness that has brought about the downfall of C.J. and Sovereign Grace Ministries. The well-known proverb is true.
  
Proverbs 16:18 Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

But here’s the good news. Unlike the King’s men with Humpty Dumpty, the Holy Spirit can put contrite men back together again. In his mercy, the Lord gathers after he scatters. It continues to be my prayer that God will raise up and strengthen pastors and churches characterized by humility, honesty and courage.

(SGM-Saga) Covenant Life Polity Position Paper

Is Mahaney getting his "wings" clipped? There is no room for Papacy or Prelacy, bad news for Autocrat Mahaney and his stacked Board.  Time will tell.

http://sgmrefuge.com/2012/07/13/covenant-life-church-polity-position-paper/

Covenant Life Church Polity Position Paper

Covenant Life Church Polity Position Paper

“…Built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord.” Eph 2:19-21

On The Order of Christ’s Church

Jesus Christ is the head of the church (Col 1:18, Eph 4:15) and exercises his authority through his Word (Eph 2:19, Acts 20:32, 2 Tim 3:16ff), wherein he establishes the parameters for the order of his church. In that divinely prescribed order, the local church is the primary structure, ruled by Christ through elders with the congregation.

Local churches are governmentally independent, yet should not deny the blessings and obligations of association with other churches. While one local church and its elders have no authority over another, local churches can partner with one another to support the expanse of the gospel and to support one another as needed. (Rom 15:22-39, 1 Cor 16).

There is no ongoing apostolic office or hierarchical structure of governance above the local church. The apostles held a unique, unrepeatable office, their qualifications including personal witness to the resurrected Christ and their commission by Christ to lay the foundation of the new covenant church. The term overseer, or bishop, refers to aspects of the elder’s role, not to an office that exists apart from or over local churches. Therefore, local churches are to be submitted to the Word of Christ and their own local elders.

Seven Principles of Church Polity

1. The principle of jure divino

The church is God’s creation and government is indispensible for the right administration of the church of Jesus Christ. Just as a temple calls for an architect, a field a sower (1 Cor 3), a flock a shepherd (John 10), a body a head (Col 1:18), a family a father (Eph 2:18-19), and a kingdom a king (Col 1:13), so also the church is unthinkable without an authority that sustains, guides, cares for, and protects it.[1] God has prescribed and provided for the government of his church through various means. In the past, God providedprophets, judges, priests, and kings, and in more recent times, God has provided apostles, pastors, and teachers who stand upon the written Word (Eph 4:11-16).

The principle of jure divino establishes that the government of the church is instituted by God for his glory. God alone is able to define the purpose, nature, and form of government for his church. The nature and details of church government are not left for man to determine independently of divine revelation. Just like marriage, church polity is not the product of human ingenuity; Paul’s analogy of the two in Ephesians 5 indicates as much. This does not mean there is not a certain bandwidth of liberty on how this government may be exercised or on the variant details of the attending circumstances of its constitution, but, just as the church belongs to Christ, so also must its government be regulated by His Word.
Jesus Christ alone is the king and head of the church (Joh 10:16). The government rests upon his shoulders (Isa 9:6). Jesus is not only the founding head of the church, having redeemed her by His blood, but He also is the presiding head, ruling and reigning over the church today (Col 1:18). In this role, King Jesus continues to build His church, even unto the ends of the earth (Matt 16:18). For this purpose, he has distributed gifts to men and established offices, ordinances, and oracles through which his government can be administered (Eph 4:11-12). These doctrines and practices are either expressly set down in Scripture or adduced by good and necessary consequence therein.[2] To this, King Jesus commands that nothing be added and that nothing be taken away (Mat 5:18-19). While Scripture itself is not a book of church order, it does contain the principles of church government that cannot be disregarded without injury to the spiritual life.[3]

2. The principle of organic union

The church is one: one body, one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father over the church (Eph 4:4-6). The most common picture used in Scripture to illustrate the church’s union is that of a body. As one body, each individual member and each individual local congregation is organically connected to make up the entire body. This union transcends denominations, nations, and ages. Yet, the inviolability and distinctiveness of the individual person and congregation is not transgressed within this organic union (1 Cor 12:12-27),
In this organic union, the head of the body is only and always Christ. He is the head of the church universal as well as local, visible as well as invisible. As an organic body, we have fellowship with all true churches and believers, and we ought to pursue unity accordingly. It ought to be of utmost importance for believers and local churches to pursue unity and peace with one another, highlighting our spiritual unity in the gospel and where possible demonstrating our unity in practical ecclesiastical cooperation. Therefore, let us celebrate where there is doctrinally sound, gospel ecumenicity and collaboration. Let us grieve and work against sectarianism and unnecessary schism (Eph 4:15-16, 1 Cor 1:10).
Organic union is also realized in the unity that exists between all the individual members of the body. In the body of the church, there are various parts with various functions, but all fundamentally are still members of the body and not separable into distinct classes or levels of spirituality. The distinction between “clergy” and “laity” that underlies a separation between members and ministers is nowhere taught in the New Testament and is rejected by the organization of the first-century church.[4] We ought to reject any spiritual or functional division of the body, whether established upon a “clericalization” of some special group or upon a “charismatization”[5] wherein certain individuals are viewed and function independently of and without accountability from the rest of the body (1 Cor 12:12-13, 1 Pet 2:9).

3. The principle of authority in actu primo and in actu secundo

Authority in the church can properly be said to be in actu primo (actual or real authority) to the whole church itself and in actu secundo (functional or exercise of authority) to those especially called, namely the elders.[6] Church power belongs essentially to the whole body of believers, whether officers or not.[7] To state it concisely, the power of the church is vested by God to the body and then exercised through its officers. The primary depository or subject of church power is not in the office-bearers exclusively, nor the whole body of believers exclusively, but both working together as an organic whole.[8] This principle rules out strict congregationalism as well as strict prelacy (Mat 18, Gal 3).
The people of God in a local church possess the combined powers, gifts, and calling of a church and by affirmation of elders actually exercises them. Any theory which speaks of the appointment of rulers except by the free acts of the local church is in error.[9] In this biblical model of authority, Christ alone, as head of the church, prescribes the need for rulers and graciously provides elders to rule and oversee His church. But it is the local church, working with its leaders, that affirms its officers. These elders are to be called by God (Eph 4:11), qualified according to Scripture (1 Tim 3:1-7), and examined and installed by the church.

To the elders has been given the stewardship of shepherding the flock of God, as under shepherds of the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ. Elders are to exercise this God-given authority in the church as servants, not lording it over the sheep (Mar 10:42-45). Such authority is ministerial, spiritual, and declarative. As clearly revealed by the Chief Shepherd, there can be no lording, domination, or pre-eminence of power in the church.

Indeed, we see from Scripture that it is the task of the elder that is noble, not the office itself (1 Tim 3:1).

Furthermore, according to the aforementioned principle of church authority, there can be no in actu tertio, that is to say, another authority in the church beyond what Christ himself prescribes and provides. Any other claimed authority would be foreign to the teaching of Scripture and therefore illegitimate. Any other claimed authority established by means other than full participation of the people is also illegitimate. As stated above, authority in the church comes from within the church and is part of the organic unity of the church. This is not to say that a church whose leadership has been wrongly established or authority misunderstood is not a church or teaching a false gospel, but that such a church is immature in its polity and inevitably will run afoul of its deficiency. Regardless, there is no place for non-ecclesiastical, para-church, or quasi-church authority over the church of Jesus Christ.

4. The principle of local authority

We hold that, according to the New Testament, every local church, governed by its elders, is independent and a complete church. Any theory that demands a legal or binding authority over the local church and its eldership introduces an impermissible hierarchy into the church of Christ.[10] This is not to say there is not a place for and usefulness to councils and ecclesiastical assemblies. On the contrary, such connection is clearly taught in Scripture (Acts 15) and, when agreed upon by mutual assent by individual congregations, is desirable to enhance the work of the church. Indeed, it encourages the unity of doctrine, discipline, and worship within various churches and furthers common interests such as the education of ministers and the work of mission and mercy.
However, we see no ongoing scriptural grounds for authority to be located in an extra-local eldership. While local congregations can join together by mutual assent to further gospel ministry, no eldership from one church can exercise authority over another. And no individual man can claim authority over a congregation of which he is not an elder. This is even more so the case if said “elder” has no congregation at all, but plays the part of an administrator or asserts self-acclaimed authority without the affirmation of the people. Such authority does not have a place in a biblically derived polity, but rather is what we see in the Papal system of prelacy. In this system, a bishop is established but not an elder in the biblical sense. Without a particular, local congregation, he is like a father who has no children, a husband without a wife, a shepherd without any sheep – all of which contain a contradiction. It is inconsistent with the nature and purpose of the pastoral office, which is inextricably intertwined with a particular congregation.[11] Authority vested in an extra-local elder would have to assume apostolic power, which we deny exists since the passing of the original Apostles, outside of their teaching found in the canon of Holy Scripture. To incorporate extra-local eldership into church polity leaves a church vulnerable to governance that is arbitrary, authoritarian, and ignorant of local circumstances.[12]
5. The principle of plurality
We affirm the essential New Testament principle of church polity that authority in the church must be exercised within the framework of a plurality of elders (Acts 14:23, 20:17, Phi 1:1). Scripture’s use of “elders,” whenever it appears in the context of church leaders, is always set in the plural. The authority vested in the eldership rests in the whole and not upon any individual. No one elder can presume to claim greater authority or assume greater privilege than another elder. It follows from this that there can be no investing of authority to an individual under the pretense that he represents the plurality of a body of elders or out of expedience in the effort to further mission. This would essentially give extra-biblical authority to a man, which we reject, as it contradicts the principle of plurality and the teaching of Scripture in regards to post-apostolic church polity. However, within the plurality of elders we have no scruple with the sub-principle of primus inter pares, which allows for a “first among equals” functionality bestowed upon the lead or senior elder amongst the plurality of elders.
This biblical model of church governance serves to provide a multitude of counselors, protects the church from individual caprice and weakness, preserves the greater unity of the body, and permits the shared load of responsibility in shepherding the church of God (Pro 15:22).
6. The principle of parity within cooperation
Just as there is essential equality between all the individual members of an elder board, there is also similar parity between every board in relation to any other board of elders. This is true regardless of a congregation’s size, history, or prominence. No church can arrogate to itself pre-eminence of authority on account of its stature over other churches that have a duly constituted board of elders. Each and every board has equal authority over its own jurisdiction (its membership).
Because there is biblical precedent for and obvious usefulness in collaborating together as churches for the purpose of doctrinal unity and mission, we affirm the permissibility of local churches formalizing their cooperative efforts. In so doing, it is important to specify the parity that exists between congregations in the structuring of the various assemblies, whether they be called associations, councils, or denominations (Acts 15).
7. The principle of representation
We affirm, consistent with the example revealed in Scripture and practiced by the early as well as the Reformation church, the principle of representation for every governing church body, whether local or cooperative. Having been endued with the Holy Spirit and adopted as sons of God with all the privileges therein, it is the right of every member of the household of God to be able to participate in the governance of the church by affirming who will oversee the church and to whom they will submit in the fear of the Lord. The right of the people to take part in the government is both reasonable and biblical (Acts 14:23, Eph 2:19, 1 Tim 3:1-7).
This same privilege is the right of every local congregation in regards to representative assemblies. All broader assemblies ought to be formed by representatives of the local elderships.[13] This principle of representation is the bond of union and the medium of common action.[14] It follows that broader assemblies can only legitimately be called together and exist at the will and calling of local elderships. Authority between assemblies is organic and interwoven and cannot be independent of the other.
We can surmise both from principle as well as from experience that where there exists an omission of representation in government, the unity, trust, and accountability that the association is built upon is inevitably undermined. Such a system is a temptation to those who rule and injurious to those who are ruled. This is not to say that representative government is a polity panacea, for where sinners govern and are governed, there will be no shortage of error and controversy. But to fail to exercise this principle will uniquely hinder the work of furthering the gospel, as it fails to implement all of the other principles of church polity stated above.

Polity in Sovereign Grace Ministries
Given the occasion of this paper, we would like to specifically address the issues of apostolic ministry and the independence of local churches, along with our perspective on the polity of SGM going forward.
1. Apostolic Ministry
Along with Reformed tradition, we affirm, “The apostolic foundation of the church and its government does not mean a continuing apostolate. For us it survives, not as an institution, but only in the apostolic word, which remains as the foundation of the church” (Eph 2:20, Acts 20:32).[15] We see that apostolic authority functions in the New Testament, along with local elders (Acts 15, 20) and involving local congregations (Acts 6, 14). However, the apostles play a unique redemptive-historical role in proclaiming the new covenant. The apostles never replicate themselves in office, nor do they call anyone else to do so, but in their church-planting ministry they appoint men to an office different from their own – eldership. The New Testament gives us no qualifications for apostles as it does for elders. The qualifications for apostleship we can infer are unrepeatable, including personal witness of the resurrected Christ (Acts 2, 1 Cor 9:1, 1 Pet 5:1).
Men such as Timothy and Titus do seem to express some authority in local churches (1 Tim 1:3, Tit 1:5). But their authority is derived, an extension of the ministry of apostles (Acts 19:22), with an emphasis on teaching the Word and modeling godly conduct as exhibited by the apostles (1 Cor 4:17, 2 Tim 3). In that role they continue to ordain men to offices distinct from their own (eldership), as the apostles had. These men are never referred to in the New Testament as apostles, but as helpers (Acts 19:22), children (Tit 1:4, 1 Tim 1:2), and evangelists (2 Tim 4:5). They never operate independently; their ministry is largely about proclaiming and modeling what they learned from Paul (1 Cor 4:17, 2 Tim 2:2). They are never called to replicate apostolic office but are sent with Paul’s commendation and are charged to appoint elders in local churches who will preach the Word. In the final canonical letters from both Paul and Peter, each seemingly self-aware of their impending death, neither gives instruction for the appointment of apostles. Rather, both explicitly hold up the authority of the Word (2 Tim 3:14ff, 2 Pet 1:19ff, 3:2, 15-18; see also Acts 20:32). Churches are submitted to the authority of Christ’s Word, given by the apostles, and led by local elders who faithfully teach it. We are simply never told in the New Testament to appoint men to an apostolic office, and we have no pattern in the New Testament in which apostles or churches appoint apostles. We are told to appoint elders who preach the apostolic Word, and we see this practice demonstrated in the New Testament itself.
2. Autonomous Local Churches
We believe it is possible to affirm the independence of local churches, while also affirming the importance and value of connection. In this sense, the independence of local churches is not qualified. We also do not believe that this local church connectedness is rooted merely in some sort of ongoing apostolic ministry but in common submission to the authoritative, apostolic teaching of the New Testament, which binds true churches together. This independence has nothing to do with American democracy. These views were put forward by a number of historical theologians and pastors who had no concept of modern American democracy. This has to do with where Scripture places authority in the church. As a father is the head of his household and not the head of another, so local elders have authority for their own churches and not other congregations. And just as a godly man will consider the interests of other families, not merely his own, a faithful local church will work with and for the good of other local churches. We simply do not see where Scripture ever calls or commends one local church to submit itself to the elders of another local church. We believe it is permissible and appropriate for associations of churches to determine what kind of churches will make up the association, but we do not believe Scripture allows a local church eldership to cede its authority to the elders of another congregation or to any man or group of men who function apart from the authority of local churches.
3. Moving Forward
In light of the principles laid out above, it is our perspective that SGM must define itself either as:
A. A non-ecclesiastical, para-church network that exists for the purpose of equipping and strengthening local churches through the production of music, literature, conferences, training and general edification. In addition to this, we see SGM having a vital role in strategizing and supporting the work of church planting and the furthering of gospel mission. Or:
B. An ecclesiastical body with actual and equal representation from each of its member churches, with a scope of authority limited to matters of doctrine, mission, and those matters which are mutually agreed to by its representative churches.
We do not believe there are any other biblically permissible options, based on our understanding of Scripture as outlined above.

We could not in good conscience endorse:
A. Any type of ecclesiastical body that is not made up of member churches having authoritative representation in ecclesiastical decisions.
B. Any non-ecclesiastical body that claims authority and oversight of local churches.

____________________________________
[1] Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 4, p. 329.
[2] PCA, Preface to the Book of Church Order, p. 88.
[3] Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 4, p. 370.
[4] Ibid., p. 358.
[5] Contra Montanism.
[6] John Owen, The True Nature of a Gospel Church, vol. 16, p. 31.
[7] James Bannerman, Paradigms in Polity, p. 326.
[8] Ibid., p. 327.
[9] J.H. Thornwell, Collected Writings, vol. 4, p. 139.
[10] Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 4, p. 433.
[11] John Owen, The True Nature of a Gospel Church, vol. 16, p. 94.
[12] This principle of local authority is not particularly controversial, even in our family of churches. In Jeff Purswell’s outline on polity handed out at the 2010 Together for the Gospel conference, we read, “We believe the authority Paul exercised over the churches he planted was unique…Beyond Paul’s own authority, the NT indicates no formal, ecclesiastical hierarchy to which churches were in submission. The picture seems to be that elders were given by God to care for their own churches.”
[13] We agree with John Owen: “…synods are to be composed and consist of such persons as are chosen and delegated by those churches respectively who do act and exert their communion in such assemblies.” (Op. cit., p. 202) See also Bavinck, Op. cit., p. 434, point 7.
[14] J.H. Thornwell, Collected Writings, vol. 4,p.137.
[15] Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 4, p. 327.

C.J. Mahaney's Home Church Defiantly Cuts Off Funding to SGM

Dear Covenant Life members,

Our prayer for you today is one offered many times by the Apostle Paul in his letters: “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”

We are writing briefly to let you know that the elders have decided, with the input of our Financial Advisory Committee (FAC), to suspend Covenant Life Church’s financial giving to Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM).

The background is that the FAC and its subcommittee have requested more time to ask further questions and to weigh the upcoming Ambassadors of Reconciliation (AOR) report before giving the elders a final recommendation about our church’s financial giving to SGM. The committees have recommended that Covenant Life suspend its giving at this time, while their evaluation continues. We believe this recommendation is wise, and we will continue to work with the FAC to determine the best long-term course of action.

We’ve communicated this decision in person to the leadership of Sovereign Grace who were very gracious in their response. We communicated that we are still committed to funding our shared mission in North Africa and have asked them to make us aware of other projects that we could specifically fund.

We will update you when we receive the FAC’s final recommendation. Moreover, when we present the 2013 Fiscal Year budget to the congregation this summer, we will include a plan for allocating any funds that are uncommitted as a result of the suspension.

Please continue to pray for the pastors and others involved in this decision. We take the stewardship of the resources of our church very seriously and need God’s help. And as always, we invite your perspective and wisdom and encourage you to speak with your pastor about any questions you may have.

In Christ,
Your pastors

Update from SGM Board

http://www.sovereigngraceministries.org/blogs/sgm/post/Priorities-for-the-year-ahead-an-update-from-the-new-Board.aspx

The new Sovereign Grace Ministries Board of Directors met this Wednesday. We devoted most of our time to getting an update and overview of the state of SGM and established two immediate priorities for the coming year.

First, we decided to create a polity committee to consist of two members of the Board, two members of the Leadership Team (including C.J. Mahaney, who will chair the committee), and at least three Sovereign Grace pastors not on the Board. This committee will pick up the work that has already been done on polity and develop it to give better definition to the ministry, to how SGM as a ministry relates to pastors and their churches, and to policies and procedures for making decisions and selecting leaders. We are tasking this committee to solicit a broad range of views within SGM regarding how we are governed and how we define our connections between churches and the ministry. Once the committee’s work is done, they will submit it to the Board for review, amendment, and approval. The resulting governance and our partnership agreements will then be presented to Sovereign Grace pastors for their review. We decided, at least for the present, not to set a deadline for the committee’s work to be completed but do want this to be a top priority for our development as a ministry.

Second, we expect to receive the Ambassadors of Reconciliation report in the coming two weeks. We plan to begin discussing the report on a retreat in Louisville April 9 & 10 and then to make plans for responding.

This Board will operate differently from the interim Board. We will not involve ourselves in day-to-day ministry decisions and communication. Our priorities are appointment and evaluation of the Leadership Team, broad evaluation and strategy for the ministry, advising the Leadership Team on key concerns, and providing accountability to the Leadership Team regarding doctrine, finances, and governance. Our primary interactions, therefore, will be with Leadership Team members and others who can inform us about the ministry and counsel us regarding decisions.

It is customary to end messages like this asking for prayer, but this request is more than customary. This new Board is aware of the significant responsibilities we carry for the future of SGM. Please pray for us and more importantly, please pray for this family of local churches and your own local church so that we can—individually and connected together—plant and build local churches that proclaim the gospel and bring praise to our Lord.

Mahaney/ SGM – Louisville, KY SBCers? Mohler/SBTS to the Rescue?

Deb at "The Wartburg Watch" is offering the following interpretation of Mahaney's convenient and hasty westward retreat from his home church--whence he fled--, Covenant Life, Gaithersburg, MD, towards Kentucky.  Mahaney had a temporary layover at Dever's community and then Solid Rock (SGM), MD.  We suspect that Mahaney got a preliminary whiff of possible fallout and debris from an impending report from the Ambassadors of Reconciliation (due end of Mar 2012).  The new school Baptyerian, Lig Duncan, once suprised RA, but his stock has dropped to about $0.25 from the old school standpoint.  As to the forthcoming T4G, 10-12 Apr 2012, we did a preliminary analysis last year:  one can expect a few cool $$ million in profits for the event.  Where the $$s go is anyone's guess.  On another note, for those advancing in years, we offer this.  Three benefits accrue in watching and researching Mahaney's history.  (1)  Ocular exercises, especially.  That is, "rolling the eyes."  (2) "Shaking the head."  It works the neck muscles to get those kinks out.  (3) "Laughter."  It works the cheek, face and throat muscles.  "Ya just gotta laugh a little." Nothing like watching a skilled enthusiast "enthuse." A modern mountebank of the first order.  However, there is one contra-indication:  do not watch or research Mahaney/SGM if one has blood pressure issues.  But back on point.  Deb says:  "For those of you who are sports enthusiasts, here is what Mohler and Dever have done on behalf of pastor-athlete Mahaney. They have RUN INTERFERENCE, meaning they have protected Mahaney from the criticism and correction he is rightly due from those whom he has hurt in Sovereign Grace Ministries. To put it another way, Mohler and Dever have done an end run around SGMers and prevented that from occurring. Now Mahaney is hiding out at Solid Rock Church until he makes the BIG MOVE" [emphasis in the original].

http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/02/29/mahaney-sgm-unprecedented-rescue-by-the-sbc/

"I think preaching and pastoral ministry are where grace is most evident in my life and where my leadership is most effectively expressed. Others seem to agree."

C.J. Mahaney

We believe history is being made as high profile leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention MEDDLE in the affairs of another denomination, which self-identifies as a "family of churches".


Yes, I'm talking about Sovereign Grace Ministries (SGM). In case you haven't heard, C.J. Mahaney, who was recently reinstated as President of SGM, is assisting with the appointment of his successor and laying the foundation to PLANT a new church in another state.


As the saying goes, "bloom where you're planted", and the word on the street is that Mahaney is planning to relocate to Kentucky and set down roots there. There is also speculation that the offices of Sovereign Grace Ministries will be moved from Covenant Life Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland to Kentucky — most likely Louisville.


We have written extensively on C.J. Mahaney and Sovereign Grace Ministries, so if you are new to TWW, you might want to browse through our archives. Why is Mahaney leaving the state where he grew up and the church he pastored for 27 years? It appears the accusations of hyper-authoritarianism and spiritual abuse (among other things) by hundreds and hundreds of current and former SGMers (including many pastors) have reached a fevered pitch, and Mahaney believes his best option is to get out of Gaithersburg! The Ambassadors of Reconciliation have been called in to investigate the accusations, and they will be issuing their findings very soon. We will be sure to pass along any information that is made public.


What was the straw that broke the camel's back in SGM? From our vantage point, it appears the 600+ pages of documentation that Brent Detwiler compiled (which an anonymous individual posted on the internet) put all of this in motion. As soon as Mahaney suspected Detwiler was going public in some way with his incriminating information, Mahaney voluntarily stepped down. That was in early July 2011. Seven months later Mahaney was reinstated as president of SGM.


Perhaps the most damning information that was revealed in Detwiler's documentation was Mahaney's attempt to blackmail his mentor Larry Tomczak if he did not leave the organization quietly back in 1998. Tomczak had a big problem with the shift toward Calvinistic theology, and, Mahaney threatened to go public with the confidentially confessed sins of Tomczak's son if Larry did not go away quietly into the night… Fifteen years passed, and Mahaney finally made an attempt to patch things up with Tomczak, who had been urging a reconciliation for years.

Why would Mahaney relocate to another state — Kentucky — as some are speculating? If the Bluegrass State is the Mahaneys' destination, there is a very good reason… Dee and I first began investigating C.J. Mahaney and SGM in the fall of 2008 — seven months before we began blogging. Exactly two months after we launched The Wartburg Watch, we wrote about CJ's significant monetary contributions to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in a post called The Mahaney Money Machine. We were so new to blogging that not many people read the following "observation" included in that post:

"How did C.J. Mahaney become so popular among reformed Christians? As far as we can determine, C.J.’s secret to success is that he has friends in high places. We believe his recognition among the “Reformed Big Dogs” began when he befriended Mark Dever, Senior Pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church, in Washington, D.C. (a church not far from Gaithersburg where CLC is located)."

For more, see:
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/02/29/mahaney-sgm-unprecedented-rescue-by-the-sbc/

Also, Deb concludes with this bit of humour.  We leave you with a tune the Mahaneys may be singing.

Brent Detwiler's Take On Mahaney's Fear and Flight from Gaithersburg, MD

Brent offers this interpretation of Mahaney's fear and flight from Covenant Life, Gaithersburg, MD at:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=695090287&ref=tn_tnmn#!/profile.php?id=100001057065862

Here's Brent:

"Thanks for your prayers. C.J. has now pulled away from Joshua, the pastors, and Covenant Life Church and doesn't want Ted Kober to help mediate. The CLC pastors were wise to refused a strict confidentiality agreement. That sent C.J. running. He doesn't want any of the correction he has received from them to get out. Instead, I think he is packing his bags and heading to Louisville to plant a church next to Southern Theological Seminary with Mohler's full support. I suspect Jeff Purswell will be offered a teaching position at the seminary also. Students will flock to hear C.J., sit at Jeff's feet and Al Mohler will be cheering them on."

Detwiler Still Doggedly Pursuing the Fleeing Mahaney

Brent Detwiler

Brent Detwiler is offering more on the subject of Mahaney's shop of horrors.  The outside mediators, Ambassadors of Reconciliation, had a thankless task of reviewing SGM's track record and will issue a report--we're led to believe--by the end of March, 2012.  Thus far, Mahaney bolted from Elders and the Church he founded in Gaithersburg, MD.  He'll been headed west (high speed no doubt) to Kentucky, probably Louisville, to resume some sort of operations there.  Al Mohler, Mark Dever, and Ligon Duncan will be and have been enthusing at the T4G-operation in Louisville, KY, 10-12 April 2012.  Recently, Dave Harvey refused to be on the new SGM Board.  Time will tell, but Brent is still in pursuit of reform and responses.  Further responses to Brent by SGM simply will not happen.  At this point, "DC" ops--a Navy term for "damage control" for fires or combat ops afloat and aboard Naval vessels--have been underway.  Exculpate Mahaney, burnish the lucrative brandname, retain the image, get on with things, put the Detwiler-documents in the rear view mirror, weed out dissenters, and move on to "a new target audience without the past baggage."  Brent offers his update at:  http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/2012/2/28/an-appeal-for-ted-kober-to-expose-dave-harvey.html

Two days ago, I sent the correspondence that follows to Ted Kober, President of Ambassadors of Reconciliation. I asked him to provide answers to three questions by noon today. In so doing, I hoped for a private response but I’ve heard nothing. It is now 2:00 pm. I must share my appeal in public. It is also relevant to every leader and person in SGM.

Over the past 7 years, I asked C.J., the SGM Board, and others, hundreds of vital questions. Normally those inquiries were totally ignored. Over the past two years, I made scores of specific charges backed up by evidence and asked for a defense. No defense was given 98% of time except for vague denials. Over the last 7 months, I requested that any errors in my writings be corrected. More silence. C.J., Dave, the SGM Board and others remain unaccountable.

The SGM Board also put a muzzle on justice by forbidding her to speak openly and freely before neutral judges. The three panel approach was their crowning achievement. It gave the appearance of justice to the naïve; while securing a miscarriage of justice apparent to the discerning. No judge in American would allow such a bogus proceeding in their courtroom. Moreover a host of people would have gone to jail for criminal activity including perjury, jury tampering, the suppression of evidence, and the denial of due process. Every statutory standard for the hearing of evidence in a court proceeding was done violence.

This is due in large part to the craft and cunning of Dave Harvey. In the piece below, I ask Ted to boldly expose Dave for his ongoing lying, deceit and manipulation. Corruption has only increased over time. Thousands of people in SGM churches have been deceived. They’ve been told to trust their leaders, believe the best of C.J. and Dave, not read my materials and refrain from “divisive” discussions with others. All the while storm clouds keep gathering.

##

Introduction

From: Brent Detwiler
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012 4:03 PM
To: Ted Kober
Cc: Melissa Richholt
Subject: Response to Ted Kober
Importance: High

I don’t know Ted’s travel schedule or if you screen his email but would you please bring this to his immediate attention if necessary. I’d like his response by noon on Tuesday.
Thank you Melissa.
Brent

February 26, 2012
Dear Ted,
I need to share honestly with you. The hour is late. Your report is due soon. Please let me be direct without it being misinterpreted as a lack of love or gentleness.

First, I believe you have been taken advantage of and manipulated by the SGM Board. Second, I think you have been timid in addressing evil, ignored evidence, been unwise in what you’ve proposed and failed to oppose the three panel approach as unjust. I hope you acknowledge all of these in your March report.

I need to continue my appeal for boldness and share more of my concerns with you based upon our conversation and interactions the past month. In particular, I want to warn you again regarding Dave Harvey. He cannot and should not be trusted. He is a master manipulator and consistent liar.

Tragically, the SGM Board has followed his corrupt example and been duped by him. Just like C.J., he has not been held accountable by the SGM Board or his local elders.

Proverbs 27:5-6 says, “Better is open rebuke than love that is concealed. Faithful are the wounds of a friend, but deceitful are the kisses of an enemy.” C.J. and Dave have been kissed many times by men who benefit from their favor. To date, none of their “friends” have been willing to rebuke them in the open. A true test of love is the willingness to reprove. They are surrounded by man pleasers who are afraid of the consequences that come with offending them.

Lady Wisdom is correct. Proverbs 9:7-8, “He who corrects a scoffer gets dishonor for himself, and he who reproves a wicked man gets insults for himself. Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you, reprove a wise man and he will love you.”

Recently I sent you and others “Mush-Minded Invertebrates” with the following note. It is the need of the moment.

For more of Brent's dogged pursuit, see:
http://www.brentdetwiler.com/brentdetwilercom/2012/2/28/an-appeal-for-ted-kober-to-expose-dave-harvey.html

(New School) Baptyerian Ligon Duncan Enthuses Over Mahaney and T4G

Here's old Ligon Duncan from a FB post dated 28 Feb 2012. 

"Standard registration for T4G 2012 ends at midnight tomorrow (2/29). Then the price goes up by $80! Register in the next 24 hours or so. Hotels are filling up. Registration is well ahead of 2010. Some break out sessions are near max. Join us! In this video, CJ explains why we've upgraded our approach to panels." [emphasis added]

Here's the T4G-post.  http://t4g.org/media/2012/02/panels-the-new-t4g-format/#.T02gsL8AzAA.facebook  A few comments follow at the bottom.

Panels: The New T4G Format

Speaker: Al Mohler, C.J. Mahaney, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever Year: 2012

It all reminds me well--as it does others--that Old School Churchmanship, Confessionally and liturgically, can't be ceded or yielded.  Self-respecting and reading Churchmen will go elsewhere, thank you very much.  It's an affair for Neo-Anabaptacostals.  Mahaney is in his element, where he can garner a crowd, admiration, and exaltation...as he's sought and achieved earlier until he bolted for the doors with tire tracks on the pavement away from CLC.   Watch old Mahaney work the crowd in this video.  It's standard ops; theatrics, hand-waving, humour, tears, thunderings, applause-lines and more.  Close observers have long-noted the narcissism, mountebankery, and serious inferiority issues (e.g. high school education). 

"Whew!  Carolyn, that was close over at CLC and SGM...we got out in time and big boys love me!  We'll put SGM in the rearview mirror.  Honey, we gotta a new gig, now.  The kids are all out and taken care of...the new boys...they'll love me."

It was what it was.  It is what it is.  It shall be what it's been.  Laughter amelioriates, to some degree, the pain of listening to the old fella. 

Perhaps some of the financial proceeds can go to fund a community college education for Mahaney?


For some CLCers, they'll be be opining and singing, "Old Ceejie Boy..."   Or, "Old Mickey Boy..."   Or, "Old Davie Boy..."  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujr8dQJgQUU


Some will sing Mr. Rogers's theme song, "Will You Be My Friend?  A Wonderful Day in the Neighbourhood..."  http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7768158695430580276#editor/target=post;postID=837656190595170278


Others will bid him "Good riddance, Sir." 


As for this household, "See ya, T4G, wouldn't wanna be ya!  Bye, bye."  We did the homework and the vetting.  That's our ruling with strong prejudice and without appeal. 

CJ Mahaney Ditches Covenant Life (Gaithersburg, MD) and Heading West

SGM Survivors offers the following letter from Covenant Life (SGM) Church, Gaithersburg, MD.  Mahaney bolted months ago and has remained over at Dever's Anabaptist Church.  Now, that the dust-off and reburnishment of the image has occurred with a few in-house SGM panels offering an analysis, Mahaney is headed west.  One wonders if Mahaney will ever return to CLC.  What will NOT be happening, is that Sir Charles won't be writing or offering anything of significance or depth, as usual. 

Meanwhile, the old Southern Baptyerian, Ligon Duncan, a man whom Dever wouldn't give Holy Communion, gives an attaboy to Mahaney with this FB post.  Here's Lig, to wit: 

"Standard registration for T4G 2012 ends at midnight tomorrow (2/29). Then the price goes up by $80! Register in the next 24 hours or so. Hotels are filling up. Registration is well ahead of 2010. Some break out sessions are near max. Join us! In this video, CJ explains why we've upgraded our approach to panels." 

Watch old Mahaney the Enthusiast do his mountebanking gig on Together For the Gospel.  Mahaney's got another home now and a new crowd to feed his inner supply-needs for admiration.  Watch him here: http://t4g.org/media/2012/02/panels-the-new-t4g-format/#.T02gsL8AzAA.facebook

Anyways, here's CLC's letter to Mahaney's orphans.  http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=3369#comments

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