R U “UNDER CEEJ”?

Our post “UNDER CEEJ – Why the Impersonation of C.J. Mahaney is NO LAUGHING MATTER” drew some interesting comments.  An SGM loyalist who goes by the moniker “I think you exaggerate…” challenged my claims against SGM.  I have decided to respond to his/her questions. 

 

QUESTION #1:

 

“I really think you have greatly exaggerated these claims against SGM. You may have researched them for two years…but have you attended one? Have you listened to sermons from their pastors online? Have you been to a small group setting?”

 

Answer:  So glad you asked…  Dee and I attended a Sovereign Grace church together on January 25, 2009, and we heard C.J. Mahaney deliver one of his often repeated messages – “Cravings and Conflicts” — taken from James 1:2-4. Just Google it and see what I mean.  I had seen C.J. on YouTube prior to attending the “meeting”, so I was already familiar with his mannerisms and preaching style.  In addition, I have heard quite a few of his messages online.

 

C.J. began by thanking the pastor for getting tickets to the Duke-Maryland basketball game so that he, his son, and his son-in-law could attend.  The game was played on Duke’s home court.  Of course, C.J. is a HUGE Maryland supporter.  He spent AT LEAST 15 minutes (maybe more) explaining in great detail how Duke cleaned Maryland’s clock.  Sadly, it wasn’t even a contest.  For sports enthusiasts, here are the stats on Duke's 85-44 win.      

 

As as aside, I'm proud of my alma mater for winning the 2010 NCAA basketball championship. 

 

C.J. made one comment to the congregation that I don’t believe I will ever forget.  He referenced his wife Carolyn and how many years they have been married.  Then he said something like:  “Our marriage is really s-i-z-z-l-i-n-g!”  Wow!  That’s great to hear…

 

On September 25, 2009, exactly eight months after I heard C.J. Mahaney speak in person, he delivered a message called “Expository Faithfulness” at the first 9 Marks Conference ever held at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.  According to the SEBTS website, “Mahaney challenges us to be faithful, consistent expositors of the Word of God.”  You can watch it here:  

 

 

I have spent years listening to sound expository preaching from Bible scholars (much of it in person), and from my perspective C.J.’s expository preaching is extremely lacking.  I was shocked that Mark Dever had him come and speak on this topic at the 9 Marks Conference.  Sorry folks, but when you presume to teach others on “expository faithfulness”, you’d better be an expert! 

 

In addition to the numerous Cravings and Conflicts messages C.J. has delivered at various SGM churches, he even wrote about his sinful cravings on Joshua Harris' blog.

  

http://www.joshharris.com/2007/08/cravings_and_conflicts.php

 

Apparently, C.J. got angry at Carolyn when she challenged him.  Here’s how he describes what happened:


“The truth that "cravings underlie conflicts" was vividly displayed in my own life, when I arrived home one evening from work. My family was gathering for dinner, and hugs and kisses and "I love yous" were given all around. Carolyn walked by me on her way to the table with some food and kindly mentioned in passing that I had failed to tell her about a calendar commitment I made for both of us.”

 

C.J. then explains how his “cravings” got the best of him.

“My arrogance was pronounced and my anger was escalating; but Carolyn chose to serve and not sin. In my prideful state, that was simply unacceptable. So to my shame, I made several remarks intended to provoke her to join my sinful party. I wanted her to have something to confess as well. But Carolyn wasn't playing my game, and we ended the conversation in disagreement.

Did I then go to another room, fall to my knees, open my Bible to James 4, and repent? No, I went to our bedroom, sat down, opened my new Sports Illustrated, and dove in. But I wasn't reading the articles. I was imagining my wife coming into the room and saying, ‘Love, you really are most incredible husband in all of world history. How could I have possibly criticized you in any way? Will you please forgive me?’”

To read the entire account, you’ll have to click on the above link. I find it fascinating that Carolyn’s spiritual maturity seemed to exceed that of her shepherd husband (at least in this snapshot of their lives). What a great reminder to me that we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

 

QUESTION #2:

Has it occurred to you that some of these men like John MacArthur or John Piper actually like CJ, and have been in SGM churches and/or conferences many times and have not seen the claims you have made?

Answer:  Duh… Why didn’t that occur to me?  Of course they like C.J.  He butters them up and helps promotes their agenda.  I highly doubt that John MacArthur has ever been in an SGM church.  I do know that John Piper attended a Celebration some years ago and publicly criticized C.J. for not being more missions minded.

When Dee and I visited a Sovereign Grace church, we were absolutely stunned as we walked in the front door!  The focal point in the church lobby was an expansive “bookstore” equipped with a cash register to ring up the purchases.  Guess whose books were on the shelves?  C.J. Mahaney, Joshua Harris, Carolyn Mahaney, Mark Dever, Al Mohler, John Piper, John MacArthur, etc.  No wonder they like C.J.  He highly promotes them and their books (as well as their conferences)!  Here’s the bottom line (pun intended), C.J. is not only a pastor/athlete but a salesman!

Addition 6/13/10 – Here's a video that I believe demonstsrates very clearly the points I made in  response to Question #2.  C.J.'s Scorecard 

Thanks, Radiance, for providing the link.

 

For those of you who did not read the comment posted by “I think you exaggerate”, here’s a good portion of it:

“I do remember the very first Sunday I was there someone asked me if I homeschooled my kids. I said no, they were in public school. I did notice a ton of people homeschooled their kids and had very large families. I do honestly feel that lots of kids were almost a trophy of some sort in that church…I didn’t like that at all. There were at least two families in my small group that homeschooled their kids and the mothers were completely unqualified to do so and some of the kids were way behind in their schooling. That really did bother me. (But I’ve seen this in many other churches I’ve been in).

The pastor of this church was the authority on child rearing in SGM (then PDI). I did really feel a lot of his teaching was whacky. He was teaching people to have their kids come to their parents and tell their wrong doing and ASK for punishment. I thought that was really strange. But I could take or leave child rearing advice…I think most people do. Never felt the pressure to do that. I noticed our small group leaders doing that with their kids and it drove me nuts. We’d be sitting in a small group, their young son would come and say “Daddy, I hit my sister” and then the father would go spank him.

Eventually this pastor, the child rearing “expert”, had a daughter run away and marry an Army guy. Yep, pretty embarrassing. Except for the child rearing stuff, I really loved this guy. He was removed which I was not happy about. I didn’t see the moral failure on his daughter’s part (she was 17 I think?) as his failure. But earlier that year he had boasted from the pulpit that if one of his kids ever went astray he would step down as pastor. It was definitely put forth by SGM leadership that he was demoted for pride, not for his daughter’s sin. In truth it was probably both. She did stand before the congregation and apologize…I think the poor kid was mortified that she had cost her father his job and well over a thousand people the pastor they loved. It was actually a very touching moment and the church really hurt for her. She was well loved.

After this, I do remember Steve Shank or someone coming and apologizing to the church for the legalism that had crept in regarding child rearing. They said no SGM (then PDI) church should put pressure on people to homeschool and that people shouldn’t identify a good Christian as someone who homeschools or not. They were trying to correct this YEARS ago. Because we were pastorless for awhile, we constantly had people like Steve Shank, or Joshua Harris, or CJ Mahaney come. They were all very gifted speakers and I felt their sermons were very helpful. They spoke a lot on grace.

I grew up in an independent fundamental church and had seen a lot of abuse by authoritarian pastors who weren’t answerable to anyone. I felt that having a chain of accountability was a good thing. I certainly wasn’t used to the concept of having your pastor chosen for you. I certainly wasn’t privvy to the intimate workings of the church. I am not saying that any of the things you mention never happened. I don’t know. Again, I liked the teaching and worship so much that the way things were structured didn’t bother me or strike me as odd.

As far as not leaving an SGM church goes….I definitely remember hearing from the pulpit that if you really had to move, you should move near another SGM church. I never felt for one second that this was controlling or cult like. It was because the leaders really felt that their churches were great and that Reformed theology was the best point of view. I moved away and my SGM friends treated me totally normal and said they’d miss me. Nothing out of the ordinary. Ended up in a PCA church because the teaching was similar.

I have since only visited some SGM churches. One visit was pretty recent. It seemed a lot less charismatic than it was–almost boring.

I really feel for the most part that SGM is just fine…not perfect and alot of stuff has been blown out of proportion on this blog. Chances are people would have just as many negative things to say about the denomination the writers of this blog attend.

I can clearly remember being told in small group that at one time the church endorsed shepherding but that was bad and they were no longer doing that.

We were encouraged to buy PDI literature and music…but again, this is because they really believed that the stuff was helpful. They encouraged us probably even more to read Jerry Bridges, John Piper, RC Sproul, etc.

I really think the writers of this blog aren’t being fair to SGM.”

 

So "Exaggerate", who admittedly is now a member of a PCA church, has only "visited" some SGM churches since leaving PDI (aka SGM).  How in the world would (s)he know what really going on in Sovereign Grace Ministries?  

 

Here's my sincere question for you…  

 

After reading the personal testimony of "I think you exaggerate", do you believe I exaggerated about SGM in the previous post?

Comments

R U “UNDER CEEJ”? — 39 Comments

  1. Deb, when you guys visited the SGM church, did they have what they call the Prophecy mic? Does anyone know what that entails?

  2. And another curious thing….why does exaggerate refer to it as “PDI” Literature? Did he/she attend an SGM or was it back when it was PDI?

  3. These pastors want to be loved and made much of…They’re only human and I understand that…CJ Mahaney probably has deep insecurities…I find it strange he constantly alludes to his lack of his college education in that video. Perhaps he seeks much of his “validation” in his ministry, his gifts, and his elite peers as a result…I agree we must pray for him. I also believe leaders must be held accountable and that there should never be an atmosphere of secrecy and fear preventing people from voicing their testimonies of not-so-healthy church experiences.

  4. Yes, there was a prophecy mic. Two people got up and spoke, and from what I could tell they both read Scripture passages. I didn’t hear any prophecies.

  5. It sounds like “I think you exaggerage” was a member during the PDI days, but (s)he is still very loyal to SGM. Hmmm…..

  6. Radiance,

    I absolutely agree with you.

    As I have expressed before, my ONLY motivation for sharing this information is to help those who have been victimized by SGM and to warn unsuspecting brothers and sisters in Christ about the potential danger of getting involved in a hyper-authoritarian church. More on that in today’s post…

    I have previously seen the video you shared, and it is definitely worth watching. It’s interesting to see how these guys interact with each other.

  7. I am appalled that “I think you exaggerate” calls the parenting teaching whacky, then casually writes that people were free to take it or leave it, then spends several sentences describing how people were PRACTICING IT OPENLY!

    I think abusive is a better word than “whacky” because such a frivolous word makes light of the inherent lifelong pain such ideas cause in the children of the people who put it into practice. Later they asked for take-backs, so that makes it all right?

    I feel a kinship with “I think you exaggerate” in that I too am more than willing to overlook problems in people who are meeting MY needs. It is an all too human but not at all admirable trait. May God forgive us and cleanse our hearts from indulging in it in the future.

  8. Thanks for your input shadowspring. You are definitely getting to the heart of the problem with SGM sycophants.

    I don’t think we have any idea how many children have been abused (yes, that right – ABUSED!!!) in Sovereign Grace Ministries.

    Did you know that some SGM parents have used GLUESTICKS to discipline their children? Why? Because they doesn’t leave marks.

    When these children grow up and break free from their SGM stranglehold, I believe we’re gonna hear some horror stories.

    My heart just breaks for these little ones who are made in the image of God. May their parents develop a backbone to protect their own children against abusive leadership!

  9. I watched most of the video and once again I think people are so blinded they cannot see how they guys are actually elevating each other. It is a sad thing. And to think how many young men pay money to see men makinghefty sums to elevate each other on stage. I am just sick this sort of thing has become the norm in Christianity.

  10. Lydia,

    You may be interested to know that I’m getting my thoughts and research together for an upcoming blog post that ties in with your comment.

    The post will be appropriately called: “Multi-Level Ministry”. Look for it next Monday.

  11. Shadowsprings

    I am sick when I read how many children have been harmed by some of the tactics in SGM. I have read one too many accounts over at the survivor sites. You are right-this ain’t whacked-it downright abusive.

  12. I attended a SGM church with my mother and a friend of hers. CJ spoke that day. Honestly at the end of the intro from the head pastor of the church I was expecting nothing short of a beam of light and CJ to come out with a glowing Halo upon his head. It left me wondering… with all the praise and adoration they give CJ and co. , is there anything left for God?

  13. Lydia,
    “Yikes!” That is your response to hearing that some Christian women wore headcoverings to church? Has it occurred to you that they believe that they are being obedient to 1 Corinthians 11? I ultimately disagree with their understanding of the passage, but can’t we give them the liberty to wear headcoverings? I find your response to be extremely condescending and believe that you are guilty of the same spiritual abuse that you claim to hate so much.

  14. Scott,

    Let’s take a look at 1 Corinthians 11, shall we?

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2011&version=NKJV

    Head Coverings

    “2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. 6 For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. 10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. 12 For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God.
    13 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her[a] for a covering. 16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.”

    If you are married, does you wife take this passage literally and cover her head?

    Just curious…

  15. Scott

    Spiritual abuse by saying “yikes”? Egads, man, you have no idea of the definition of the word!!!! In fact, that statement could be considered dismissive of those who have been abused. Maybe you didn’t mean it? Please read the sad accounts of those truly abused and you may be a bit less flippant. I recommend, “The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse.” You need to get educated, fast!

    Freedom to wear a veil? Sure, you are also free to wear a burka, to cover your face, to wear sackcloth and ashes, to wear jeans up around your middy with a belt, or to wear stripes with plaids, etc.

    CS Lewis said that no one “will go to hell for believing that God has a white beard”. But, it does make for sorry theology and could lead to a statement made by Kenneth Copeland who said that God has a handbreadth of 12 inches.

    Even the Catholic church,which insisted on veils for years , has given up on it.

    The reason for concern is that it is potentially damaging to a woman who may view herself as needing to cover her head because she is more sinful than a man or must be more submissive than a man in her position before the Almighty.

  16. Deb, if you would read my comment again, I said that I ultimately disagree with those who interpret 1 Corinthians 11 to demand that they wear headcoverings. However, I believe that they are free in Christ to do so. In the same way, I disagree with those who think that the Bible mandates abstinence from alcohol, but I respect their freedom in Christ to abstain. These are what we call gray matters and we have to give Christians leeway to live out their convictions without being mocked.
    I’ll pull back on my use of the term “spiritual abuse” as I wrote that in an absolute furor over Lydia’s comments. The reason for my anger was that as much as this blog and others like it claim to look out for those who are victims of spiritual abuse, they consistently mock those who come to conclusions that are different from their own. In fact, after reading comments from Deb, Dee, and Lydia, I would argue that if you were in positions of spiritual authority, you would likely handle yourselves in the same way as the pastors that you so harshly criticize. Just look at the way that you have circled the wagons over my comments. This is just some food for thought, as I think that their is some latent bitterness that is coloring every post and comment on this blog.

  17. Great Scott, Scott

    You have just used my soon to be banned word “bitter.” It is another word used by authoritarian types in order make the person, who exposes the problem, the problem.It shows a singular lack of imagination. Might I suggest using a thesaurus so that at least you come up with a clever way to insult people. I personally like the word, mordant. Junkster appears to like absinthian.

    And Scott, we did not “circle the wagons.” I do not know Lydia, I have never met her. I have read her comments over time and I have gotten a “feel” for her concerns. for those who have been hurt.

    Finally, Scott, you contention that we would be just like abusive pastors is the same response that little children give in on a playground. “You are a meanie.” “Well so are you.”

    Once again, I recommend the book, The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse. You might see that some of your methods of communication are outlined in the book.

  18. Dee, one could argue that your communication methods are used as well. Let’s see, you don’t like hearing people described as “bitter,” so you want to ban the use of the word on your site. I noticed on another post that you mocked one of my previous comments. Also, read your responses to the people who agree with you. You have referred to people who agree with you recently as “prophetic” and “mature beyond your years.” For those of you who are keeping score at home, that is mocking and shutting down those who disagree with you and praising those who praise you. It sounds just like the very things that you are condemning in the pastors that you write about.

  19. Scott
    She is mature beyond her years. She is a teenager and you should agree with that even if you don’t agree with her statements.

    As for the word, bitter. Perhaps you haven’t read this site but we use humor frequently. We have joked about banning this word since we started this blog.

    And I am happy for those keeping score at home. If you read out blog over a longer time, you will find that we often have conversations with those who disagree with us.

    However, methinks there is more to your agenda than to simply disagree.

  20. Hmmmm — headcoverings? I attended a PDI/SGM church for over 20 years, went to multiple Celebrations and other conferences, often visited other PDI/SGM churches, and currently am in contact with many who still attend. And I can confidently say that in all those years, never once did I see anyone wearing a headcovering — except for somebody’s eccentric grandmother who turned up wearing a dramatic Spanish mantilla one day. I am in no way an SGM defender — actually, I think they’re, for the most part, nuts. But no one was ever nutty enough to preach/ teach or encourage headcovering from the pulpit.

    I’m thinking that at the church in question, those who were wearing headcoverings may have brought that tradition with them from another church culture. Once, when I visited the mothership in Gaithersburg, I noticed quite a few people dressed in native costumes from other countries, and some of these included headgear of some sort. But this would not be unusual in an area with such an international flavor as Gaithersburg, Washington,DC, and Northern Virginia.

    However, when I grew up in the Methodist church, proper church ladies always wore hats. Pure fashion — pure tradition. When I worshipped in a military chapel, a couple of ladies wore the Mennonite style caps that look like kitchen strainers, simply out of their own choice and tradition.

    So, the headcovering thing is not something I’d consider worthy of discussion in regards to SGM. However, plenty of other things ARE worth discussing. And my comment to those who allege that TWW exaggerates is this: When it comes to SGM, no exaggeration is needed. There’s plenty to be prayerfully concerned about, and you don’t have to look far beneath the surface to find it. But you will have to dig a little. You’ll have to wade through major word plays and translate lots of official answers out of SGM-ese and into plain English. Go ask some questions of your leaders. Go ask some questions of your friends who’ve finally left and are no longer under the gag order disguised as cautions against gossip/slander. How I wish it were not true. How I WISH SGM would repent, apologize, ask forgiveness, right some wrongs, and move on. They had so much going for them — how I’d love to see their vision, their ministry, their government restored! No — TWW has not exaggerated.

  21. NIckname

    Thanks for the info and kind comment.There were three ladies with coverings, all of them were under 40 and all seemed and none of them had accents. Perhaps it is part of the culture of the individual church we attended last year. This church was in NC. Glad to hear it isn’t a “thing” at all of the other churches, however.

  22. Headcovering ….

    Interesting, my home church in the UK where I grew up in the charismatic era (similar to SGM in many ways) strongly taught headcovering and abstinence from alcohol as absolute non-negotiables. Any husband whose wife didn’t cover her head in worship stood no chance of any leadership role in the church.

    The SGM church I attended in the UK scoffed at this, freedom to drink alcohol and not wear hats was seen as “grace”.

  23. Scott, My “yikes” was more in responding to the fact they most likely do not understand the Word. I have studied 1 Corin 11 in depth backwards and forwards in Greek and can agree with you that Paul was giving those women in that culture a choice. It was a tough choice because in that culture, it was considered imodest to uncover and they could be divorced by an unbelieving husband for doing so in worship.

    But why would a woman cover today? That is the big question. Does she think it makes her more Holy to cover? Is she covering like the Jews did to show her shame for sin before God? If so, then that mocks Christ and His sacrfice.

    My response was more from wondering what their understanding of the Word is. If they are covering, they are free to do so but I would hope some brother or sister who loves them would ask why and point them to the Word and explain. If they still want to cover then no problem. But stuff like this can spread like a legalistic cancer and women especially can have a false sense of being Holy because of a hat.

  24. Scott wrote: “I’ll pull back on my use of the term “spiritual abuse” as I wrote that in an absolute furor over Lydia’s comments. The reason for my anger was that as much as this blog and others like it claim to look out for those who are victims of spiritual abuse, they consistently mock those who come to conclusions that are different from their own.”

    If I have mocked, I apologize. But I find that sometimes a few think serious debate is mocking. I find this with pastors a lot who do not like being challenged at all.

    ” In fact, after reading comments from Deb, Dee, and Lydia, I would argue that if you were in positions of spiritual authority, you would likely handle yourselves in the same way as the pastors that you so harshly criticize. Just look at the way that you have circled the wagons over my comments. This is just some food for thought, as I think that their is some latent bitterness that is coloring every post and comment on this blog.”

    This could not happen because I could never be in a “position of spiritual authority”. That is reserved for Jesus Christ alone. As a matter of fact, thinking one is in a position of “spiritual authority” is the firt step to spiritual abuse. If we are really true believers, no matter what our function in the Body, we know we are lowly servants in that function.

    I have to wonder what those who believe in HUMAN “spiritual authority” understand what is the function of the Holy Spirit?

  25. Scott, My “yikes” was more in responding to the fact they most likely do not understand the Word. I have studied 1 Corin 11 in depth backwards and forwards in Greek and can agree with you that Paul was giving those women in that culture a choice. It was a tough choice because in that culture, it was considered imodest to uncover and they could be divorced by an unbelieving husband for doing so in worship.

    But why would a woman cover today? That is the big question. Does she think it makes her more Holy to cover? Is she covering like the Jews did to show her shame for sin before God? If so, then that mocks Christ and His sacrfice.

    My response was more from wondering what their understanding of the Word is. If they are covering, they are free to do so but I would hope some brother or sister who loves them would ask why and point them to the Word and explain. If they still want to cover then no problem. But stuff like this can spread like a legalistic cancer and women especially can have a false sense of being Holy because of a hat.

  26. I never praised dee or deb. Although I have in the past, not in the comment you talked about. I just made a comment about my past experience with an SGM church. Nothing more nothing less, just my humble-teenage-two cents worth opinion.

    Although I will admit I do agree with them on this subject.

  27. I went to CJ’s church from 1986-2007.

    There were a few women who wore head-coverings. I remember when Wendy Virgo came to speak a long time ago — and she said it was up to our husbands whether we covered our heads or not.

    My neighbor asked me just recently if I still attended CLC and said she had visited it recently. I told her I didn’t–and that I could not in good conscience recommend it to anyone, primarily because of the hyper-authoritarian control, extra-biblical requirements, and CBMW.

  28. Acme
    Thank you!!! I think some folks doubted what Deb and I saw during our visit. Up to our husbands whether we cover our heads or not??? My husband would never even think to ask me about this? I find it very odd that, in this day and age, this would even by a subject for discussion beyond the historical value.

    I am going to repeat you comment under the ongoing discussion about comp/egal.

  29. Actually, my husband thinks I look really cute in a cowgirl hat, but I’d never feel comfortable wearing it to church and my husband would never dream of asking me to “cover my head”.

    BTW, my wonderful hubby doesn’t “approve” my wardrobe selections either. If I’m not mistaken, I believe I read that C.J. inspects his wife’s wardrobe. Can someone confirm this?