C.J. Mahaney and Family Bolts Flagship Church

Two important posts have developed over the last two days.  C.J. Mahaney, two Pastors and families (son-in-laws of C.J. Mahaney) leave their 2000-member, SGM-flagship church, Covenant Life. Mahaney founded this community 30 years ago.  An important meeting of 2 hours will be held this weekend at Covenant Life for a review of the situation.  Ferment is emerging at Covenant Life.  For investigators, there are telling comments amongst posters.

C.J. Mahaney And Sons-In-Law To Quit Covenant Life Church?

http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=2716

C.J. Mahaney’s Sons-In-Law To Leave Covenant Life Church

http://www.sgmsurvivors.com/?p=2729

Again, Why We Don't Coddle Ana-Baptists

An excellent article by Matthew Lush. Attribution to him is given.  Found at:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/146899558722807/?id=148208941925202&ref=notif&notif_t=group_activity#!/note.php?note_id=125791670847086&comments&cmntid=125793514180235&notif_t=comment_mention

The Dangers of Anabaptist Teaching: Definitions and Distinctions

by Matthew Lush on Saturday, July 30, 2011 at 7:34pm

I. Definitions and Distinctions
On the one hand I hope and strive to be fair to Baptists of all variety, while on the other hand I still endeavour to be fair to Christendom. A number of references, definitions, and distinctions will be made to properly identify and distinguish what is properly Christian, Baptist or Anabaptist. I am of the opinion that the doctrinal similarities of the modern Baptist make them a mixture of both the Radical Reformation and Protestantism. Although Baptists most certainly share a similar heritage to both the Protestant and Reformed churches I will hope to show that they ceased to be Reformed when they departed from our teaching.

I have spoken thus far of Reformed teaching and it would be fruitful to define what the Reformed tradition is and what it is not. For the sake of the readers this will not be an exhaustive survey of Reformed thought. The focus of content will be the sacramental theology of the reformed tradition.

1. The French Confession (1559)

One of the earliest confessions is the French Confession of 1559 which is not as expansive as other confessions but nevertheless affirms what some initial concerns of the Reformed tradition were and elevated some doctrinal necessities. The section regarding the sacraments (Articles 34 & 35) is concise and to the point. According to the confession the sacraments and both “pledges and seals of the grace of God.” Additionally they are outward sign in which God works for God “not signify any thing to us in vain.” The Spirit is the effective agent of a) adoption b) engrafting in Christ, c) cleansing from sin and d) renewal of life. Since this is “a sacrament of faith and repentance” the necessary factor is not repentance as the Baptists argue but faith. As in accordance with the promises of God given to Abraham and confirmed through Moses, Christ, Peter, and Paul we not only bless our children through the sanctifying waters of baptism but we engraft them into the Body of Christ with a promise. For this reason it is written “Nevertheless, although it is a sacrament of faith and penitence, yet as God receives little children into the Church with their fathers, we say, upon the authority of Jesus Christ, that the children of believing parents should be baptized.”

2. The Scots Confession (1560)

The Scots Confession section regarding the sacraments follows in the pattern of Covenant Theology by first speaking of “the fathers under the Law” and their “two chief sacraments, that is, circumcision and the Passover.” Moreover they expound upon the great importance of these two sacraments by instituting that any who would reject such sacraments “were not reckoned among God's people.” In the New Covenant or “the time of the gospel” the concern is for “all who will be counted members of his [Jesus Christ] body.” One of the most explicit statements regarding the purpose and efficiency of the sacrament is the following:
“These sacraments, both of the Old Testament and of the New, were instituted by God not only to make a visible distinction between his people and those who were without the Covenant, but also to exercise the faith of his children and, by participation of these sacraments, to seal in their hearts the assurance of his promise, and of that most blessed conjunction, union, and society, which the chosen have with their Head, Christ Jesus.”

The confession goes so far as to “condemn the vanity of those who affirm the sacraments to be nothing else than naked and bare signs.” The signs are not adorned with reverence, since they can be distinguished from their source which is Christ, and neither despised, since in them Christ is given. A distinction is made between the Romanist understanding of the Supper, but a rejection of pure symbolism is nevertheless present. More could be said regarding the institution, signs and seals, but it should be sufficient to understand that a) pure symbolism is rejected and b) proper administration is necessary. In the next section under “The Right Administration of the Sacraments” it indicated that only lawful ministers may administer as well as the proper administration. Thus any department from what was instituted by Christ is no sacrament at all.

3. Belgic Confession (1561)

The Belgic Confession which was co-written by Protestant reformer and martyr Guy de Brès is modeled off the French Confession and became a doctrinal standard for the Netherlands. Together with the Heidelberg Catechism and the Canons of Dort these three documents compile what is commonly referred to as the Three Forms of Unity. By the mid sixteenth century the Swiss, French and Dutch were linked together in the Reformed tradition. Like the French Confession the Belgic speaks of a pledge and seal.

Like the French Confession the Belgic Confession is concerned with the benefits of baptism to the recipient. These benefits come only when faith is present and while the sign and seal is binding to children of believers the benefits can and will only be present when faith is first given by God.

4. The Articles of Religion (1563)

Concerning the Articles of Religion for the Church of England is a brief and concise description and application of the sacraments. They are ordained by Christ and not as “only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession,” but rather are a sign of the grace and good will of God towards believers. Concerning baptism the articles indicate that it is a sign of one’s profession and difference with the world, but it is also a sign of regeneration and engrafting into the Church. It is a sign of the forgiveness of sins, adoption. Those who partake are “visibly signed and sealed” and “faith is confirmed, and grace increased.” Concerning children it is written: “The Baptism of young Children is in any wise to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ.”

5. The Second Helvetic Confession (1566)

It begins that Sacraments are added to the Word; effectively with the preaching of the Word is the administration of the sacraments. The author indicates that they are “mystical symbols, or sacred rites, or sacred actions.” They are God’s words plus the signs and the realities so signified. They outwardly represent what God inwardly does through the Spirit, which seals the Word of God in the heart. These are promises which require faithful hearing, and the promises are divinely united with the sacraments. The faithful receive the sacraments from the ministers but effectively “as from the hand of God.” As such the ministers cannot affect the sufficiency of the sacrament, not matter how great their fault. Like the Scots confession a parallel is made between the sacraments of the Old Covenant and the New Covenant which again shows the stream of the Reformed tradition regarding the continuity in the Abrahamic covenant. Regarding the place of the New Covenant sacraments it is written:

“But now since Christ the true Messiah is exhibited unto us, and the abundance of grace is poured forth upon the people of The New Testament, the sacraments of the old people are surely abrogated and have ceased; and in their stead the symbols of the New Testament are placed -- Baptism in the place of circumcision, the Lord's Supper in place of the Paschal Lamb and sacrifices.”

Regarding baptism the sign signifies “regeneration and the cleansing from sins.” Moreover it means to be “enrolled, entered, and received into the covenant and family, and so into the inheritance of the sons of God; yes, and in this life to be called after the name of God; that is to say, to be called a son of God; to be cleansed also from the filthiness of sins, and to be granted the manifold grace of God, in order to lead a new and innocent life.”

In conclusion of the article of baptism it writes concerning Anabaptists the following:

“We condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that newborn infants of the faithful are to be baptized. For according to evangelical teaching, of such is the Kingdom of God, and they are in the covenant of God. Why, then, should the sign of God's covenant not be given to them? Whey should those who belong to God and are in his Church not be initiated by holy baptism? We condemn also the Anabaptists in the rest of their peculiar doctrines which they hold contrary to the Word of God. We therefore are not Anabaptists and have nothing in common with them.”

6. Westminster Standard (1646-49)

The Westminster Confession of Faith is forthcoming in its treatment of the sacraments in that they are “holy Signs and Seals of the Covenant of Grace, immediately instituted by God, to represent Christ and his benefits.” They are also provided for the strengthening of faith as a means of grace. In the sacrament is “a spiritual relation, or sacramental union, between the sign and the thing signified” so "the names and effects of the one are attributed to the other.” According to the Westminster Confession, baptism signifies entrance into the visible Church, but also a sign and seal “of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life.” Concerning the Anabaptist teaching it simply writes that “the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized.” But it expands by writing “Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance, yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it: or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated.” Like the other confessions and the Christian faith, baptism is to be administered once.

Conclusion

Thus far we have seen a thorough rejection of three Anabaptist errors: 1) credo-baptism for the children of believers 2) cata-baptism or the rejection of one’s baptism and 3) ana-baptism or the rebaptism of a believer or child of a believer. Additionally, continuity between the Old and the New Covenant is assumed in all the confessions whereby the entirety of Visible Church does not constitute members of the Invisible Church as the Anabaptists and modern Baptists interpret New Covenant readings.

Why We Do Not Coddle Rebellious Ana-Baptists

This is why we give no quarter to modern ana-Baptists and would refuse such from attendance at the LORD's Table.  This is said to include, but not limited to:  Billy Graham, John Piper, Mark Dever, John MacArthur, Steve Lawson, Al Mohler, Scot McKnight, Mark Driscoll, C.J. Mahaney and all his 100 Pastors, Southern Baptist Pastors, all Charismatics and Pentecostals.  Why do we not coddle rebellious Ana-Baptists?  Because we are Protestant, Reformed, Confessional and Anglican Churchmen.  It's that simple. Weak Anglicans, like John Stott, would disagree, but John died and infants and children will be in heaven.  Weak Presbyterians, like Ligon Duncan and R.C. Sproul, Sr., would disagree too.  Death faces us all.  Let us speak truth, irrespective of voices, concerns for responses or income streams.

 

A quote from Ursinus below,  a co-author of the Heidelberg Catechism, a catechism worthy of memorization by youth (if an adult, get on it).  A hat tip to Andy Underhile. Thanks Andy.

 

‎"Wherefore, the Anabaptists, denying Baptism to infants born in the Church, not only spoil them of their right; but also obscure the grace of God, who wills that the seed of the faithful should from their birthday, yea, and from their mother's womb, be reckoned for members of the Church: yea further, they derogate manifestly from the grace offered in the new covenant, and scantly it less than the grace of the old covenant, seeing they deny that Baptism is now extended unto those infants, to whom circumcision was extended: They weaken the comfort of the Church and faithful Parents: they cancel the solemn bond, whereby God will have the seed of his people from their first infancy bound unto him, and discerned and severed from the rest of this world: they impair and make faint, in Parents and children, the study of thankfulness, and keeping their bond: they impudently contradict the Apostles, affirming that they cannot be forbidden water, who are endowed with the holy Ghost: they saucily restrain and keep back the infants from Christ, who biddeth them to be brought unto him. Lastly, they profanely detract from Christ's general precept of baptising all. All which absurdities manifestly prove, that the impugnation of infants' Baptism, whereon they are consequent, is no light errour, but an impious, profane heresy, contrary to God's word and the comfort of the Church. Wherefore this, and the like follies of the Anabaptists' sect, is with the more circumspection and wariness to be avoided, which doubtless have been inspired by the devil, and is an execrable monster, composed and made of divers heresies and blasphemies."

 

 Zachary Ursinus, The Summe of Christian Religion

A Screed against Mahaney

This is a screed and, we feel, poorly written, developed or argued.  However, in the interests of coverage, we post it.  In the comments section, one will find a level of anger and familiarity with the SGM-movement.  These appear to be insiders who felt the "heavy-hand" of Mahaney.

http://spiritualtyranny.com/cj-mahaney%E2%80%99s-metaphysical-magic-mayhem-2/

CJ Mahaney’s Metaphysical Magic Mayhem

Wednesday July 13, 2011

CJ Mahaney, El Primo Doctrinal Mover and Shaker of Sovereign Grace Ministries fame, recently released a letter stating that he is stepping away from being the Alpha Big Dog at the top of the “First Among Equals” governing egalitarian hierarchy. It is my current understanding that he wrote this letter to the leaders within his family of churches on July 2^nd. He subsequently made a blog post on

July 6^th for general consumption. There is one difference of consequence between the blog posts and the pastoral letter—blog version: first paragraph, CJ reserves the right to update his blog while he is on self-imposed doghouse vacation.

The gist of the letter/post is easy enough to understand: “People told me I’m a bad, bad sinner. (Whispering: ‘and they said the same thing about other leaders in SGM’) So I am going to put myself in time-out so I can morally navel gaze.”

If one is able to look past the coils of SGM speak slithering around the one-thousand-word document that threatens to squeeze your mind into a spiritual warm fuzzy, if you can remain conscious enough to spot the Harry Houdini level logical sleights of hand, it is rather obvious that CJ doesn’t really think he has done anything wrong. Well, maybe I should say he is willing to concede that he his is a sinner but doesn’t think what he has done is terminally disqualifying. He fully expects to return—appropriately chastened—to his rightful place after he has looked at his belly button for an undisclosed season.

Yeah, we can all see him working double time to say all the right things. Since he is the creator of the SGM sin, confession, and reconciliation mantra, it would be absurd to think he would say anything else. No matter how much he acknowledges some theoretical wrongdoing, he ultimately disagrees with the judgments brought against him. Notice this specific admission in the last part of the third paragraph:

“Even with the charges I disagree with it has been beneficial to examine my soul and ask for the observation of others. And I am resolved to take responsibility for my sin and every way my leadership has been deficient, and this would include making any appropriate confessions, public or private. Most importantly I want to please God during this season of examination and evaluation.”

And notice this in the 7th paragraph:

“I have resolved that I and the Sovereign Grace team can’t effectively lead us into the future without evaluating the past, addressing these deficiencies, improving our structure, and as much as possible pursuing reconciliation with former pastors.”

This means that no matter how much repenting he ultimately does, CJ by fiat, reserves the right to maintain his judgments about former ministries and ministers.

In the grand world of Indwelling Sin where one’s motives and rational understanding is shot through with disqualifying “sinful cravings,” it is a bit puzzling how he gets to even say “I disagree” with the charge of sin; nor do I understand how he can summarily decide the level of reconciliation. The doctrine says one is guilty never to be proved innocent because one is blind to the corrupting power of sin. This is the metaphysical assumption that SGM leaders use as a hammer when dealing with unruly deleterious problem children. All those silly ideas, all that rational confidence, all that personal assurance you think you have, no you don’t. You are a bad, bad sinner and need to shut up and just believe what they tell you is true. When we want your opinion, we will give it to you. We are old enough to be your father after all, so we should be sufficiently patronized for our lofty leadership authority. (BTW, Robin, do you feel patronized yet?)

That is what they would say to a lowly pew-sitter that was called to the carpet by their considered judgment. By definition, CJ’s self-awareness is flawed, and the proof is his self-assertion, which means he is disqualified to self-disagree. Well, that is if SGM were at all consistent with their sound doctrine and denounce the glaring display of doctrinal egoism within the letter. (MUCH more on this in a minute.)

The content of the letter is not surprising. CJ must pay lip service to the SGM yardstick that defines the “humble” approach to receiving criticisms, accusations, and addressing offense. He does not have a choice but to at least publicly entertain the notion that he could be wrong. Since someone dumped about 500 pages of documentation onto the internet, declaring in excruciating detail the content and conduct of Sovereign Grace Ministries’ governmental “deficiencies,” it is kind of hard to persist in a blazing display of “un-entreatability.” So it is no hair off his head to at least entertain the chance that he might have, potentially inside book-making odds within the existential consideration of all possible worlds, done something bad. Who can argue with the truth established from the ages:

“Oh woe is us! WE are all just sinners in need of God’s Grace? You all just never mind the implications of my sins. I will take care of this myself as I see fit. I have organized everyone who is anyone to make themselves available to make sure this all goes smooth. And I will be back soon to continue my—oops, God’s very important work.”

The bottom line is CJ Mahaney, in his letter of apology(?), is defying everyone to challenge his moral authority to act as he sees fit. His contempt blazes forth between the lines of this letter like the morning sun. He is daring someone to cast the first stone. And if the SGM Wikileaks has shown anything, no one within that organization has the stones (not the ones you throw) to resist his assertion of moral superiority. A curios dare, considering this is a quarry he dug.

It is fun to notice that when the pressure is on, to see how fast El Primo Doctrinal Mover and Shaker’s doctrinal consistency starts to unravel. He let the Schrodinger’s cat out of the quantum mechanics box with his admission to an unofficial sin hierarchy scale.

“These charges are serious and they have been very grieving to read. These charges are not related to any immorality or financial impropriety, but this doesn’t minimize their serious nature, which include various expressions of pride, unentreatability, deceit, sinful judgment, and hypocrisy.

It is an entertaining thought experiment to make all human action sinful and therefore universally disqualifying because it makes God look really big because it makes man look really small. And when Man makes God look really big, we get impressed with our spirituality. But the most important part of this metaphysical cavorting is that preachers get to create a moral and ethical paradox. They get to define the moral yardstick and keep it in a box that no one can peer into, and then when it serves their purpose, they LOOK at the cat to see if it is alive or dead. Oops, I mean look at who is committing a given ethical action and condemn or applaud depending on the day or the Verschränkung.

(That quantum mechanics joke was hilarious.)

But anyway, CJ has walked into his own quantum entanglement. Of course, the nature of the charge minimizes or expands the measure of moral failing. The whole premise of Levitical legal code—that is lex talionis—was to place a proportion on human action, ethical values, and subsequently, civil penalty for failure to live to those standards. It is absurd to suggest otherwise. But if you do suggest otherwise, why make the distinction at all? By definition, CJ is making a comparative statement.

CJ Mahaney’s contempt for people rolls off this two-page document in waves, centering on the Harry Houdini level logical sleights of hand. So, let us keep our eyes on the other hand so we can spot the illusion. Observe and you will see CJ Schrödinger’s thought experiment turned moral disaster.

First thought experiment: “I have been accused of pride and arrogance and hypocrisy, blah blah blah, so I will look in the metaphysical box and determine how bad I am. Gasp! I had no idea, but God has revealed that yes, this is very, very bad.”

Second thought experiment: “I have been accused of sexual immorality and money problems, so I will look in the metaphysical box and determine how bad I am. Oh wait, I didn’t do those things so I’m not that bad, so you just never mind.”

And here is the quantum entanglement. This gives CJ Mahaney the power to treat each ethical lap as a wholly unique metaphysical event that is nonexistent until it is observed. Until the moment of God-revealed awareness, it has no specific bearing on reality. (MUCH, MUCH more on this point in a minute.)

Let us take this out of the realm of thought experiments and place this firmly in reality. If the “offense” was adultery, homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, or embezzlement, would the SGM leadership act in the same way? Would they be circling the wagons and declaring El Primo Doctrinal Mover and Shaker the most humble man EVER? Would Larry Tomczak be “reconciling” with CJ if he’d molested his son? Or would Larry be using his “Apostolic Authority” to cover and defend his son and protect the flock. Oops … OK … well, maybe that is a bad example. But certainly, people who don’t cower away from extortion would be pressing every available force to boot CJ into the doghouse and chain him there.

And they certainly would not tolerate letting CJ Mahaney spin this as a self-declared parade of Altruistic Moral Narcissism.

The truth of the matter is if the charges were sex or money-related, everyone would be reacting differently. If CJ had been … uh … ponying up with a pony, his wife would be looking for a divorce attorney that can split up the funds earned from CJ’s speaking circuit. (Hey, he brought up sex, not me! I’m just saying, who knows how far down into debauchery “the greatest sinner he knows” goes?!) And if it were money-related, the police would be knocking on the door.

As for CJ’s self-flagellation over “various expressions of Pride” and “sinful judgment,” yeah, that is a big what-EV-r and beneath his Harry Houdini act. He has much, much better metaphysical and epistemological magic tricks. The bit over pride is SGM Subterfuge 101. They create the yardstick. Tell everyone how to live up to the yardstick. They emulate the standard they created and everyone marvels at their humility and character. SGM manufactured these two nouns—pride and judgment—into the highest spiritual sedition by taking on the adjective “sinful.” Well, maybe I should amend: they are secondary spiritual seditions to “immorality or financial impropriety.” But who is quibbling with the unofficial SGM sin hierarchy scale? It is all bad—very, very bad—even though “various expressions of Pride” is no real crime of any applicable measure and “sinful judgment” is a euphemism for a rational error. We cannot evaluate CJ’s rational error without context, content, and the ability to MEASURE the dynamic between CJ’s government power and the outcomes of that expression of force. El Primo Doctrinal Mover and Shaker sound’s pretty churchy when he starts confessing his frolicking congress with the evil twins—Pride and Judgment—but this is a full-on attempt to parse words and wreck moral clarity. Only a man with the highest contempt for human existence can lead with such a cavalier ethical manipulation. But you just never mind the coils and coils of SGM speak and render the only appropriate response in light of Pervasive Depravity eternity—all together now: “Ooooohhh . . . Ahhhhh . . . CJ is soooo humble.”

So no matter what the glossy brochure says about all sin being a great big fat evil before God, it is apparent that he thinks some sins are not as bad as others. It seems that the Reformed Theology Vicar Charles Joseph Pious I is creeping closer and closer to Catholic doctrine. First, we have the sin hierarchy: venial and mortal sins. Second, we have the cardinals and bishops refusing to confront the Pontifex Maximus.

What is next? Confession to a Priest of the Lord?

Since CJ took a trip into the wild side, living dangerously with that dastardly pair, Pride and Judgment, the priest should really stick it to CJ. Those mortal sins—oops, those leadership “deficiencies” are very, very bad. They are very, very grieving. When Mark Dever and David Powlison step into the confessional, what will be their penance? Rosary beads, 28 Hail Marys, and 31 Our Fathers? I figure they have to keep the appearance of Protestant Papacy to a minimum, so they will probably have to mandate the reading of Sin and Temptation on his knees 3.14159265 times. Or maybe they will limit penance to: “Now, my son, go crack a self-deprecating joke and sin no more.”

But jokes aside, describing a catastrophic failure of judgment as a “deficiency” is such a CJ-ism. Deficiency makes it sound like he forgot to put on a belt with his pants, or maybe forgot to comb his hair, or forgot the mustard for the perfect tasting hotdog. Deficiency is a polite euphemism designed to conceal effective description of his leadership outcomes. Or in SGM speak, it is designed to hide the nature of the fruit. In the real world, a persisting, manifestation of rational judgment over the course of time is called incompetence.

“One more thing. For the past five years or so I have become increasingly aware of certain deficiencies in my leadership that have contributed to deficiencies in Sovereign Grace Ministries’ structure and governance, the lack of a clear and consistent process of conflict resolution and pastoral evaluation, and the number of former Sovereign Grace pastors who are offended with me/SGM.”

I read this section and thought of Napoleon after Waterloo: “Yes, my dear Frenchmen, it seems that after five years I have come to understand that I have certain ”deficiencies” in my leadership.

I marvel that this gets ANY traction with rational, competent, successful men and women. Some of you members of the SGM juggernaut are captains of industry, successful by any measurable method. You are responsible for the decisions that may involve potentially destructive consequences for investment portfolios, or real-estate, or the livelihoods of hundreds of employees. Do you get five years to become “increasingly aware” to recognize that there ARE deficiencies of leadership? We haven’t even gotten to the specifics of the deficiencies or the intended corrections. By SGM math, it would take 15 years to get any given “deficiency” set aright.

What are the minutes of that corporate board of directors meeting?

“After five years I realize that there might be deficiencies in my leadership? Give me another five to figure out exactly what those are and another five to fix the problem.”
“Oh yes, you are very humble to admit that. It is such a privilege to serve with you in this very important endeavor.”

What a hoot!

Once again, free yourself from the quantum entanglement of CJ Schrodinger’s morality play and plant the events in the real world. A business leader would have about five MINUTES to identify the possibility of incompetence. And by close of business THAT DAY, he better have a full grasp of his rational errors. It would be a profound mercy if the “offended” share holders will let him take five MONTHS to correct the “deficiencies.”

What happened to Larry Tomczak is not a deficiency. It is a full-on moral atrocity. Calling it a leadership “deficiency” is a roaring, contemptuous trivialization. It doesn’t matter if Larry is selling out the event and reconciling the last fifteen-ish years (the aftermath) as a mere “offense.” The defining measure of ethics and morality is NOT subjective to the offended party.

And this is the point of the whole illusion—the profound mastery of moral relativism and the contemptuous parade of moral narcissism. So now we will turn our attention to CJ Houdini’s metaphysical and epistemological sleights of hand. If I wore a hat and was motivated toward the same Mystic Despotism ends, I would be doffing my cap in admiration.

In 1996 I made my criticisms of the SGM juggernaut public. (Well, maybe I should say that I made them MORE public. There was no Wiki back then because there was no real web.) One of the first, most scathing denunciations of my efforts to address the “deficiencies” of their leadership was that I was “hiding behind a veil of theological exactness.” Of all the mean things in that letter, this one crossed a line. Actually, I am just kidding about the crossing the line part. (But not the mean things part.) What these words revealed is that after reading my book, the writer did not understand where the lines were drawn. They were woefully misinformed about the lines of logic that run deep underneath the SGM leadership’s claim to authority. My 1996 effort to expose those lines of logic was designed to explain the source and substance of those ideas. Here I am almost fifteen years later taking up the same cause.

“Hiding behind a veil of Theological exactness” are great words that I will relentlessly plagiarize. But in context to me, they are horrifically misapplied. There is a universe of difference between being theologically precise and using the endless coils of Theological ideas to shield and justify real world outcomes. Or said another way, there is a big difference between being logically consistent and using the tools of logic to create a rational castle that shields men from critical review.

In 1996 I was being theologically precise; in addition to being historically precise, in addition to being philosophically precise, in addition to being logically precise.

In every area of human existence, rational competence and logical consistency are ESSENTIAL for man’s success. But somehow when we get to the world of Religion, and specifically Christian Theology, aspiring to the same standard is spiritual sedition. People tend to treat the ideas behind theology like some smorgasbord that they can pick and choose at their leisure accepting or rejecting doctrines to fit their emotional or spiritual feng shui. If this blog has shown anything, it is that this approach to the Arena of Ideas is a disaster.

I have said this—in many forms and variations—ardently and often, what I captured in the Gospel of John Immel Chapter 3 verses 1-3.

1) All people act logically from their assumptions. 2) It does not matter how inconsistent the ideas or insane the rationale, they will act until the logic is fulfilled. 3) Therefore, when you see masses of people taking the same actions, find the assumptions and you will find the cause.

Words mean things. The ideas those words convey create structures by which men seek to live. Those structures are integrated into cohesive philosophical statements. That underlying philosophy becomes the galvanizing system of thought that drives the moral superiority to take action. The action is in service to the assumptions underneath the ideas. It is this dynamic that everyone wants to evade.

Christians have decided that the only valid knowledge comes without work: Unless it is a superior revelation that comes from a supreme authority, man cannot know anything. So we go to men who claim to represent that supreme authority to spoonfeed us ideas. And herein is the problem. This places select men in the position to arbitrate the sum of human knowledge and excuses us from having to take up the cause of our own consciousness.

This is a disaster. We cannot take the pulse of the cause and effect of our ideas and subsequent actions because we have abandoned the very tool that makes judgment possible: our brain. So when challenged with ideas that do not conform to the spoonfed standard, we respond exactly like my “Veil of Theological Exactness” critic.

Here is what my critic was really saying: “John, you think you are really smart and are too big for your britches. You are just making something simple, complicated. So I have no responsibility to understand what you said.” In other words, he morally justified a rational punt because the ideas were beneath his super-spiritual simple-mindedness.

I would be a very rich man if paid money for every time I have heard some variation of this excuse. I hear it a lot because people pretend that simple-mindedness is morally superior, and moral superiority is a potent evasion because it absolves everyone of every thought they don’t want to address. It is much easier to evade the reality of their own making, and it lets them pretend they have transcended the evil, selfish, vain philosopher. Or said another way, it lets them dismiss me.

Here is the reality I am no longer willing to let people evade: it is THEIR rational bankruptcy that lets men like CJ Mahaney maraud his way through metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical disaster. As long as he can keep little Joseph in his pants and his hand out of the till every other “deficiency’ and “sinful judgment” and “hypocrisy” is trivial to some superior simple-mindedness. Since he hasn’t offended the threshold of your moral sensibilities, you marvel that people make it into a big fat dealeo, never once realizing the catastrophic function of his assertions.

Rational vacancy is not a superior moral state, and a man cannot use his faith to change reality until he can DEFINE reality. So here it is: The Mahaneys of the world exist because YOU let them. His current position and the existing failures within SGM have nothing to do with cultic behavior, or bad polity, or a lack of accountability, or a thousand and one other blogosphere criticisms.

Go look in the mirror. The problem is looking you in the face.

The problem is every time you whined about having to THINK to make sure you were fully consistent. The problem is every time you failed to earn your own mind and thoughts by strengthening your logical faculties. The problem is every time you told yourself that you knew everything you would need to know and had no responsibility to challenge the source, content, and outcomes of your ideas. The problem is every time you insisted that you had “authority” to think what you think, and therefore your ideas were unassailable. The problem is every time you resented a counterargument headwind and closed your mind in a fit of “unentreatablity.” The problem is every time you condemned men like me who offered you a depth of insight that was beyond your conceptual ability and dismissed the ideas out of hand because you didn’t happen to like the tone. The problem is every time you rationally punted with a wave of the “I just believe in Christ and him Crucified wand” as if that passage was a license to irrationality.

I will be my usual adorably blunt self and put my finger dead square on the real problem: The current SGM quandary exists because people are rational cowards.
Just so there is no misunderstanding, just so everyone can grasp my goal, just so there is no confusion about motive, it is my intention to wreck the thing that makes it possible for the CJ Mahaneys of the world to rise in power and thrive in despotism. I will grab hold of the raw nerve of the whole debacle and yank and hammer until people have so much psychic pain they cannot sleep or eat. Mystic

Despotism has reared its ugly head throughout history, and it only prevailed when good men refused to think. We are circling back round the assumptions that have always undergird Mystic Despotism and the issue is not confined to the theological bankrupt glory unfolding before our eyes in Sovereign Grace Ministries.

American Christianity is on a disastrous course. The only way to correct its direction is to remove the rich soil that gives men like CJ Mahaney the ability to grow and thrive. That rich soil is the hearts of Men and Women who accept their moral inferiority as the metaphysical starting place and live fearful and resigned to a theoretical inability. To uproot the choking infesting root system, it requires that YOU be conscious and THINK.

To that end, let us strip away all of the coils designed to suffocate us all into a spiritual warm fuzzy. Our goal requires that we remove all the extraneous words and spiritualized sentiments and look at exactly at what was said. This exercise will reduce CJ’s words down their foundational truths and doctrinal assertions. Once completed, we will have successfully pulled back the real veneer overlaying the extraordinary manipulation of theological exactness.

Contrast this:

• expressions of pride
• unentreatability
• deceit
• sinful judgment,
• hypocrisy

With this:

• … perceived a degree of my sin…
• But I want to perceive
• Although my experience of conviction
• . . . more for me to perceive …
• … gift of sight where
• … blinded by my sin …

And now we know exactly why CJ is lost. He’s trying to taste his way to conceptual awareness.

Perceptions are the physical apparatus of man’s sensory impute: taste, touch, sight, smell, and hearing. You perceive cold, hot, red, blue, hunger, loud, cinnamon, grape, and thousands of other sensory input.

Conceptions are the stuff of integrated logic and rational abstraction. Pride, “sinful” judgment, hypocrisy, unentreatablity, deceit are all abstractions based on a specific set of logical assumptions and filtered through metaphysical truths that impact epistemological conclusions.

Consider everything a man must understand to grasp the concept of deceit. Here is the definition:

–noun
1. the act or practice of deceiving; concealment or distortion of the truth for the purpose of misleading; duplicity; fraud; cheating:
2. an act or device intended to deceive; trick; stratagem.
3. the quality of being deceitful; duplicity; falseness.

At a minimum, one must be fully capable to grasp the nature of TRUTH. And then one must be aware of what others understand of TRUTH. And then one must consciously seek to undermine that understanding. There is no need to dissect every level of this abstraction because the absurdity is self-evident to those with the rational development of a twelve-year-old.

CJ speaks of failing to understand abstractions as if he were describing the flavor of a grape. He hears what everyone else calls “grape” and is mystified that it doesn’t taste like “grape” to him. So he says, “OMG! I’m such a wretched old sinner. I need God to impute grace so I can perceive grape-ness.”

CJ’s letter is like a high school senior trying to rip out the pages of his textbooks with his teeth and rubbing them over his eyes to perceive Calculus and the “confessing” to his parents that he sucks at math. Rational parents would be keeping that kid from licking windows and fitting him for a helmet, not discussing his great humility for admitting that he had become aware of his academic “deficiencies.”

CJ is declaring himself to be the philosophical equivalent of an infant gumming an epistemological teething ring trying to make sense of the world through his mouth. Even the two-year-old manages to grasp the concept of “yucky” as mommy teaches that the world is not understood through a river of drool.
And CJ expects you to “swallow” these shenanigans? I tell you, he holds you in utter contempt.

You think I am just parsing words? That I just need to give him the benefit of the doubt and just understand what he is trying to say?

No, I am not: This is not mere semantics. And no, I don’t: We are decades past the benefit of the doubt. His letter is a bold manipulation of the doctrines of Pervasive Depravity and Irresistible Grace. Most people are familiar with the first doctrinal concept, but I suspect not so much for the second. To summarize, Irresistible Grace says that no matter how much of your depraved part sins, no matter how much you act like a heathen, acting unworthy of your calling, and walking apart from your election, those whom God calls cannot resist his Grace because God would not allow such a precious gift to be squandered. The fact that you can “perceive” any good is the seal of your authentic election. So now you can see how CJ is parsing the doctrines for the broadest personal benefit and within sentences defying the logical conclusions of his own appeal.

Furthermore, during the early 1990s, during the SGM “Doctrinal Refocus” (which was a euphemism for Reformed Theology Force-Feeding), the men at the top of the leadership food chain thumped the pulpit and then their chest for their effort to dig into the deep things of theology. They wrote endless articles and preached endless sermons denouncing the lack of theological precision and general rational vacancy within American Christianity. They were very pleased to tell EVERYONE that they were “not like other churches.” They patted themselves on the head for saying “We don’t want to be like the ‘gift rich’ but doctrinally-deficient Corinthian Church.” They wore their lofty self-educatedness like a badge of qualification. And then they beat everybody around the spiritual head with submission and authority to demand obedience to their self-educatedness.

CJ built a monument to his theological precision—ostensibly a seminary level library in his office. So now he can’t have it both ways. CJ cannot make an appeal to his qualification to lead by the virtue of the size of his library and his “greater measure” on the one hand and then pretend that he can use any old word to describe any old idea, because he is just a simple man preaching simple truths—kum-buy-yah, kum-buy-yah.

And—somehow—I become the big meaner when pointing out that CJ does not have any clothes? Or sense? Or rationality?

As one of my professors was very fond of saying, “Rubbish!”

I told you I was standing in the quarry he dug. I’m not even throwing rocks. I’m merely pointing out that the rocks he has thrown for years to intimidate the uninitiated are really ping pong balls that no one has had the courage to return.

But now we do have to turn our attention to the rocks. Now we have to focus on the bedrock of CJ Houdini’s all star Metaphysical Magic Mayhem that leaps off the page in the 3rd, 7th paragraph.

I believe I have by the grace of God perceived a degree of my sin, and I have been grieved by my sin and its effects on others. . . . . But I want to perceive and confess any and all sin I have committed. Although my experience of conviction has already started—and this is an evidence of God’s mercy—I’m sure there is more for me to perceive and acknowledge. . . . it has been beneficial to examine my soul and ask for the observation of others.
. . .
Please pray that God would give me the gift of sight where I have been blinded by my sin and others have been adversely affected by my sin. Pray that I will be convicted and experience godly sorrow resulting in reconciliation where necessary and adjustments to my heart and leadership.

Let us once again extract the important parts from the coils choking our minds.

“I believe I have by the grace of God perceived a degree of my sin…”
“Although my experience of conviction has already started—and this is an evidence of God’s mercy—I’m sure there is more for me to perceive and acknowledge. . . .”

Sounds churchy, doesn’t it? And because it sounds like something a humble preacher should say, the reality of the words sail right over our heads. But these words are the core of this whole letter. These sentences are profound epistemological declarations and the key to understanding how SGM leadership has gotten to this point in their history.

Epistemology is the science of determining HOW we know what we know so that we can define WHAT we know. Without understanding the answers to these two questions, man cannot live. It is that simple.

For almost the whole of human history, the conclusion to these two questions—the conclusion that crawled out of the primordial ooze of man’s superstitious mind and landed in the mouth of the local soothsayer, and was explained by every generation of mystic until it was codified by a man called Hammurabi and was eventually integrated into a full philosophical statement by a man called Plato, and was then fully syncretized into Christianity by a man named Augustine—was there is no HOW because Man cannot know anything unless the gods tell him. And WHAT he understands from the gods’ instruction is limited by the corruption of man’s nature.

The inevitable conclusion of this worldview is that select men are given a dispensation from the inability to “perceive” TRUTH from the gods. Those with the dispensation are then morally superior and therefore empowered to compel those “under” them to act in accord with the edicts. Once man accepts this premise, the only conversation left for humanity to have is how much force (that is authority) do those morally superior men have to compel compliance?

And now many, many generations later, CJ Mahaney is saying the exact same thing. CJ is summarizing the HOW and WHAT of his knowledge using the ancient assertions of mystic despotism. He is appealing to the most ancient of all worldviews and explaining his actions by tossing himself in to the mosh pit of the most destructive metaphysical and epistemological assumptions this world has ever seen. He is specifically telling us he is not responsible for his rational capacity. He is admitting to having abandoned every pretense of conscious responsibility. The HOW of his epistemology is that he doesn’t know ANYTHING.

WHAT God tells him may be perfect, but he is flawed and therefore needs supernatural help to “perceive” what his sinful nature corrupts blinds. Whatever repentance or change of mind CJ Mahaney is undergoing to “perceive his sins” has nothing to do with an objective standard of ethical behavior, or evidence presented that led to rational correction, or the logical capacity to evaluate the cause and effect of actions, or a mastery of abstractions to achieve conceptual understanding.

No. No. No.

CJ is telling us that he is blind, deaf, and dumb unless God gives him mercy. This lip service to Irresistible Grace is an overt effort to say that a correction of rational judgment is not really “rational” at all, but rather the imputation of divine revelation. The fact that he can see ANY ethical or moral failing is the PROOF of God’s specific involvement and therefore evidence of his authentic Christian calling. So his epistemology (the science of HOW and WHAT he KNOWS) is “God gave me the gift of sight.” And his ethics are summed up by saying “I don’t know how to act unless I get a specific gift from God that I can put in my mouth and chew on.”

Are you kidding?

Can you imagine the Reformed Theology groupies hue and cry if this were Todd Bentley or Kenneth Copeland saying they can’t get their moral act together unless God (turn up the reverb) gives them a “revelation” on how to act?

But beyond the silliness, notice how much power this gives a man. You confront him with an objective outcome and he can blithely say that he does not have a “conviction” or a “witness” or a “gift of sight” to see what you see. So he is free to measure the “objective” outcome by the whims of his epistemological teething ring. So for instance, unless he gets the same revelation of grape-ness that you have, he can persist in any action without any responsibility to outcome. And this is why this body of doctrine obsesses on authority. The only way to tell whose taste buds are authentic is the man with the most force to compel epistemological compliance. He gets to shove his teething ring in everyone else’s mouth to “perceive” what he “perceives” until the world is flooded with drool. So as long as HIS revelation of grape-ness is affirmed by his authority, how can he correct his actions? He cannot correct his actions because he “perceives” no need to correct his action. His authority is granted by the gods. And who are you to challenge his dispensation to understand TRUTH? So if he does not change his mind, it is PROOF of God’s imputation of Grace. And if he ever does “perceive” himself guilty of ANY ethical or moral failing is the PROOF of God’s specific involvement and therefore evidence of his authentic Christian calling.

And this is SGM leadership in all their metaphysical glory.

Each person-to-person interaction is a wholly unique event that is measured up against … nothing … but the ability to “perceive” as God grants grace. This is the metaphysical equivalent of a newborn baby who cannot distinguish between mommy being gone and mommy being under a blanket. The baby does not conceptualize the blanket, only that mommy’s face is present and mommy’s face is gone. Likewise, CJ does not conceptualize the broader pattern of his edicts and declarations. He can see no system dynamics between the metaphysical given of his own epistemological vacancy and the subsequent outcomes of his leadership deficiencies. By definition, he only sees what God specifically “gifts” him to see.

So he at once has no rational responsibility to ANY consistency or logic AND is excused for his prevailing failures because of his blinding sin. Alakazam! Poof! He is free to create a world of his own detached whim and his errors are mere “sinful judgments” and leadership “deficiencies.” And since we are ALL just sinners in need of Grace, who can fuss with that?

With such a metaphysical and epistemological worldview, is it any wonder that HIS moral and ethical judgment is all over the map? Is it a wonder that there is no rhyme or reason to SGM pastoral council? Is it any mystery why CJ suddenly must at least acknowledge “. . . the lack of a clear and consistent process of conflict resolution and pastoral evaluation . . .”?

I cracked my Schrodinger’s cat joke above because as a metaphor, it captures this very dynamic. In the quantum thought experiment, the cat is either alive or dead at the moment of observation. This experiment was used to explain how it was possible that quantum particles could exist in two simultaneous states—wave and particle—and yet when observed, they could become one or the other but not both. In any given moment, that cat was alive or dead within the box: the only way to know is to “perceive.” Hence, the similarity to quantum particles.
About half of you dear readers are sorely tempted to let your brain go tilt and give me the “You just think you are really smart and I just preach Christ and him Crucified,” speech. You want to read me the riot act for not arguing Scripture; tell me I’m too big for my britches and brush this off as me being too clever by half.

My britches fit just right, and this is not too clever by half!

I told you it was Harry Houdini level sleights of hand. This is masterful in its presentation and execution, but it relies on your unwillingness to watch both hands and remain conscious of the very foundational level ideas. Just as quantum mechanics is the foundation of our physical existence, metaphysics and epistemology are the foundations of our rational/spiritual existence. This brazen manipulating is how SGM has been so successful at romping through people’s lives. This is how SGM can hold Scriptures in two simultaneous states: absolute and bendable. They put the Bible in the Schrodinger box and do a thought experiment with every interaction. Is the Bible absolute or bendable? Who can tell until they “perceive”? And here is the scandal. They don’t let anyone else look in the box. We don’t all get to look at the cat and see if it is dead and check their quantum math. There is no math to check. There is no algebra. There is no objective standard. There is only their imputation of Grace to determine, in every discreet moment, what God is saying and doing. They emerge from the “observation” and declare the conclusion.

And this is EXACTLY what CJ did in this letter.

And this is EXACTLY what frees CJ to be utterly inconsistent with his evaluation of his own judgment. Notice in 2008, CJ wrote an article about Bill Belichick decrying his lack of humility in the face of adversity. How did CJ arrive at this conclusion? Simple, Bill left the field before time on the clock ran out. I addressed the full absurdity in this article. But now I want you to read how CJ justified his judgment. (Full article)

“. . . I am the worst sinner I know. For am I most familiar with the countless sins I have committed against God, . . . Though it doesn’t appear Bill Belichick is a humble man, I know I am not a humble man.

I am a proud man who is pursuing humility only by the grace of God. . . .
So today after examining my heart for any trace of self-righteousness, any hint of moral superiority in my soul, I have prayed that God would . . .

So how does a man go from being the worst sinner he knows to the egoistic assurance of “So today after examining my heart for any trace of self-righteousness, any hint of moral superiority in my soul, I have prayed that God would blah blah blah ….”?

ONE DAY! Not five years to arrive at the conclusion that he MIGHT have leadership deficiencies. Within ONE DAY he can fully and effectively declare himself free of self-righteous moral superiority and then subsequently manufacture a doctrine that eternally condemns a man for leaving a football field before the end of a game.

Really?

Here we are a few years later and he wants to pretend that he cannot successfully master his own rational appointment within half a decade?

Really?

You all are buying this?

Since CJ brought up reconciling with Larry T. we need to revisit what they said of the Apostle of Covering back when they booted him to the curb. I will summarize that letter as follows:

The [then] PDI Leadership team and the three men of the local Atlanta Church [where Larry was currently stationed] would not agree with “. . . Larry’s assessment of himself. . .” because “. . . for a man simply cannot trust his own assessment of himself or determine unilaterally when he returns to ministry once he has been disqualified.”

For those of you who still have the letters that deal with the “offense” of Larry Tomczak’s removal from his job. Notice how the doctrine of Pervasive Depravity is used to absolutely steal the power of volitional judgment from Larry T.

Who is acting unilaterally now? How did CJ get a dispensation from implications of Pervasive Depravity? Where are the “leadership team” letters decrying CJ’s ethical egoism with the same zeal as they went after Larry?

Hmm? Anyone?

In light of Pervasive Depravity eternity, how does CJ feel qualified to orchestrate the terms of his own exile? For someone who is supposed to be reviewing his ”deficiencies” and hypocrisy and all the self-flagellating rest, for a man who admits that he has no means to know anything but what God puts in him, he is profoundly self-appointed. In a 1,000-word document, the “Greatest Sinner he knows,” uses the word “I” almost 50 times. How can he be trusted to choose who will help him find the solutions? How can he “take responsibility”? By doctrinal definition, he does not have the ability to be responsible for his conduct. By self-admission, he is claiming to struggle with the most rudimentary level of human cognitive development. So if CJ picked the course of action, it should be immediately disqualified in his manmade efforts toward a solution to the “deficiencies.”

Of course, this begs the conclusion whether there should BE a solution to the “deficiencies.” Who is to say that God isn’t appointing CJ Mahaney to wander in the abyss of his epistemological “deficiencies”? Since authentic Bible doctrine and sound doctrine purity must be defended at all cost, it is worth considering.

Human lives are at the utter disposal of all pure, righteous Bible absolute TRUTH. So I’m just saying . . .. CJ admits that the nature of the grace and mercy granted him so far is partial, which means that God is choosing to withhold the full truth from his delicate, fragile, sin-filled psyche. So by definition He [God] is

Sovereignly appointing the circumstance. Indeed God has, to date, withheld the grace that makes this deficiency-ridden, sinful judgment, Pride-filled, hypocritical state of CJ’s leadership possible. God has refused to grant the “gift of sight” for five years. So why do we automatically presume that God does not want it to persist for another decade?

Why would God do that?

Who are you, oh man, to even ask such a question?

It is God’s sovereign choice to raise up vessels of Grace and destroy vessels of destruction. If He chooses to allow CJ Mahaney to trot off the deep end, how is that any of your concern?

You cannot rationally object to God’s sovereign action. Since you have subordinated your mind to authority, you have no choice but to go along for the ride into perdition. You can, at no point, revert to YOUR judgments because you are also in need of Grace to “perceive” the error of your ways. And what you do “perceive” must be validated through the authority. So suck it up and stay in your pew; shut your mouth and let God do as he sees fit because whatever bad thing CJ does, God intended it for your life.
. . .
. . .
. . .

Did that finally get real enough for some of you? Is any of this penetrating the stupor of your mind? Are any of you quaking in your boots at the logical conclusions? This Houdini level Metaphysical and Epistemological illusionist show is exactly what has empowered CJ Mahaney to romp through the lives of people unchecked, treat everyone else as a distant theological abstraction, all the while making pretense at seizing the highest moral and spiritual standard. Once he can make an unchallenged claim to moral authority, he gets to define for EVERYONE what grape-ness tastes like and you can stick it in your ear if you don’t happen to like the dog squeeze he force-feeds you in the name of biblical absolutes.

Do you “perceive” how this liberates a man to act with impunity?

This might be marginally understandable if it were accidental. We might be able to grant some space to a man struggling to master the elements of his existence and taking responsibility for his own consciousness. But that is not what has happened with CJ.

He is at once blaming his moral failing on God and confirming his Christian authenticity by the PROOF of the small measure of his repentance to date. So he affirms his authority by appealing to Pervasive Depravity and absolves his authority outcomes by the doctrine of Irresistible Grace. He is at no point disqualified.

This whole magic show is a despicable display of rational larceny. And it is rational larceny because it is obvious that he does not believe for a minute that he is ineligible in any applicable sense. He is now fully on record for cherry-picking his qualification and abandoning his rational culpability when it serves his purpose.

I told you from the outset that he holds us all in contempt. No matter what the glossy brochure says, no matter how often he smiles and self-deprecates and is his generally witty winsome self, this man fully believes he is morally superior by any and every measure. The morality play unfolding before our eyes is a further brilliant move, a well orchestrated final act in an endless campaign to make himself unassailable in the acquisition of moral superiority. The men around him are utterly cowed by his moral authority. They have demonstrated no capacity or even the slightest desire to check or balance his conducts, actions, or doctrines. They let him rewrite the meaning and outcomes with impunity. And as a governing body, they are universally “unentreatable” unless it serves their purpose.

So this only has one outcome.

At the moment the leadership team has had their confidence shaken so they too are saying all the right things, in all the right places for all the same reasons.

This will give local churches who have been chaffing under the pain of having to subordinate to the Big Dogs the moral clarity to defect from SGM central planning.They will suffer the usual criticism of those who dare leave the SGM fold. But then it will pass. The leadership will have sufficiently watched their bellybutton to affirm in their own mind they are still qualified to govern.

El Primo Doctrinal mover and Shaker will head into self-appointed exile and navel-gaze till his heart is content. The board will investigate. The men of correction will enter the stage on cue, offer their correction as if CJ is a five-year-old that needs swatted with a spoon. He will be told to respond “right away, all the way, and cheerfully.” He will cry great big alligator tears in public, an event that is hardly unique. A season will pass—season = until he gets tired of the dog house—and he will then unilaterally return, appropriately chastened, appropriately repentant, appropriately confessed.

For the first few board meetings, CJ will nod in all the right places as if the words he hears others say are new and fresh and important. He will defer and conciliate. Everyone will extol: “See, it works! The redemption is real! The process of restorations is a miracle of Grace!” They will write books and sing songs and dance their hold over charismatic two-step in the aisles. All the sins have been washed away. Repent of unforgiveness. Move past your emotional offense. You too must confess your faults and make your Pastors work a Joy.

Woe is us, we are all just sinners.

And then, one day, behind the scenes, the e-mail chain will start again, and to those who lived the nightmare the first time will “perceive.” The illusionist never left and now CJ is unassailable.

SGM, welcome to CJ Mahaney’s Metaphysical Magic Mayhem.

SGM Board: CJ Mahaney is our Man

An excellent blog that we recommend linking to in the coverage of Mahaney and the subculture of neo-Calvinistas, or, as we call them, predestinarian ana-Baptists.  Others call them "evangelicals." It's a story of authoritarianism and--as former SGM members tells--a story of abusiveness.  Our readers will decide.

http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2011/07/13/cj-mahaney-is-our-man-sovereign-grace-ministries-board-statement/

CJ Mahaney is our man – Sovereign Grace Ministries board statement

Posted on July 13, 2011 by Bene Diction

It took Jesus 30 years to prepare for ministry. He ministered publicly for 3 years. He was crucified and rose 3 days later.



It’s taken the board of Sovereign Grace Ministries six days to issue a statement of resolutions essentially declaring they will exonerate their founder CJ Mahoney, re-stating their board authority and declaring the writer of SGM wikileaks to have ‘publicly slandered…Mahaney’s reputation.’ The board further states there has been public defamation.

Background to the events of this group is here. I strongly recommend reading the key blogs which have followed SGM and provided a haven for former members.

1. That Brent Detwiler’s refusal to participate in mediation with C.J. Mahaney—unless Mahaney first agrees (a) to publish an extensive written response to each of Detwiler’s accusations and (b) to make a public confession prior to any mediation or impartial evaluation of his charges—is unjust and constitutes a denial of biblically grounded due process for a qualified minister of the gospel (Matthew 18:15-17; 1 Timothy 5:19-20, Proverbs 25:9).
2. That Brent Detwiler’s distribution of written accusations against C.J. Mahaney to all Sovereign Grace pastors constitutes ‘the public slander…of Mahaney’s reputation’.
3. That the board of Sovereign Grace Ministries has reviewed Brent Detwiler’s documents accusing C.J. Mahaney of sinful practices in the conduct of his ministry and finds no reason at this time to deem him unfit for ministry. However, the board will reevaluate Mahaney’s fitness after receiving formal evaluation of the accusations lodged against him (see below). The board acknowledges that sins have been committed but also recognizes and appreciates Mahaney’s eagerness to confess sins, pursue reconciliation with Detwiler, and pursue personal holiness and growth as a minister.
4. That C.J. Mahaney is a qualified minister of the gospel and this board approves his pastoral and teaching ministry in Sovereign Grace and the wider body of Christ.
5. That Sovereign Grace Ministries will engage a process of evaluation regarding CJ Mahaney’s fitness for ministry.

- a panel will examine Mahoney’s confessions to see if he is fit for ministry
- a second panel will work with the first, and set up a fair hearing
- the board will get comments from outside pastors
- the board will then make it’s determination

Oh. The board and CJ Mahoney have already decided, and this statement while hearbreaking for members and former members who had hoped for transparency and healing from leadership, is no surprise. SGM is structured on ‘Apostolic leadership’, birthed out of the discredited sheparding movement. It is hyper-authoritarian, complementarian (no women in leadership) and run by a small hand picked board raised and trained in SGM, and loyal to the founder. The double speak and contradictions will be evident to those who take the time to read past the pr.

Sovereign Grace Ministries has been around for about 30 years, under different names, but around. There are about 70 churches.This is not a denomination, it is a group of charismatic reform churches.
There are to my knowledge five types of church governance.

1. CENTRALIZED form of church government is where a central council has much authority over the running and ordinances of the local congregation. This is typical of denominational mainline churches where the pastor is appointed and regulated by the directions and rules of the central council. This kind is usually one with a long history and has established branches.
2. PRESBYTERIAN form of church government is where the local church is governed by a board of elders which has final authority over every aspect of the church, including the appointment and work of the pastor.
The pastor may or may not be a member of this board. This kind of church may be denominational or independent.
3. CONGREGATIONAL form is where the majority rules, the democracy style of government where the people vote to elect their pastor and the church board to administer the affairs of the church. It is usually an independent church.
4. PASTORAL form of government is where one is in authority, with the board or elders or deacons in the advisory and co-laboring capacity. The pastor receives from and is directly accountable to God, and he runs the ministry according to his depth and knowledge in God. It is usually an independent church. The person may not be a pastor in his primary call, but it is considered as pastoral in that the pastoral function has a more dominant role and the vision is more localized, called to raise a church in a particular place and time.
5. APOSTOLIC form of government. Apostle means “one sent out”, one with an outward thrust and a pioneering or restoration cutting edge, the edge that causes revolutionary impact and can either be of a new movement or a work of extensive scale, or even both. The leader is a commander with a mandate and an extended vision which is usually cross-cultural or global, but not always. He has to be one raised and equipped for the job and for the hour. He usually presides over a council of fellow ministers that has direct calling and anointing for the thrust, covering the 5-fold ministry in varying degrees. It is a patriarchal and theocratic government, where the Word of God reigns supreme, where the leadership is strong and the followership intelligent, where revelations from above chart the course and the leader is directly accountable first to God. Is he also accountable to the people? Yes, but not in the same way as he reports to his God. The spiritual authority of his leaders is derived very much from ministerial calling even though seniority is respected.

While every form of governance is subject to abuse, checks and balances are in place for most of them. SGM is a mish mash of self made, self chosen apostolic and sheparding rules and polity. The sheparding movement has been throughly discredited, and renounced by a couple of it’s founders. It continues in various forms in the US, with Sovereign Grace Ministries being one group who embraces the doctrines and structure.

The SGM board has spoken. CJ Mahaney has spoken. And spoken again. He plans to be on stage this fall getting a man hug from a co-founder he blackmailed years ago at his popular pastors conference in front of the fanboys. All will once again be well in this hyper-authoritarian, hyper-rerform environment and everyone will live happily ever after.

Or will it? One name is missing from the board statement.** A young minister mentored groomed and schooled personally by Mahaney isn’t quite following the rules. Josh Harris was put in place as senior pastor in the mother church, and is trying to listen to the concerns of members, former members, and obey God. He has come across as the voice of empathy as information became public and he may be the next leader thrown under the bus – or in SGM language – de-gifted. He is on the board and he did not sign the board resolutions. He is one pastor in a larger group of pastors who will have choices to make. I believe as the window of opportunity closes for members and leaders to foster and bring forward change and seek healthier forms of governance and accountability, and to move away from authoritarianism and celebrity worship, current members who are seeking truth will come to a fork in the road. Anger is rising as is frustration, conversation is flowing fast and opinions are being formed, changed or hardened. SGM members have a difficult environment to navigate.

If you look at the history of SGM and of the sheparding movement, you’ll see that the spin and the tracjectory is classic and predictable.

1. A small internal and loyal group decides on political and doctrinal checks and balances
2. A small group decides on the flow of information
3. A small group stifles questions and internal criticism
4. Outside criticism is dismissed by the leader/group
5. Walkaways are labelled, dismissed and shunned
6. Whistleblowers are accused of slander and sometimes taken to court
7. A circle of leaders who benefit financially and by reputation are enlisted to reinforce the leadership message
8. Members are told (using fear and coercion) not to read/listen or follow criticism or critics
9. Power remains centralized, the threat/perceived threat is nuetralized using inside loaded language and the well established language of control
10. The status quo and organizational equilibrium is maintained.


Members of SGM paying attention to the public kerfuffle will see power posturing, performance pre-occupation, unspoken rules, lack of balance in theology which can swing from extreme objectivism to extreme subjectivism, flashes of paranoia and quick anger, loaded language, misplaced loyalty, emotional manipulation, secrecy, (does anyone believe the SGM board will release ‘outside’ findings?) and fostered polorization. ( gleaned from The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse by David Johnson and Jeff VanVonderen)

Other resources for SGM members
A Study of Authoritarian Church Leadership and Individual Freedom of Church Members
Apologetics Index: the Power Abusers
Ron Enroth: Churches That Abuse
Covering and Authority
The Discipling Dilemma

There is nothing new under the sun.

Other groups and denominations have walked this road. Individuals have repented, and the pattern has been that in such toxic and dysfunctional systems, spiritual health is maintained or regained by those God has called to repentance by time away from the group or walking away. The board of Sovereign Grace Ministries may regret their premature statement, time will tell. I’m hearing these hand picked men say, “We stand with Mahaney. You are for us or against us.”

Jesus asks, “Chose this day who you will serve.”

The fork in the road may have come a bit more quickly for some SGM members than expected.
As much as the SGM board would like to be in control and need to be in control, they cannot unring a bell. The online coverage of SGM goes back years, former SGM members have put their stories out for those who have ears to hear. It will get louder and messier and sadder.

Blogs covering SGM
The Warburg Watch
SGM Refuge
SGM Survivors
The Phoenix Preacher
Are Women Human?

I’ll end with this sickening statement from Ligon Duncan, a long time ideological friend of CJ Mahaney, telling SGM members what to do.

…I would then encourage you to ignore the assaults of wounded people on attack websites and blogs, and that you discount the opinings of those who have no real knowledge of these matters or relation to SGM or authority to comment upon them, and that you refrain from assuming that you (or they) are in a position to render judgment on these things.

Update: ** That didn’t take long – Joshua Harris resigned from the Sovereign Grace Ministries Board. I would take the circumstances of his resignation as explained by the board with a grain of salt.