The Presumption and Favoritism Involved in the 9 Marks View of Church Resignation

"Please accept my resignation. I don't care to belong to any club that will have me as a member." Groucho Marx link

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=11794&picture=folsom-gate

Folsom Prison

The Deebs thank Todd Wilhelm and Steve 240 for drawing our attention to this 2013 post. We believe that it offers insight into how church discipline can be a cover for abuse and hierarchical control. It is our opinion that anyone considering membership in 9 Marks and other so inclined church conglomerates should carefully think about the potential ramifications, especially when it limits the rights of Christian conscience.

In a post, When Church Discipline Is Sin, Jason Harris looks at the troubling world of contemporary church discipline by focusing on Mark Dever and his 9 Marks churches in regards to church resignation while under church discipline. For readers of TWW, it will come as no surprise that we believe the 9 Marks process is arbitrary and occasionally abusive.

The rules surrounding church discipline are ill defined.

TWW objects to most churches which claim to practice "church discipline" because, unlike the laws in the United States (relevant to Leeman's response in this post),  their system has virtually no definition for what constitutes a discipline worthy offense. For example, in the United States, you know that if you drive drunk and are caught, you will be subject to certain punishments and fines. The rules of the game have been  predefined.

In 9 Marks and other such groups, the pastor (and his handpicked leaders) decide what they will, and will not enforce, without any predefined parameters. In other words, you could be punished for any old thing they please. This can be used by used by sinful men to control the flock and this is dangerous.

Preemptive church resignation is not allowed in 9 Marks churches.

They do have one defined rule. You are not allowed to leave the church without their permission. Do you think you should be allowed to resign from a church when, and if, you are "under" church discipline? What if the church discipline is pernicious, unfair, or inappropriate. If you have signed a 9 Marks membership contract (or is that covenant?), you have signed up for their ill-defined rules and discipline. Harris quotes from Mark Dever's constitution. It is Mark Dever's constitution because he is the one who set his church, Capital Hill Baptist Church and subsequent 9 Marks churches, on this road. 

The church shall have authority to refuse a member’s voluntary resignation or transfer of membership to another church, either for the purpose of proceeding with a process of church discipline, or for any other biblical reason.

Although Harris supports church discipline (he has also not defined the parameters of discipline), he admits that it can rapidly progress from helpful to abusive. Church discipline should mean something to the recipient of said discipline. When a person chooses to reject the church, and continue to sin (if they are truly sinning which we will bring up in a minute), is making a big fat show of excommunicating them effective?

Harris' scenario

Adele and Adam have been married for 6 years and have been confessed Christians for about 3 years. Adele leaves Adam and shacks up with her new love and plans to divorce Adam.

Over the following weeks, there had been many meetings involving many within the church body begging Adele to turn things around. Finally, after many weeks of tears and prayers and visits, the elders sent an email to Adele notifying her that as the matter has been addressed many times privately and she has refused to listen, on the following Sunday evening she would be brought before the church to involve the whole congregation in seeking to draw her to repentance. 

She resigns before the meeting. Keeping this in mind, Harris begins to look at church discipline.

9 Marks believes that NOT having a big, ol' excommunication meeting to turn her over to Satan is akin to "merrily sending her on her way."

Harris disagrees and I concur.

Adele has chosen to resign from membership in the church. He explains that the church needs to continue to pray for and reach out to Adele to try to draw her back to obedience to Christ, but sadly, for now, the church had done everything in its power/authority to restore her and the relationship had been severed.

In no possible sense could this be construed as “merrily sending [Adele] on [her] way.” She is no longer counted among the membership. There has been a clear break. 

Harris says the Bible does not give authority for denying a resignation.

This is important because it indicates that much of what we accept as Biblical may simply be one guy's interpretation. And one must be aware that people who make up rules often do so to benefit their side of the story. In other words, most of these rules benefit the pastor and leadership.

The Bible says nothing explicitly about the procedures for membership in a local body.

Here is Harris' most compelling argument: Theology argues against denying resignation

Harris  is singing from the same hymnal as TWW. He claims that church leaders are also prone to serious sin, something often diligently ignored by leaders and some of the flock.

There are many reasons why a person might legitimately need to resign and move to another church and in which it is unlikely that a letter of transfer would be granted. For instance, the church may have weak or false doctrine or an unbiblical leadership structure, there may be irreconcilable doctrinal disagreement, there may be philosophical differences, a church may be in sin (such as not handling a situation biblically), a pastor may go rogue or be in unrepentant sin, etc

TWW believes that both Mark Dever and John Folmar have presided over injustices in their churches and we shall discuss this momentarily.

History argues against denying resignation.

Again, recognizing abusive churches throughout history, Harris says

Jamieson( ed. note-another 9 Marks leader) argues that Baptists have long rejected voluntary resignation. Without entering that argument in depth, it seems odd to argue based on this point since church history is dominated by an almost unending succession of abuses and misuses of disciplinary power. The Roman church used prison, torture, and execution-by-fire among their “discipline” practices. The Protestants did the same at times. It was the Baptists themselves, ironically, who often argued against such abuse of Scripture and the church’s power.

If history teaches us anything about church discipline, it is that human leaders cannot be given absolute power without being corrupted.

Harassment of former members can lead to legal involvement and public attention.

Harris says Adele became so frazzled by the unending visits and phone calls after asking them to stop, that she contacted a lawyer to help her deal with the incessant badgering. Now, the public gets involved and many people outside of the church focus on what appears to be abusive behavior. In fact, let me add that many abused people are coming to blogs to tell their stories of intimidation, including former members of 9 Marks.

Adele is not going to be won over by this activity. In fact, she will be sure to avoid the church in the future. Lawyers, judges, police, neighbors and the PTA will pass around the story and you can be sure that many of them will stay away as well. Meanwhile, the pastors and members will likely pretend that they are being "persecuted for Christ." 

Resignation and church discipline 9 Marks style

Here are two examples of how 9 Marks plays games with church discipline.

1. SGM leader, CJ Mahaney was given refuge at Mark Dever's Capital Hill Baptist Church when he bolted from his SGM church.

CJ Mahaney has long sucked up to Mark Dever, calling him "My Captain." His undying devotion earned him a perk from Mark Dever, who allowed Mahaney to hide out at Capital Hill Baptist Church when Mahaney stepped down from SGM due to sin (which he later recanted). Mahaney would never allow people to leave SGM while being involved in conflict. He agrees with Dever agreed on this point. However, it appears that such rules are only for the pew sitters, not for BFFs. 

 We wrote a post called Mark Dever-CJ Mahaney's BFF.

If you have been following the Sovereign Grace Ministries debacle, you have likely heard that C.J. Mahaney, who recently stepped down as SGM’s president, is no longer attending the “dearest place on earth” – Covenant Life Church – where he pastored for 27 years. Instead, C.J. and his wife Carolyn are worshiping at Capitol Hill Baptist Church where Mark Dever presides as senior pastor.

The lesson: if you suck up to Dever and  give him plenty of speaking engagements, you are a BFF. Then you get a pass on following their version of discipline. So, are you willing to attend a church in which the rules apply only to those who are not leaders?

2. John Folmar, 9 Marks Dubai (UCCD), refused to recognize Todd Wilhelm's right of conscience.

In My, My Dubai: 9 Marks Played Hardball, we documented the story of Todd Wilhelm, a formerly dedicated member of John Folmar's UCCD/ 9Marks church in Dubai. John Folmar is a close friend and associate of Mark Dever. As we have said, CJ Mahaney's friendship with Mark Dever bought him all sorts of perks, including having Mahaney books pushed at the UCCD bookstore. Wilhelm objected due to his concern over the sex abuse lawsuits against SGM.

When Folmar refused to consider Wilhelm's request to stop selling those books, Wilhelm, in line to be a deacon, resigned. He was told he could not resign until he joined another "approved" church. Wilhelm said he wanted his resignation accepted based on his profound disagreement with 9 Marks. 

Although Todd could have become a member of another church, he stood firm on the principle of the matter. After 6 months of writing letters, being defriended, having his emails ignored and seeing his name, week after week, appear on the membership rolls, Todd finally prevailed. You can read Movin On at his awesome blog, Thou Art the Man

"I have been told by friends who attended the membership meeting last night at the United Christian Church of Dubai that we have finally been removed from their membership roster. All  good things come to those who wait.  We have waited for 6.5 months!

That chapter in my life is now closed.  Perhaps I will write about it in detail at some point, but for the present I am happy to move on. I now have some strong opinions on what a local church should not look like, I am still formulating what it should look like. I have some thoughts on this and am trusting God to lead me to other like-minded believers."

Jonathan Leeman, a 9 Marks spokesman, responds for 9 Marks and it's a doozy

You can read the whole letter at the post. I have chosen to look at some parts of the letter.

Leeman compares church membership with citizenship in a country or an athletic contract.

 I expect you don’t apply this standard to other domains. A citizen cannot “opt out” of citizenship on the way to being arrested for committing a crime. A doctor cannot “opt out” of the medical licensing society when charges are brought for malpractice and still expect to practice medicine in some other office. An athlete cannot “opt out” of paying a fine for some penalty before the trial is complete and still expect to play. in the first example, the state would prevent him from leaving. In the second and third examples, the society would say, “Sure, you can leave, but we’re going to revoke your license/membership.” And I don’t think you would fault them for doing so, would you?

Harris responded:

Your comparison to citizenship fails on two points. First, crime is unrelated to citizenship. A foreigner who commits a crime is just as liable to prosecution. Second, a crime against the state is not parallel to a crime against the church. Our “crimes” are against God and our relationship to God is not mediated through the church. That was the error of the Roman Church.

Your comparison to a doctor fails in that a medical licensing society is hierarchically superior to any particular doctors office. There is no parallel in the church unless you deny the autonomy of the local church. This is made clear when you change the scenario to a doctor leaving one office on bad terms and then going to work at another office.

Your comparison to membership on a sports team fails in that an athlete can indeed resign and walk away as long as the offenses are private matters (vs. civil or criminal wrong) and he is willing to give up the privileges of playing for that particular team.

Leeman says the church is not a voluntary society from the standpoint of Christ's kingdom.

This is a particularly shocking claim. For some reason, Leeman believes that you lose autonomy

 You conceive of the local church as a voluntary society with no real authority.The state has no authority here. But it’s not a voluntary society from the standpoint of Christ’s kingdom The institutional church instituted by Jesus has an authority you and I as individual believers do not have (see Matt. 16 and 18).

Harris disagrees:

membership in any particular local church is entirely voluntary. 

A person can leave one local church and look for another one without in any way rejecting the authority of the local church.

According to Leeman, people act like unbelievers if they exempt themselves from church discipline.

 So when a person acts like an unbeliever by prematurely exempting themselves from the processes of discipline, ironically, they force the church to make SOME declaration. To accept the resignation is to say, “Everything is fine with this person and their profession of faith.” To deny the resignation is to say, “Everything is not fine with this person and their profession of faith. In fact, since they are refusing to cooperate and show the signs of repentance

I think this is hogwash. Todd Wilhelm was not acting like a nonbeliever when he made a stand against the 9 Marks machine. He was acting like a man of honor and courage. Herein lies the danger with the 9 Marks way.  You will be pegged as an unbeliever if you stand up to what you perceive to be an injustice. This is a travesty of the highest degree and negates this organization's claim to be gospel based. They have a rule and that rule is to be followed at all costs. How very sad and how very much like the Pharisees.

Leeman claims that by accepting a resignation, it  is akin to saying everything is fine with said person's profession of faith.

To accept the resignation is to say, “Everything is fine with this person and their profession of faith.” To deny the resignation is to say, “Everything is not fine with this person and their profession of faith. In fact, since they are refusing to cooperate and show the signs of repentance, for integrity and honesty’s sake, we must remove our affirmation of their profession.” To choose the latter, as I see it, is not coercive; it’s just being honest. And the church doesn’t want to be in this situation;

To accept a resignation is not the same thing as saying everything is hunky dory. Resignations in every part of our society are often due to a disagreement with a company or an organization. It does not mean that the person was a great employee. It simply means the relationship is now severed. That person no longer represents that company in any fashion.

Also, a person who refuses to participate in church discipline does not mean that the person is not a Christian or even acting like a non-Christian. In fact, their actions could be considered the height of Christian bravery as they stand against injustice. Also, Leeman would have to label Mahaney and Dever as acting like non-Christians, since they avoided the very process that they claim to support. 9 Marks believes that they have the "authority" to declare who is, and is not, a member of God's kingdom link.

But, strictly speaking, I would argue that the exercise of the keys is the pronouncing of a judgment. It is a legal or judicial binding or loosing. It is a church’s decision about what constitutes a right confession and who is a true confessor.

In other words, the keys are put into practice whenever

a church decides upon a confession of faith that will bind all church members,
a church admits a member,
a church excludes a member. 

The holder of the keys—the church—is being called upon to assess a person’s life and profession of faith and then to make a heavenly sanctioned and public pronouncement affirming or denying the person’s citizenship in the kingdom and inclusion in the church

Leeman thinks the word "persecution" is strange in regards to this process.

You used the language of “persecution,” and while I agree churches can, in principle, persecute, it strikes me as strange, perhaps overwrought, to quickly jump to such language. Might I compare this situation to my wife insisting on a divorce, my refusing, and her saying that I’m “persecuting” her by refusing? 

Leeman is studiously ignoring the 9 Matks treatment of Todd Wilhelm's situation which was despicable and, in my opinion, a form of persecution. Go after Todd and protect Mahaney- what an example of a strange gospel™.

Leeman sticks his head in the sand and assumes his version of "the process" will restore an individual.

 I fear you might be taking away the very tool that Jesus and Paul would give to the church so that it might do good for the sinner. Paul says to hand the man over to Satan so that his soul might be saved. 

Leeman is making a jump. In fact, the very process could prevent a person from returning to the church for assistance. Back in the early church, survival was often dependent on the good works of the church. Christ followers shared food and shelter. To be removed from the fellowship was quite difficult. Today, it is quite the opposite. Disciplining a member will often have little effect on the life of that person. They can move on quite easily. 

Harris comments:

You seem to be suggesting that when someone runs from the church, we have to pull them back in and then throw them back out. The passage you quote (1 Cor 5) deals with someone in open sin who is “among you.” Paul tells them to throw him out because he wasn’t running! He was hanging out IN the church, in good standing, as if everything were ok. In that case, yes, you do have to throw them out. But to twist this to suggest that we have to run after them, pull them back in just so we can ceremonially throw them back out is deeply immature at best and abusive at worst.

I would propose that a quieter process could be far more effective. I saw that occur in the following true story which took place when I was a member of Bent Tree Bible Fellowship.

A man left his wife and moved in with his new love. He was told, quietly,  he could no longer be a member of the church but that he was deeply cared about by the church. none of this was ever "made public." Decent elders and pastors spent time, visiting him off and on, with his permission, through the course of the year. A year later, the man decided he had made a mistake and began a process, with the help of the church which had maintained a kind relationship with him, of reconciliation with his wife. Two years later, they got up in front of the church and told their story. You could have heard a pin drop. 

Let's see, which scenario was more effective in restoring the person into the church? Was it the haranguing of Adele or the careful approach of Bent Tree Bible? 

Leeman claims you must go to another church if you think you church is abusive.

But don’t churches make mistakes, or become abusive and unhealthy? Of course they do (that’s why Jamieson does what he does); so do parents and teachers and courts and police officers. But each of these still have the ability to discipline. What protection is there against wrong decisions and genuinely abusive churches? You go to another church!

Let's take a look at Todd's situation. Todd resigned from the church in good conscience. He rejected the "9 Marks loves Mahaney club" because he cares deeply for the abused. He could not stay in the church any longer. He gave up his position in the church for something far greater. Todd is also a thinking man. He is not willing to willy nilly join another church just to be in a church so 9 Marks will "let him go." But he could no longer in good conscience attend UCCD. 

Todd is one of my heroes. He is also a hero to those who have been hurt by the SGM system. I am fielding emails from people who want to meet him when he is in the States in order to thank him for making his stand half way around the world. 9 Marks lost a wonderful church member who truly cares about the "least of these." 

Here are two comments on the post that are important as we close this discussion. 

Todd Wilhelm

Thanks for writing this article Jason. I have lived through the abuse you have described. As a member of a 9Marks church in Dubai I chose to resign my membership for issues of conscience. 6 1/2 months after I submitted my email to the elders I was removed from their membership roster. Nobody in church leadership had the decency to tell me of this, although they had no problems badgering me in the interim!

Paul Petry (Former Mars Hill pastor who was thrown under the bus by Mark Driscoll link

“I believe this 9 Marks-promoted teaching on church discipline is dangerous and needs to be addressed.”

Unfortunately, the teaching has infected church organizations worldwide, and the persons in leadership who put those dangerous teachings into practice are in most cases not as mild-mannered and humble as Mark Dever – and there is the danger. His teachings, in the hands of ruthless CEO-type “lead pastors”, have left behind a trail of broken lives and wounded sheep – or as one well-known leader has boasted, “a pile of dead bodies” behind the bus.

Jason Harris' post is prophetic in light of the many instances of abusive church discipline with which we have been acquainted. Jonathan Leeman, albeit polite and kind in his response to Harris, is either naive about the potential for abusive legalism inherent in his system or is deliberately overlooking the documented problems because he believes that 9 Marks is playing by gospel™ rules. 

Lydia's Corner: Amos 1:1-3:15 Revelation 2:1-17 Psalm 129:1-8 Proverbs 29:19-20

Comments

The Presumption and Favoritism Involved in the 9 Marks View of Church Resignation — 193 Comments

  1. On the other hand; at most churches ( Catholic, Protestant etc.,) if you’re involved in sexual perversion and the church finds out; the quicker you leave, the happier the church leadership is.
    *
    “Whew, he has resigned and that particular problem is no longer ours. Let some other church deal with it.”

  2. What are the alternatives to signing membership contracts? Do 9 Marks churches and the like insist you have to or they won’t let you past the doors?

  3. These uber-discipline churches do not sound like they want restoration of anybody. They sound like they want revenge. That would be revenge, not for some particular sin the person may have done, but revenge for defying the pastoral system itself. Letting any one pastor or any pastoral team get that much authority/control over the congregation while they themselves are answerable to nobody does not look like it is working too well. Too bad. For a while there “back in the day” bapto-world was better than that. That would be in pre-neo-puritan days.

  4. @ Nancy:
    Actually they sound more like the inquisition of old. Get the confession of sin out of them even if we have to kill them.

  5. Can we discuss Leeman’s analogy of refusing his wife’s request for divorce? Because… um, no. It is not legitimate for him to “refuse” her if she asks for a divorce. And the fact that he thinks it is illuminates something about his character and way of thinking.

  6. What’s next? A Berlin Wall with toe-poppers, bouncing bettys, and machine-gun nests?

    “We never had to build a wall to keep our people in!”
    — JFK at the Berlin Wall

  7. CJ Mahaney has long sucked up to Mark Dever, calling him “My Captain.” His undying devotion earned him a perk from Mark Dever…

    The honor of being Dever’s human shield in the event of an assassination attempt?

  8. I have a pastor friend who was disciplined by his elders because he got in a fist-fight with his 18 year old son out on the street – no damage to either the pastor nor his son but the elders felt it was unseemly for the senior pastor to be involved in a public altercation with his 18 year old. The pastor was restored after a few months.

  9. I’ve had two friends who were elders at different churches; disagreed with the their respective pastor and he put them under church discipline. It appeared, that the pastors were both rather lacking in maturity or Godly confidence and felt they had to use their position to punish their disagreeing elders. Neither of the elders had a reputation for being trouble makers.

  10. I never have understood why anyone would be a part of a church that applies discipline. I guess I just do not trust church leaders to be fair.

  11. “You seem to be suggesting that when someone runs from the church, we have to pull them back in and then throw them back out. …..(T)o suggest that we have to run after them, pull them back in just so we can ceremonially throw them back out is deeply immature at best and abusive at worst.”

    Note that, almost nine months later, Leeman still hasn’t responded to Harris’s excellent point here.

  12. While I do believe that the membership practices of 9Marks do not hold up under any kind of logical or ethical scrutiny, that is not my primary concern. My primary concern is that this organization tries to pretend that their methods are endorsed – if not mandated – by Scripture. I thought in this post-Harold-Camping universe that thinking Christians everywhere rejected proof-texting? And then there is the rather disturbing realization that of all the “marks” that a “healthy” church is supposed to exhibit, simple things like exhibiting the fruit of the spirit are absent. Which of course stems from yet another philosophical-intellectual fail: the presumption that methods make results.

  13. Thanks for your kind words Dee. I look forward to meeting people I have become friends with through your blog. This was a very well composed and written post, the sort I would write if I had your skill set!

    My situation at UCCD was rather minor compared to several other travesties of justice I have witnessed there. At least I got out without being excommunicated!

    Dee and Deb know the facts about a friend of mine who quit because he no longer believed the way UCCD conducted “church” was biblical. He preferred to meet with like-minded believers in a home church setting. This friend is a truly humble man, not the C.J. Mahaney brand of humility, and he simply desired to quietly go his way. He wrote the elders an email informing them of his resignation. What happened from that point on can be described as nothing less than heavy-handed abuse by the senior pastor, the end result basically being “you can’t quit, you’re excommunicated.” The whole elder board, as is generally the case, rubber-stamped the senior pastor’s decision without even interviewing my friend to hear his side of the story. It seems to me when church leadership undertakes such a solemn action they, as a minimum, should offer the individual involved a chance to address the board in one of their meetings. These men, charged with caring for the believers of the church, abrogated their duty and participated in a gross miscarriage of justice. IMO their actions should disqualify them from the eldership.

    As you mentioned in your post the 9Marks disciplinary procedure rarely results in a member being restored to their church. I can only recall one such case at UCCD where this happened. I believe that the day will come when enough christians wake up to the travesty of these “contracts on the membership” that 9Marks will be forced to abandon them. The sad thing is that in the interim many people will continue to be hurt through this abuse and may never return to a church of any kind.

  14. Nancy wrote:

    These uber-discipline churches do not sound like they want restoration of anybody. They sound like they want revenge. That would be revenge, not for some particular sin the person may have done, but revenge for defying the pastoral system itself. Letting any one pastor or any pastoral team get that much authority/control over the congregation while they themselves are answerable to nobody does not look like it is working too well. Too bad. For a while there “back in the day” bapto-world was better than that. That would be in pre-neo-puritan days.

    It’s all about control Dr. Nancy. One person/family get out of what the church sees as ” wrong” we’ll come down hard on them…..keeps the rest of the church family ” in line.”

  15. @ Caitlin:

    We do have something called a contested divorce in my state. That is, nobody has to just agree to an uncontested divorce if there are reasons to contest (and money to pay the lawyers.) And we are a no-fault state. Maybe that is what he had in mind.

  16. You know what I think is also happening. I would suggest that Mark Dever and Jonathan Leeman are redefining “God”. Their God is Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., or any other approved “local church” And unless you grovel at their feet and kiss the ground that Dever steps on…then you’re not in a “healthy church.”

    I guess that means that money and fame is the guiding factor. One must pucker up and brown-nose pretty hard. Who knows if any of us pucker up and do some serious brown nosing…we still might find CJ Mahaney practicing “Gospel Centered Brown-nosing”

  17. @ K.D.:

    Could something like this happen in Texas? Hollywood has led us to believe there is right much rootin and tootin in Texas. Hard to see such a thing being done to Texans.

  18. Nancy wrote:

    @ K.D.:
    Could something like this happen in Texas? Hollywood has led us to believe there is right much rootin and tootin in Texas. Hard to see such a thing being done to Texans.

    Dr. Nancy, not only can it happen in places like Dallas, or Houston or San Antonio, it happens. Many people even in rural areas are scared to death of being ostracized by their church….now there’s people like me who would wear it as a badge of horn, but Texas is just like the the rest of the nation, oh sure people are gun nuts, and vote GOP without thinking, but so many people do anything just to be part of the crowd….
    It’s sort of like high school…. :/

  19. So is that a form of sexuality? Nasal a**l in***co**se? Is that what gets these discipline extremist pastors excited?

  20. Oh boy, I have huge problems with this issue. My own former pastor pulled the church discipline card and excommunicated us (even though we were never members according to the church’s bylaws).

    To accept the resignation is to say, “Everything is fine with this person and their profession of faith.” To deny the resignation is to say, “Everything is not fine with this person and their profession of faith. In fact, since they are refusing to cooperate and show the signs of repentance, for integrity and honesty’s sake, we must remove our affirmation of their profession.” To choose the latter, as I see it, is not coercive; it’s just being honest. And the church doesn’t want to be in this situation;

    They are saying that both church membership and church resignation is a salvation issue. This is important.

    To sign up and be an official church member, you have to be a Believer. So now they are stretching that even further to say that if you as a church member resign from their church, and they don’t approve or see repentance, they will not affirm your faith. Whoa, Nellie.

    I read these stories time and again and it still boggles my mind the sense of entitlement and ownership these church leaders think they have over people, yet when they want to resign, the rules change for them. Hmm…

  21. (minor editing to clarify who said what)

    @ Nancy:

    Leeman said:

    "You used the language of “persecution,” and while I agree churches can, in principle, persecute, it strikes me as strange, perhaps overwrought, to quickly jump to such language. Might I compare this situation to my wife insisting on a divorce, my refusing, and her saying that I’m “persecuting” her by refusing?"

    I would actually say yes in some circumstances. notwithstanding that there are good reasons to let someone contest a divorce request. lets say one of those wonderful pastors were abusing his wife or child and the wife wanted to divorce, but the wonderful pastor wouldn't want that because it would ruin his ministry and his reputation and so yes I can see one 'persecuting' her constantly not only refusing the divorce but haranguing her into staying with him at any cost. its the fine line of intent I think that makes 9marks and (driscoll, who used to recommend dever books a lot) that makes these men not obvious to the church in their sins. in this instance they take church discipline and twist it to mean exactly what your article shows, discipline for the members that they don't agree with and never for themselves. church discipline is made to appear the issue and then people can discuss proper church discipline and that takes away from the actual issue. Thank heavens this leeman guy does such a horrible job of interpreting church discipline that it should be obvious to any real Christian that 9marks is abusive and way out of line. very thankful that mr Wilhelm was steadfast enough to let this all be brought to the Light in the open instead of going away quietly

  22. At least here in the USA, here’s something the 9 Marks people absolutely had better keep in mind: being a member of a church is a voluntary thing. If a person resigns, that means that person is not a member from the moment the resignation hits the mailbox. Consequently, any disciplinary action against him/her had better STOP IMMEDIATELY. Failure to do this could leave you open to a lawsuit if the discipline is for something mushy but tortious (as in “hello lawsuit!”) in nature. I’m reminded that back in the 1980s, a guy here in Arizona wanted out of the Mormon church and had to go to court just to resign his membership. Not because he’d violated any rules, but because he just didn’t want to be a member anymore! He didn’t want to be excommunicated because in his town, being exed was the social kiss of death. The lawsuit got settled and the Mormon church now has a well-established resignation procedure.

    So, to take the above example: It’s not Adam and Adele and then Adele leaves Adam for another guy and is openly living with that guy, but it’s Adele who’s had enough of Adam and she moves in with Stephanie to share the bills. Hinting around that Adele and Stephanie have an “improper relationship” to the church when the reality is rather different could leave the church open to a lawsuit for trying to besmirch Adele’s reputation (slander). Hinting to Adele’s elderly mother that Adele may burn in hell if she doesn’t repent and come back into full fellowship could be intentional infliction of emotional distress. Need I go on?

    Seriously, the moment Pastor Rev. High Muckety-Muck gets a resignation letter, he should send it over to his membership person and have that person’s name removed immediately. And then not say a darn word about that person again, except to confirm he/she attended there at some point AND NOTHING FURTHER. You know, rather like how employers will only confirm that you worked for them once you’ve moved on to bigger and better things. But some pastors are power hungry people and they love the control that having a membership requirement gives them. They’re just walking lawsuits waiting to happen.

    tl;dr: If a church receives a member resignation, process it and let the person go.

  23. speaking of Australia, more are coming to straighten out your doctrine!

    Acts 29 Conference: Australia
    Date: Friday, August 29, 2014 – Saturday, August 30, 2014

  24. I think church membership/ church discipline is very, very tricky. My current church doesn’t have a membership roll so there is no follow up when someone leaves. The downside of this is that those who attend have little influence and deacons and other leaders are chosen by the pastors. The only time anyone was asked to leave was when some families became involved in a movement with worrying theology and used the church as a recruiting ground. Many meetings and personal appeals were held before they were asked to leave. It was awful as the vitriol directly at the church was vicious and had a profound effect. I wish the members had more say in what happens, the pastors were influenced by pastors from the USA who believed” the kingdom of God is not a democracy ” . On the other hand I also saw the toll it took on the pastors when those they asked to leave launched a vitriolic, public campaign against them and their families. I don’t live in a part of Europe with many choices of churches so despite my concerns about the lack of influence of those who attend the church I remain involved.

  25. It seems that the rule makers just like to PLAY CHURCH and make the rules up and change them again when it suits them- ‘Hard on the weak and weak on the strong’. Not very Jesus like but very Herod like! Ezek 34 comes to mind.

  26. sam h wrote:

    please continue prayers for Washington state wildfires. terrible firestorms last night even going right through a town, but no one was killed or injured. and the church in the middle of the destruction is still standing in a town called pateros! thanks

    Thanks for the update Sam. I lived in Wenatchee for a few years. I attended a Bible college in Monitor. I have friends in Wenatchee, Cashmere and Dryden. Dryden is quite close to Leavenworth. My wife was raised in Wenatchee and currently visiting her sister in the Seattle area. It is a beautiful area. Praying for the fires to be brought under control and the safety of all.

  27. What kills me about this entire situation is the *arbitrariness* of it. Over a decade ago, I was in a very similar situation to Todd WRT a 9Marks church. After skirmishing with the church’s elders over some issues, I decided I’d had enough and wanted to go back to my old church. They let me go with hardly any fuss.

    Then again, perhaps my example fits into a larger pattern. If you commit one of the “unpardonable” sins – or you are close to the leadership – these rules apply in full. If you are one of the “peons” (especially in a Big church), you can leave quietly without a problem…

  28. @ sam h:

    I did not say that. I did say something about contested divorce being possible in my state. But what you have done is put somebody else’s words under my name as a quote. I don’t know how you did that with a computer, but it was a garbled thing. Just wanted to clear that up.

  29. Nancy wrote:

    “the church is not a democracy”

    They must be superconfident then, the pastors who say this. Because they’re right, the Kingdom of God is not a democracy. It’s very much a kingdom. You know what the last king of kings did to appointed leaders who didn’t do things the way he wanted them done? Chopped them up into bitty pieces. Sure, that was Xerxes, but let’s not forget that. In a non-democracy, bad leaders aren’t just voted out.

  30. mirele wrote:

    At least here in the USA, here’s something the 9 Marks people absolutely had better keep in mind: being a member of a church is a voluntary thing. If a person resigns, that means that person is not a member from the moment the resignation hits the mailbox. Consequently, any disciplinary action against him/her had better STOP IMMEDIATELY. Failure to do this could leave you open to a lawsuit if the discipline is for something mushy but tortious (as in “hello lawsuit!”) in nature. I’m reminded that back in the 1980s, a guy here in Arizona wanted out of the Mormon church and had to go to court just to resign his membership. Not because he’d violated any rules, but because he just didn’t want to be a member anymore! He didn’t want to be excommunicated because in his town, being exed was the social kiss of death. The lawsuit got settled and the Mormon church now has a well-established resignation procedure.

    So, to take the above example: It’s not Adam and Adele and then Adele leaves Adam for another guy and is openly living with that guy, but it’s Adele who’s had enough of Adam and she moves in with Stephanie to share the bills. Hinting around that Adele and Stephanie have an “improper relationship” to the church when the reality is rather different could leave the church open to a lawsuit for trying to besmirch Adele’s reputation (slander).

    We had something like this happen in a local church some years ago. I don’t know if a lawsuit was ever filed but a long newspaper article resulted and it did not reflect well on the church’s new spiritually abusive pastor.

    A couple in the church was having problems. I believe that the wife was really unhappy about how her husband was treating her but the details weren’t made public. The husband resented the moral support his wife’s best friend, another church member, was providing her so he went to the pastor and accused them of being lovers. Both denied this but the pastor believed the husband and denounced the women from the pulpit.

    This lovely story and many others were covered in the newspaper. Another was that the pastor had decided to limit attendance at his church’s associated school to the children of church members. The school was quite large and attracted children from families who attended other area churches in the same denomination. These additional students were not a burden on the congregation since all paid tuition but expelling so many students did cause financial problems since economies of scale were lost. The decision was unpopular enough but then the pastor kicked out a little boy in his congregation who was being raised by his grandparents (long time church members) because of the death of one parent and the dysfunction of another. He said since the surviving parent wasn’t a church member, he didn’t want the child in the school.

    This was the first time I had heard of this kind of spiritual abuse from a controlling pastor. I remember wondering why the church deacons allowed this behavior.

  31. mirele wrote:

    back in the 1980s, a guy here in Arizona wanted out of the Mormon church and had to go to court just to resign his membership. Not because he’d violated any rules, but because he just didn’t want to be a member anymore! He didn’t want to be excommunicated because in his town, being exed was the social kiss of death. The lawsuit got settled and the Mormon church now has a well-established resignation procedure.

    Since Jonathan Leeman and Mark Dever are going to imitate LDS policy I wonder what is coming next? Will we see an article on the 9 Marks Blog about how to teach submission to ALL 9 of your wives! 😛

  32. mirele wrote:

    But some pastors are power hungry people and they love the control that having a membership requirement gives them. They’re just walking lawsuits waiting to happen.

    Nope. I think there’s a class at SBTS called “How to Evade Legal Responsibility 101.” They leave NO paper trail, and the only witnesses are their lackeys in the star chamber. Of course, it’s all for the sake of church unity and to defend the honor of Jesus Christ.

    If you’d like a few grins, this is the extent of the written documentation (other than my own, which didn’t count) the church produced during my excommunication, see here: http://ikissedchurchgoodbye.org/cornerstones-correspondance-to-me/

  33. Caitlin wrote:

    They must be superconfident then, the pastors who say this. Because they’re right, the Kingdom of God is not a democracy. It’s very much a kingdom.

    And these MenaGAWD see themselves as High King by Divine Right.

    You know what the last king of kings did to appointed leaders who didn’t do things the way he wanted them done? Chopped them up into bitty pieces.

    Again, these MenaGAWD see themselves as the one who wields the chopper.

  34. Janet Varin wrote:

    Nope. I think there’s a class at SBTS called “How to Evade Legal Responsibility 101.” They leave NO paper trail, and the only witnesses are their lackeys in the star chamber. Of course, it’s all for the sake of church unity and to defend the honor of Jesus Christ.

    Ah, Russian/Soviet bureaucratic tradition:

    Plausible Deniability — “If nothing’s written down, It Never Happened and You Can’t Ever Prove It Did!”

    All for the sake of The People(TM), of course.

  35. Eagle wrote:

    Since Jonathan Leeman and Mark Dever are going to imitate LDS policy I wonder what is coming next? Will we see an article on the 9 Marks Blog about how to teach submission to ALL 9 of your wives! 😛

    Well, in SCRIPTURE the Patriarchs had Harems of Plural Wives….

    (i.e. same argument as Joseph Smith.)

  36. Marsha wrote:

    This was the first time I had heard of this kind of spiritual abuse from a controlling pastor. I remember wondering why the church deacons allowed this behavior.

    You mean Pastor’s hand-picked Yes Men?

    Like the pastor-clones lined up behind Polishing-the-Shaft Schaapf like Flip Wilson’s “Church of What’s Happening Now”?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr0UpQXYkGs

  37. And I did link Joshua Harris’ excellent article (When Church Discipline is Sin) when I published my blog, so I know my former elders are aware of its content, but it obviously doesn’t apply to THEM.

    I also made Mark Dever and Jonathan Leeman aware of the 9 Marks stamp of approval my former pastor gave to the partial, unjust and dishonest “biblical church discipline” that was so harmful to my son and me. Their responses? Let’s just say I think there’s a train of thought that if you don’t respond, you can claim you never got the message.

  38. Really all Jonathan Leeman and Mark Dever have created is a New Caste System. Its like the one in India. The members in the churches are the nww Dalits, and the Pastors and Elders above them are above approach. They can do whatever they want and they can get away with it. The new Dalits have to come to terms with being the untouchables. That’s why Mark Dever can BS his way through the 9 Marks and not apply it it to CJ Mahaney. I mean has Jonathan Leeman ever stopped to consider all the 9 Marks that were violated in letting CJ Mahaney hide behind Mark Dever’s skirt? Let’s look at these for a second.

    Leadership = Mark Dever committed an EPIC fail in his inability to stand up to CJ and instead welcomed him in. I find it amusing for a movement that speaks about the role of men and how they lead. Mark Dever can’t lead a bunch of wussies into a Starbucks if need be. If Mark Dever actually practiced what he preached he’d tell CJ Mahaney, “Get your ass out of here and go back to Covenant Life Church” Here’s another thing will Dever ever repent? Nope, nada, zip…just like Mark Driscoll, CJ Mahaney, etc… being a celebrity pastor means you don’t have to repent.

    Discipleship – Another fail by Mark Dever. If Dever told Mahaney to go back to CLC he actually could have helped practice discipleship. Instead by welcoming him to CHBC he removed Mahaney from any kind of discipleship that would have taken place at CLC.

    Discipline – Whoops…there’s another essential part of 9 Marks that you can use as toilet paper! By taking in Mahaney he allowed CJ to flee church discipline at CLC. What does that show about discipline? It doesn’t apply if its your best friend. Aaaawww isn’t that cute….CJ and Dever act like corrupt third world African dictators scratching each other’s back.

    Membership- Well Mark Dever allowed CJ to flee CLC and violate his membership. Did CJ transfer his membership? Nope…Did Dever request that CJ transfer his membership to CHBC? Nope…Did Dever require CJ Mahaney to become a member of CHBC? Nope…

    Evangelism- Well if you are going to evangelize the 9 Marks you can forget it!I have already proven how 9 Marks is unnecessary in the sense that Mark Dever already violated 4 alone. I guess with that, it means that its now 5 that are violated.

    The Gospel- Depending on how the Gospel is defined than its high likely that this part of 9 Marks was violated as well. Oops….

    Biblical Theology- Well since you teach that church membership is Biblical and mandate it by church covenants and all…. well that means you’re undermining your version of Biblical theology. Oops…

    So already it looks like Mark Dever violated 9 parts of the 9 Marks in letting CJ Mahaney flee CHBC.

    Jonathan Leeman can you tell me what is the purpose of 9 Marks especially if Mark Dever violated 7 or the 9 Marks.

  39. Eagle wrote:

    Since Jonathan Leeman and Mark Dever are going to imitate LDS policy I wonder what is coming next? Will we see an article on the 9 Marks Blog about how to teach submission to ALL 9 of your wives!

    I guess we’ll start seeing uppity wimmins getting the left foot of fellowship a la Kate Kelly, who was excommunicated last month. But John Dehlin, a priesthood holder and probably far more influential, has so far been able to ward off excommunication, and he’s pretty much not a believer in a lot of the Mormon special doctrines.

  40. Just to reiterate to readers: If you’re in the United States of America, religious affiliation is voluntary. If you want to resign, think about it, make sure that’s what you want to do, and then write your letter. The moment it hits the mailbox, that’s it. If you want to see how former Mormons go about it, there are websites dedicated to telling you how to write resignation letters which I’m sure can be adapted.

    Or you can be like a friend of mine, stay in, start up a website and identify all the donors to California’s Yes on Proposition 8 and still keep her membership nearly six years later.

  41. @ Eagle:

    There are already people advocating polygamy, program(s) on TV that present it in an adequately favorable light, and fairly large and recognizable groups with a history of (or teachings of) polygamy. There is no way that this is not going to be an issue. And, the bible does not specifically forbid polygamy except for certain church leaders.

    I am thinking that this will be presented as a religious freedom issue and as a utilitarian idea to deal with unmarried women who want children but do not want to go it alone and argument will be made about the increased economic stability of a larger unit. Some people who are really into patriarchy will jump at the idea, even if not for themselves, and arguments will be made that children need a father as well as a mother. Once gay marriage is legal nation wide, and more christian denominations get on board with that, the backlash may look at polygamy as “at least better than that” and if you allow one why not the other, and join the cause, or at least not oppose it. Some have already said that in this nation we already have polyamory and that polygamy is just one more aspect of that. Do we or do we not already have sexual slavery in some of the prostitution business, and are not some women living in circumstances which resemble concubinage in some respects (long time mistress to a married lover.) Is not the divorce rate among christians a matter of concern for some? In light of that, the fact that we already have made peace with all this, arguments against polygamy could get very difficult.

    I am thinking that we may legalize prostitution, say live and let live (don’t ask don’t tell) about heterosexual sin within the church (which is basically what we do now) and make peace with polygamy, all the while bemoaning the condition of the nation.

    Sign up now for my class in cynicism 101.

  42. Nancy, I hope we never legalize polygamy!

    One problem with polygamy is that it is usually practiced as polygyny alone. It is extremely dysfunctional to have an excess number of young unmarried men in a society; crime, violence, and social unrest go way up.

    Personally, I think polygamy is its own punishment. Imagine having to support more than a dozen children and keep multiple spouses happy!

  43. Eagle wrote:

    Really all Jonathan Leeman and Mark Dever have created is a New Caste System. Its like the one in India. The members in the churches are the nww Dalits, and the Pastors and Elders above them are above approach.

    Isn’t the top of the Hindu Cast System the Brahmins (Priests)?

  44. Having once been in a very good SBC church that went to this “covenant membership thing” after I had been a member about 7 years, I can tell you “resigning” means these preachers will send your name IN ADVANCE to other local SBC churches that you are a troublemaker or are doctrinally “liberal” or some such nonsense. (I had the nerve to question, in business meeting, spending 1/4 million on a roof of a building we had planned to tear down in 2 years. We got the roof but cancelled the tear down. I became pastor’s arch enemy number one, and was called a liberal heretic from the pulpit. For the record, many years later he repented.)

    But here is a little secret: several of us had great success simply not resigning at all, joining some non SBC church for a time and requesting our former church not be notified (they understand what is happening), then quietly later transferring from that church by statement to an SBC church. You know, the “I used to be SBC and was baptized over at 1st Church but I’ve been UMC for a few years and want to come home now.” By that time the new church has gotten to know you as a good person and the tripe thrown by the first SBC church won’t stick.

    Just saying. If you have the option of a good SBC in your area, that is.

  45. Marsha wrote:

    One problem with polygamy is that it is usually practiced as polygyny alone. It is extremely dysfunctional to have an excess number of young unmarried men in a society; crime, violence, and social unrest go way up.

    That’s what raiding the next tribe over (and it’s big brother Wars of Conquest) are for. The single young men go off to war, kill the Other’s men, pillage their stuff to increase their wealth & status, take women to start their own harems (as befits one of higher wealth & status), and the body count among the young men also eases the problem.

  46. U.S. courts have held that the first amendment’s guarantees of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly include in them freedom of association (which includes the freedom for an individual to determine with whom they will and will not associate). I suppose a church that wanted to refuse someone the right to withdraw membership could claim that they are bound by higher laws than those of the U.S. constitution, but I doubt that claim would shield the church from the legal consequences of its actions.

    The question that remains for me is, under what circumstances is church discipline / excommunication appropriate? Perhaps it is easier to say (like this article and most of the comments) what we don’t think a church should do (or be able to do) than to say what i can and should do. It isn’t like there is no biblical basis for the ideas of church discipline or excommunication. So what can we agree are the circumstances and manner in which it is appropriately practiced?

  47. I’m so happy my family never actually joined the PCA church we attended for three years. I don’t know what would have happened after the mini-dustup we had with the pastor that caused us to leave. As it was we weren’t members, so they couldn’t chase us down or some such nonsense. Not sure if they would have really done that; I hope not. Thankfully that church has a new pastor now and seems to be moving in a healthier direction.

  48. Junkster wrote:

    The question that remains for me is, under what circumstances is church discipline / excommunication appropriate?

    If you take a look at the one main incident that Paul talks about in Corinthians, the man was sleeping with his mother in in law and claiming, along with the church at Corinth, that this was allowable under the new freedom in Christ.

    In this instance, a pretty over the top sin was accompanied by justification via Scripture-a twisted tale. And the church agreed. Heresy was in the making. This wasn’t a simple sin.

    This is a far cry from most instances of church discipline that we read about today. I believe that each church should spell out examples of sins and how they will deal with it. If discipline is limited to over the top examples, as found in Corinthians, then it would not be such a hard task.

    However, methinks they do not wish to do this because they want to go after church members who irritate them. So, they leave open the whole panoply of sins for possible excommunication.This is unbiblical. (if they can use it, so can I.) I will never sign a “covenant/contract” unless the discipline is spelled out clearly- what for and when.

  49. Dee–I think that not signing the covenant started my whole trip into la la land. I figured transferring my membership in good standing from the previous out of state church had been good enough when I joined. I saw no need to “renew” my membership by signing the covenant.

  50. Junkster wrote:

    The question that remains for me is, under what circumstances is church discipline / excommunication appropriate?

    And a good question too.

    My answer is: in the first place, when it is truly conducted by the church. “Church discipline” has no authority when it is carried out by an isolated subset of believers who have rejected any assembling together with believers who do not share their own preferences regarding doctrine or polity. The trouble is that, of course, that is just what many local churches are, and certainly that is just what any “church” that insists on membership covenants (let alone “non-compete clauses”, which is a different matter entirely) is.

    I accept that one has to be just a little realistic here. When a professing believer persistently flouts what the church worldwide has practiced or taught for centuries, or tries to turn the local church into their own private fiefdom, then common sense has to prevail. When a man wants to sleep with his stepmother, or denies the resurrection, or declares that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh, or declares that Jesus is not Lord, then he cannot continue to help himself to the comforts of church membership.

    I also accept that I might not always like what seems common sense to you. So really, church discipline should involve a variety of different congregations locally. This would at least make it harder for kangaroo courts to damage individuals.

    But any congregational leader who expels a believer for questioning his authority, thereby declares himself a factional and divisive man who wants to separate believers according to their loyalty to him.

  51. In other news, as we returned from our family holiday in Mayrhofen this morning, my Austrian flag has once again become a Union flag (often wrongly referred to as a “Union Jack”).

  52. What can 9Marks possibly do to force you to stay? Sue you for unpaid membership balanaces? There’s no way that’d hold up in court. Simply leave them and head for any traditionalist Anglican, or conservative mainline parish and you’ll be received as a full member with minimal hassle. This should apply even in most parishes of denominations that 9Marks infects, such as the PCA and the SBC. For traditionalist presbyterians, Eco also offers a somewhat viable alternative to the PCA. There are very many good churches out there that don’t torture their parishioners in the manner proscribed by 9Marks. I myself of course have a huge bone to pick with 9Marks, which I mentioned in a previous comment, that being their endorsement of Islamic persecution of Catholic and Orthodox Christians in the middle east on the grounds of being “fornicating, image-worshipping drunks,” which given the fact that as of today Mosul has no Christians left, is utterly reprehensible.

  53. @ William G.:

    Will…I think you missed the point of the post. 9 Marks won’t let you leave your church. Period. They will only allow you to transfer your membership to another 9 Marks church. The only churches 9 Marks will allow people to transfer to are Sovereign Grace, Sojourn network out of Louisville, or some other 9 Marks church. You risk being threatened, harassed, etc… if you try to leave. 9 Marks practices theology the same way the Mormons do…they shun, slander, and will go after you. You can forget going to any evangelical church, Anglican, whatever…if its not an approved Hyper-Calvinist you can not leave.

  54. You know the other thing that is un-Biblical…I would suggest that in these church covenants that 9 Marks expects you to sign…they have already started the legal process against you. Do you think these covenants haven’t been run by some lawyer that Mark Dever is close to? In a way they have already started the discipline process before you even sign on the dotted line.

  55. William G. wrote:

    Simply leave them and head for any traditionalist Anglican, or conservative mainline parish and you’ll be received as a full member with minimal hassle.

    That is exactly what my family did, some to methodist and some to episcopal and there have been no problems. What a relief it has been for us.

  56. Eagle wrote:

    Will…I think you missed the point of the post. 9 Marks won’t let you leave your church. Period.

    I think you missed the point of Will’s post. What can they do? Take you to court? How can they ‘not let you leave’? Send burly thugs to stake out your house and beat you up if you try to go to another church? (Maybe I shouldn’t give them any ideas.)

    But seriously – tender your resignation, shake the dust off your feet, and move on.

  57. In theory I am not against church discipline if it follows the order prescribe in the Bible which I believe is in Matthew 18. This order is oftentimes not followed and it should be done in love, and a church dictatorship or oligarchy shouldn’t skip the steps and go to unjustly disciplining a brother or sister in Christ. I have witnessed dictatorial pastors take it upon themselves to humiliate people in front of the church. This isn’t proper, but is a form of spiritual abuse. I have also seen churches get involved in personal issues that are not any of their business. In particular a church member was excommunicated because his wife had left him for an adulterous relationship and he was excommunicated for not communicating this to the elder board. He was hurting which was one reason for his silence and that excommunication was abuse. Church discipline should be an extremely rare event and should be for truly awful things and as a last resort when a serious problem, not for frivolous or matters than can be dealt with a hand shake and an agreement. I wouldn’t want to be in a church where a pastor is a dictator or a thin skinned person.

  58. Harassment when you have chosen to leave church or have been excommunicated. Doesn’t that go against free church Baptist tradition and border on cult like practice. Also isn’t Devers church a Southern Baptist church? So someone from Devers church couldn’t transfer their membership to a non Calvinist or other church outside 9 Marks Calvinist church within the SBC. They should no longer identify as Southern Baptists.

  59. Eagle wrote:

    Will…I think you missed the point of the post. 9 Marks won’t let you leave your church. Period. They will only allow you to transfer your membership to another 9 Marks church.

    WELCOME TO THE HOTEL CALIFORNIA…

  60. Haitch wrote:

    Sam, groan, it seems we must all share in taking the ‘doctrinal medicine’

    Party Ideologists sniffing for Thoughtcrime…

  61. Marsha wrote:

    Personally, I think polygamy is its own punishment. Imagine having to support more than a dozen children and keep multiple spouses happy!

    Have you ever read Jon Krakauer’s investigative reporting he put in a book called “Under the banner of Heaven”? It is one reporters account of Mormonism and how Polygamy is still practiced in some isolated cities in the US. For one thing, the husband does not support all his wives and children. They go on welfare.

  62. roebuck wrote:

    But seriously – tender your resignation, shake the dust off your feet, and move on.

    What happens when you try to move on and they attempt to interfere with your ability to associate with another church by calling that pastor and saying bad things about you? This has happened to a fair number of people including your absolutely adorable blog queen.

    However, contacting a lawyer and letting the church know you have done so goes a long way into attenuating their response…

  63. Lydia wrote:

    Marsha wrote:

    Personally, I think polygamy is its own punishment. Imagine having to support more than a dozen children and keep multiple spouses happy!

    Have you ever read Jon Krakauer’s investigative reporting he put in a book called “Under the banner of Heaven”? It is one reporters account of Mormonism and how Polygamy is still practiced in some isolated cities in the US. For one thing, the husband does not support all his wives and children. They go on welfare.

    Picked up the book at a yard sale but haven’t read it yet. Sounds very interesting. The abuse of welfare is another reason to oppose this.

  64. William G. wrote:

    I myself of course have a huge bone to pick with 9Marks, which I mentioned in a previous comment, that being their endorsement of Islamic persecution of Catholic and Orthodox Christians in the middle east on the grounds of being “fornicating, image-worshipping drunks,”

    Could you please give me a reference to this since it is a pretty hefty charge against 9 Marks? In fact, if you can find that for me, I will write a post about it.

    I need some sort of verification of this charge in order to let the comment stand. I have put it into comment pending until you get me reference.

  65. @ William G : Good night!!!!!!!!!!! Comment approved!!!!

    Here is the reference from that 9 Marks post. Thank you for sharing this with us. I feel a post coming on.

    http://www.9marks.org/journal/putting-contextualization-its-place

    "Thus, when a Central Asian Muslim asks me if I am a Christian, what they mean by "Christian" is an alcohol-drinking, pornography-watching, sexually promiscuous, picture-worshipping Eastern Orthodox or Roman Catholic person who is part of the culture that has attempted to conquer and oppress them for centuries. Therefore, I never simply say yes. However, since Christian is a biblical word, neither do I say no. I define who I am in biblical terms apart from their historical experience."

  66. O/T
    TW wrote:

    sam h wrote:

    please continue prayers for Washington state wildfires. terrible firestorms last night even going right through a town, but no one was killed or injured. and the church in the middle of the destruction is still standing in a town called pateros! thanks

    Thanks for the update Sam. I lived in Wenatchee for a few years. I attended a Bible college in Monitor. I have friends in Wenatchee, Cashmere and Dryden. Dryden is quite close to Leavenworth. My wife was raised in Wenatchee and currently visiting her sister in the Seattle area. It is a beautiful area. Praying for the fires to be brought under control and the safety of all.

    wow! are you a Bethesda refugee? fire info at facebook:Chelan County Emergency Management fire at lake Wenatchee called the Chiwaukum Creek Fire, fire at pateros Brewster Winthrop area called Carlton Complex Wildfire, fire at entiat called the mills canyon complex. several small fires at palisades, above the entiat fire, lk Chelan etc. fire just started this afternoon in Spokane outskirts also. if you don’t have facebook you can follow at http://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/3937/ so what all this means is that I am surrounded by fires that are over 2,000 acres large and it is very smokey. I am about 20-30 miles from them though, being in Wenatchee. we had a fire two weeks ago in the saddle rock mt here but they put it out quick this time. prayer is awesome, people are reporting that the fire came really close to their houses and then the wind switched and it went up the mountain instead! Jesus Rocks!
    am very glad that if you went to bible college in monitor you came away from that with the desire to follow Jesus instead of men and the ability to stand up for your beliefs even if it meant you almost got excommunicated! many that went there didn’t and still get tangled up with following men whose purpose is financial instead of following Jesus.

  67. Deb wrote:

    @ Nancy:
    Thanks for alerting us about the problem in sam h’s comment. I think it was unintentional, and we will get it fixed.

    sorry nancy, I did that before too when I try to reply with quotes. I think I will stop trying to do that. thanks for fixing it deb

  68. Nancy wrote:

    I am thinking that we may legalize prostitution, say live and let live (don’t ask don’t tell) about heterosexual sin within the church (which is basically what we do now) and make peace with polygamy, all the while bemoaning the condition of the nation.

    Polygamy is horrible. There’s no way to do it where it doesn’t simply degrade the status of women. We have the FLDS here in Arizona and they’ve got the legislature cowed for some reason. Our otherwise corrupt Attorney General (but not indicted like the two most recent attorneys general up in Utah) has put real law enforcement into Colorado City, not marshals subject to the whims of a guy locked up for life 1000 miles away. It’s making a small bit of difference, but the real difference would be if both Arizona and Utah would start prosecuting underage polygamous marriages and bust them up.

    Families are still being broken up at Warren’s order. And even though there are no marriages going on right now (and, per Warren, everyone who was married is no longer married), the women in the twin towns can’t even protect their own children.

    I know a case (it was reported in the paper) where the judge gave custody of seven kids of two polygamous wives who decided to follow Warren to the father. That’s because the the women couldn’t guarantee that neither the daughters would be forced into underage marriages nor the sons tossed out on the street over in Vegas or St. George. The judge was so unhappy about the situation he insisted the custody change take place *that day*.

    If these patriarchalists go full metal polygamy, I’m going to be hard pressed not to walk up to one of these guys and give him a piece of my mind.

  69. Mark wrote:

    Harassment when you have chosen to leave church or have been excommunicated. Doesn’t that go against free church Baptist tradition and border on cult like practice

    It can also be the tort of invasion of privacy and/or the intentional infliction of emotional distress.

    If you think I’m harping on the legal consequences an awful lot, there’s a reason. I want to put the fear of being on the business end of a subpoena or a deposition under oath as the result of overreaching into these 9 Marks types. If I succeed with even one, I’ll be happy.

  70. mirele wrote:

    If these patriarchalists go full metal polygamy, I’m going to be hard pressed not to walk up to one of these guys and give him a piece of my mind.

    1) Patriarchalists want to be (or already are) Patriarchs, and Patriarchs get the harems of sweet juicy 18-year-olds. It’s hard to go against something where YOU’RE Personally Benefiting from it.

    2) “Mirele”? That means You’re Just a WOMAN. And to a Patriarch, women are only good for One Thing. God Hath Said(TM)!

  71. Lydia wrote:

    Have you ever read Jon Krakauer’s investigative reporting he put in a book called “Under the banner of Heaven”? It is one reporters account of Mormonism and how Polygamy is still practiced in some isolated cities in the US. For one thing, the husband does not support all his wives and children. They go on welfare.

    Three, no FOUR, things about “Under the Banner of Heaven.”

    1) It’s a great book. If you want a flavor of the kind of crazy undercurrent that comes with living in the Intermountain West, read it.

    2) The Mormon church hated the book and put out a list of things wrong with it, which was bogus. No changes were made to the book in response.

    3) Polygamists call welfare “bleeding the beast.”

    4) Jon Krakauer fell into the story of the Laffertys (which is the frame for the book) via the FLDS in the twin towns. He had some issue (car trouble? I can’t remember) and got such a negative reception from the people in Colorado City / Hildale that it piqued his writer’s interest. He turned from mountains to Mormons and their offshoots.

    Again, I highly recommend the book. It is really worth a read to understand why the Intermountain Weist is as different as it is.

  72. @ Janet Varin I especially like this comment on your page: “But as God listened to my prayers and responded over many, many months, I realized that this was one offense (or rather, a snowballing series of offenses) that happened to me because others before me had allowed it to happen to them.” http://ikissedchurchgoodbye.org/about/

    Thank you also for going public with what happened to you, what happened to me happened to many that went to the church I attended before me but they left saying nothing publicly and it might have saved me a whole lot of anguish if I had known what I was getting into.

  73. @ Todd Wilhelm I was wondering, since you mentioned the particular ministry college, and the previous story dee/deb did (my my Dubai) says: He was a member of an SGM church in the United States. and you were in line to be a deacon at UCCD/ 9Marks church in Dubai, I want to ask if you follow the doctrine of complimentarianism. all the ministries you have been involved in that I listed are very authoritarian, and complimentariansim churches. I was wondering if you have decided to not associate with churches that teach these things, and if you are married, do you hold to the comp view in your marriage? thanks in adavance

  74. dee wrote:

    What happens when you try to move on and they attempt to interfere with your ability to associate with another church by calling that pastor and saying bad things about you?

    I have lived a sheltered life. They really do that? And the pastor of the prospective church believes them, and rejects you? And these people call themselves Christian?

    They seem more like a pack of self-righteous, mean-spirited, power-crazed, swaggering punks. The only power they have is what people give them. Sites like this are so important for educating people as to what can happen. I have to admit, until I started reading this site, I had no idea such petty and vicious weirdness was going on.

  75. Are others familiar that Doug Phillis of Vision Forum infamy after having taught for so long as an elder of his church that you had to get permission to leave didn’t do that himself when he decided to leave the church he was a member of? Doug Philips was exposed as having an inappropriate relationship (along the lines of employer sexual harassment) of a much younger woman (maybe legal age but barely legal age). Sad when a leader teaches all these rules and then they don’t apply them to themselves.

    My take on some of this “church discipline” is that is can and has been used as a bullying tactic by leadership to keep members “in their place.” That is a sad account someone shared above where an elder was placed under church discipline by a pastor for questioning etc. I am sure they use this to buly reguar members at times as another commenter shared (questioning a roof replacement).

    I am glad that Harris pointed out that history has shown that history has shown that when one gets absolute power how it almost aways corrupts someone. I think it was quite wise that our founding fathers came up with checks and balances to power and later in the mid 20th century enacted term limits for presidents.

    Especially when a few people are in power and there is no other group that can provide a good check/balance I could see how church discipline coud be abused.

  76. Steve240 wrote:

    Are others familiar that Doug Phillis of Vision Forum infamy after having taught for so long as an elder of his church that you had to get permission to leave didn’t do that himself when he decided to leave the church he was a member of?

    Rank Hath Its Privileges.
    Ask King Joffrey on the Iron Throne.
    (Come to think of it, didn’t Douggie ESQUIRE(TM) LOVE to cosplay as a Highborn Nobleman?)

  77. Great discussion so far.

    As I see it, one of the problems with Neo-Cal “discipline” is that it so often appears to be motivated, not by a genuine and sincere concern for the well-being of a parishioner, but rather by a pathological urge to exert control over others.

    At our old Acts 29 church, the pastor and elders were perpetually frightened about some horrible thing happening: a “wolf” infiltrating the flock, someone usurping authority or criticizing the leaders, etc. It was all pretty clearly stemming from some deep insecurities on the part of the leadership, and it manifested itself in unwarranted and harsh treatment.

    When I confronted the pastor about it, I told him that he was like a scared person who is so afraid of being attacked by a robber, that when an he hears a sound at night in his house, he just reflexively swings away with a baseball bat, and ends up smacking his brother/sister. His response? “It’s unfortunate when an innocent is wounded, but there really are robbers out there trying to get in!”

    I was stunned. Needless to say, that was my last conversation with him.

  78. @ roebuck:

    “They seem more like a pack of self-righteous, mean-spirited, power-crazed, swaggering punks.”
    +++++++++++++++++++

    on the b>nosey!😀

  79. I got bored last night and looked up the 9 Marks Churches in this area.
    Maybe it’s just me, but I wouldn’t attend any of these institutions on a bet. All of our local affiliates are….well, different, and some still call themselves SBC….

  80. sam h wrote:

    @ Todd Wilhelm I was wondering, since you mentioned the particular ministry college, and the previous story dee/deb did (my my Dubai) says: He was a member of an SGM church in the United States. and you were in line to be a deacon at UCCD/ 9Marks church in Dubai, I want to ask if you follow the doctrine of complimentarianism. all the ministries you have been involved in that I listed are very authoritarian, and complimentariansim churches. I was wondering if you have decided to not associate with churches that teach these things, and if you are married, do you hold to the comp view in your marriage? thanks in advance

    In the past I would have placed myself in the comp. camp. However my views have undergone some modification in the last few years. I would never classify myself as a “hardcore” comp; basically I want my beliefs to conform to what the bible teaches and I have a hard time explaining away 1 Timothy 2:12 and 3:2. I recently read “Community 101” by Gilbert Bilezikian and while I found myself agreeing with most of what he said I had trouble with his explanation of these verses. Friends have suggested some other books to read and I do plan on getting to them eventually. My eldest daughter is a graduate from Bethel Seminary, was the Dean of Admissions for Luther Seminary, still occasionally preaches at a Covenant church in Minneapolis and is working on her doctorate at Loyola. I am very proud of her accomplishments. The fact that she is a preacher threw a monkey wrench into my tidy little doctrinal box. We have another young lady we consider to be a daughter (she was our first exchange student from Brazil and has spent a lot of time with us) who graduated from Truett Seminary. Unlike some movements in Christianity (such as I believe Doug Philips was in) that teach women should not go to college, I fully support and believe a woman should get as much education as she desires. I have also heard a few woman preach at the Anglican church I attend and they did a wonderful job. As I told Dee and Deb, it seems obvious that there are, unfortunately, a lot of heavy-handed authoritarian men in the pulpit and i believe many women would do, and are doing, a better job. However, as I mentioned above, I don’t care to be a pragmatist at the expense of disregarding biblical truths, and therein lies my struggle.

    I should also mention that another huge cause of my taking a fresh look at this issue is the conduct of men such as Wayne Grudem, Al Mohler, John Piper, Mark Dever and John Folmar as it relates to supporting C.J. Mahaney. All these men have demonstrated a lack of concern for the wounded victims of sexual abuse as they steadfastly support C.J. Mahaney. Wayne Grudem is one of the main voices in the comp. movement and I was astounded by his total lack of compassion for those who were sexually abused under Mahaney. Perhaps you have seen the email he wrote to me in response to my urging him not to speak at Mahaney’s church. Frankly I don’t see the love of Christ in the actions of these men and it made me call into question much of what they hold dear doctrinally. Add to that the fact that the Council on Biblical Manhood now has a 33 year old man in charge and a 29 year old 2nd in command and one has to wonder just how much life experience they bring to the job? http://cbmw.org/women/news-notes/owen-strachan-appointed-president-of-cbmw/
    http://cbmw.org/men/grant-castleberry-appointed-executive-director-of-cbmw/

    Have you seen this recent blog? http://cryingoutforjustice.com/2014/07/20/woe-to-you-celebrity-pastors-big-name-theologians-and-wanna-bes/?utm_content=buffer972fe&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer#comment-37595
    It is very good and it sums up my feelings. Many of these celebrity preachers have their doctrine finely worked out, but somewhere along the line they seem to have lost what matters most, the greatest commandment – love God and love your neighbor. They are not people I care to emulate.

    As for my marriage, you should probably talk to the lovely and talented Mrs Wilhelm about that. Let’s just say that I don’t think I am much of a role model for comp. men!

  81. I’m guessing this church membership thing has been serious for a very long time. It’s just that some men are capitalizing on the idea now or something. I was just thinking back to when my husband and I were members in a church. As teenagers we had said recited our Profession of Faith in order to get our little taste of wine on communion day which made us official separate members from our parents at the Christian Reformed Church. Several years later we received a notice saying that our membership had been transferred to the AOG church that I’m assuming they had just heard through the grapevine that we were attending. We thought back then how strange. The AOG obviously had accepted it even though we never acknowledged it. Years later we were getting notices from the AOG church that there was evidence that we were attending somewhere else and where would we like them to send our memebefship. We thought that was all so strange and we have never since teenagers officially signed any membership because of all that.

  82. William G. wrote:

    their endorsement of Islamic persecution of Catholic and Orthodox Christians in the middle east on the grounds of being “fornicating, image-worshipping drunks,” which given the fact that as of today Mosul has no Christians left, is utterly reprehensible.

    This is an unforgotten tragedy with me. And their persecution isn’t at an end if they have been able to safely exit the country and eventually try to enter Australia as an asylum seeker (read “illegal arrival” – the term used by the State, and most particularly by our Immigration Minister, who stated in his maiden speech, “My personal faith in Jesus Christ is not a political agenda”. I think that may be called irony? I’ll stop there.

    Dee – I look forward to a post on the subject, thanks for referencing it William G. As an aside, in the Christian/Muslim area that I visit in Indonesia, I have hearsay that the Muslims are annoyed with the Christians due to their excessive drinking (very strong home brew). I saw this first-hand, they took ‘wasted’ to a whole new level (background – there are high levels of PTSD from war in the area).

  83. TW wrote:

    Many of these celebrity preachers have their doctrine finely worked out, but somewhere along the line they seem to have lost what matters most, the greatest commandment – love God and love your neighbor.

    Not “Doctrine”, Comrade.
    IDEOLOGY.
    (Ask any survivor of Cambodia’s Killing Fields how far Purity of Ideology can go.)

  84. Fred

    You are reading my mind. I saw that post directly after i posted ours. I plan to look at it tomorrow. “Show favoritism”…. Can we spell Mahaney?

  85. Mr.H wrote:

    At our old Acts 29 church, the pastor and elders were perpetually frightened about some horrible thing happening: a “wolf” infiltrating the flock, someone usurping authority or criticizing the leaders, etc. It was all pretty clearly stemming from some deep insecurities on the part of the leadership, and it manifested itself in unwarranted and harsh treatment.

    i.e. Traitors, Thought Criminals, and Hidden Goldsteinists.

    Did said pastor have them organized into a coherent Me-Against-All-Of-Them Conspiracy Theory? Christians seem very prone to that, whether The Vast Conspiracy are Communists, Satanist Illuminati, Homosexuals, or Heretics & Apostates.

  86. Mr.H wrote:

    At our old Acts 29 church, the pastor and elders were perpetually frightened about some horrible thing happening: a “wolf” infiltrating the flock, someone usurping authority or criticizing the leaders, etc. It was all pretty clearly stemming from some deep insecurities on the part of the leadership, and it manifested itself in unwarranted and harsh treatment.

    i.e. Traitors, Thought Criminals, and Hidden Goldsteinists.

    Did said pastor have them organized into a coherent Me-Against-All-Of-Them Conspiracy Theory? Christians seem very prone to that, whether The Vast Conspiracy are Communists, Satanist Illuminati, Homosexuals, or Heretics & Apostates.dee wrote:

    “Show favoritism”…. Can we spell Mahaney?

    H-U-M-B-L-E (chuckle chuckle)…

  87. In other news, Rory Mackle Roy today became one of only three golfists to win three Majors by the age of 25 (the other two being Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods), following his Open win at Hoylake near Liverpool.

    Information if required: Liverpool differs from Scotland in the crucial respect that it is in England. In an odd twist, however, it is (according to some authorities) the historic capital of North Wales, and has hosted three Eisteddfodau. For more information on Eisteddfodau, see the Wikipedia article on the singular form, which is “Eisteddfod”.

    In a triumph of hope over expectation that is prodigious even by my standards:

    I hope this is helpful.

  88. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    Note in particular that, in the Welsh language, “dd” is pronounced as a soft “th” (as in the English word “father”) and “f” is soft, equivalent to English “v”. With those caveats, the event in question is pronounced “eye-steth-vud.

  89. Fred Rogers wrote:

    @ dee:
    Any idea who wrote that article?
    Hotter off the 9Marks press (Friday, coincidentally) Leeman recommends we NOT submit to abusive leaders and lists a dozen “Marks” to watch out for. Oddly, “Seldom do good deeds in secret” is one. “Oh no! Pastor Smith seldom does good deeds IN SECRET”. Need to flee!”
    http://www.9marks.org/blog/when-you-should-not-submit-church#disqus_thread

    All I could do was laugh upon reading Leeman’s little ditty. He needs to go have a talk with Devers regarding Mahaney being allowed to run away from his church. All I see is backslapping hypocrites in this group.

  90. dee wrote:

    Fred
    You are reading my mind. I saw that post directly after i posted ours. I plan to look at it tomorrow. “Show favoritism”…. Can we spell Mahaney?

    And Bridget:
    But, Ya see, Little Ceej had not at that time officially been sent to time out, nor has he been yet. He voluntarily sat in the corner of his choice, before answering the call to stand back up a few months later. And he admitted that sitting in the corner had been a mistake, cause it made it look like he’d done something naughty. BTW, what are the chances he had personally signed a discipline contract– er- covenant?

  91. Fred Rogers wrote:

    BTW, what are the chances he had personally signed a discipline contract– er- covenant?

    The same chances as all the people who were disciplined, shunned, and dismissed as trouble makers by Mahaney&co . . . whether they signed something or not.

  92. Fred Rogers wrote:

    “Oh no! Pastor Smith seldom does good deeds IN SECRET”. Need to flee!”

    I want to know how one goes about evaluating the frequency and goodness of Pastor Smith’s secret deeds. Check with God?

  93. sam h wrote:

    wow! are you a Bethesda refugee?

    I am indeed! So you see I am a 3 time loser – Bethesda, Sovereign Grace and 9Marks. It’s a testimony to God’s faithfulness that I am still in the faith! Not sure how much you know about Bethesda, but I met with Larry Titus while in DFW several years ago, and then with Paul Williams while in Wenatchee two years ago. I won’t go into details here, but let me just say I was impressed with Paul.

  94. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Did said pastor have them organized into a coherent Me-Against-All-Of-Them Conspiracy Theory?

    I’m not sure I would use the word ‘coherent’ to describe this pastor’s paranoid delusions. But he did tend to interpret every little thing as being part of “the wolves'” attack on him and the elders.

    True story: some ladies tried to start a women’s Bible study. He instituted church discipline on them for “usurping male authority,” “rebelling against church leadership,” “sowing discord and division among members,” and “gossiping about the lead pastor.”

  95. TW wrote:

    Add to that the fact that the Council on Biblical Manhood now has a 33 year old man in charge and a 29 year old 2nd in command and one has to wonder just how much life experience they bring to the job?

    Pretty standard among the Neo-Cals, no?

    A surefire way to grow exponentially: advertise to young, arrogant, inexperienced guys and tell them that they can skip straight to leadership positions.

  96. @ TW:
    I am working on a web page that discusses the role of men and women in marriage and the church and it is often updated as we learn more about the subject and I would really appreciate your feedback if you get a chance. two pages in particular which discuss 1 Cor 14:34-37 (let women remain silent in church) from a view of relationships and public appearance. it is from the idea that that scripture in the greek means ‘wives’ not all women. also on the next page it goes into other areas of women that the Lord uses in public ministry. I always was of the idea of male headship but could never get rid of the fact that Jesus’ first instructions upon His resurrection were to the women and He told them to instruct His disciples… women instructing men, commanded by the Boss! and the Boss rebuked them for not listening to those women! threw my ‘male headship’ ideas right into the toilet hehe. http://littlesanctuaryministries.org/goduseswomen/goduseswomenpage3.html

    the reason I bring this up is that there are a lot of people in ministry that are being revealed as authoritarian and abusing their ‘power’ and they get named publicly and the list keeps getting bigger, but I think people are overlooking that it is the structure of these churches that is causing this sin. The authoritarian headship of the church, men ruling over men, men ruling over women is the problem in my view. We can remove the wild pastors from their positions but if the structure continues, the same thing will keep happening over and over again, just with a new leader. I haven’t read all of Bilezikian community 101 yet but what I have read so far seems to address this very thing. Rulership. we see it extremely exhibited in the mars hill, acts 29 churches where women are not allowed to speak or hold any office in church and this I believe makes an environment where abuse thrives. you are seeing the effects of ” All these men have demonstrated a lack of concern for the wounded victims of sexual abuse as they steadfastly support C.J. Mahaney.”
    this isn’t just in Mahaneys case, it is widespread in all complimintarianism churches, not all of them make headlines, most are wounded behind closed doors with women enduring thinking they are supposed to ‘submit’ and carry their cross, most never speak out. I saw a video recently of Piper saying that if a woman gets smacked she should endure for a ‘night’ and then bring it to the elders to handle. it is the environment of male authority in the church and women being subject to them that makes it possible for women and children to be abused. my point is not only comp, its that the whole structure is wrong and breeds abuse of men and women. here is a real persons story of belonging to a comp church that was created by some of the remnant of Bethesda responding to a member of Mars Hill discussing the doctrine:
    I was saved and went to a complimentarinism church and did everything they said thinking I was pleasing God. My husband was the son of an elder and was taught that they must rule their wives well in order to have office and be in right standing with the Lord. I received many broken bones and internal injuries. when I brought it to the attention of the church they insisted I wasn’t submitting enough and that if I would try harder the Lord would bless my marriage. I tried harder. I had dinner exactly on the table exactly on time, he told me what time to vaccume, what hairstyle I had to wear, what I could say at church and what I couldn’t, he had total control of the finances, I did everything he said for 7 years. when my case was brought to the attention of the police by our babysitter due to sexual injuries to my 2 yr old, the church said that my husband would never do that because of the wonderful standing of his family in the church. they wrote affidavits in support of my husband for the divorce/custody case. my ex got custody and moved out of the area to the seattle area. My children were beaten with cables, sexually assaulted, turned into drug runners, they had been straight A students and wonderful children. the doctrine your church (Mars Hill) preaches enables men like that to attend church as long as they don’t get police reports or bad publicity. He is a great guy on the outside and wears a tailored suit and knows all the church rules, i have rarely met a christian elder or pastor that didn’t like him. my husband might have been different if he hadn’t gotten so caught up in the ‘doctrine’ that he was to be so totally in charge of his family. he didn’t use to be like that but in trying to be the perfect elder son and finding he couldn’t be perfect, he turned to drugs and violence. the misapplied doctrine cost me my family, I love my ex husband, I love my children,. Mark Driscolls application of male headship is the worst I have ever heard.

  97. And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations. 6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord. 7 And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
    1 Sam 8:5-7 (KJV)

    Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them. 1 Sam 8:9 (KJV)

  98. TW wrote:

    In the past I would have placed myself in the comp. camp. However my views have undergone some modification in the last few years. I would never classify myself as a “hardcore” comp; basically I want my beliefs to conform to what the bible teaches and I have a hard time explaining away 1 Timothy 2:12 and 3:2. I recently read “Community 101″ by Gilbert Bilezikian and while I found myself agreeing with most of what he said I had trouble with his explanation of these verses. Friends have suggested some other books to read and I do plan on getting to them eventually.

    Todd, I truly appreciate what you have written here and on your own blog. We have many points of commonality, without going into detail. May I respectfully suggest that you not read more books by egalitarians or hierarchicalists before you do your own independent, objective study of the scriptures that are causing your cognitive dissonance? It’s not that the egalitarians are wrong, it is that you may never be sure of your own beliefs unless you go to the scriptures under the teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit.

    Then, after doing your own independent study you will be better equipped to evaluate the arguments of both non-hierarchicalists and hierarchicalists. Something to consider carefully is the fact that 1 Timothy was written to Timothy about problems in the church at Ephesus. So, before anyone can make a universal application from that letter, one first needs to determine what Paul meant when writing that to Timothy in that historical context. What were the conditions in Ephesus that would cause problems in a church?

    May I suggest that you look into secular historical research about Ephesus and compare that to what that local religion might look like when it is transported into a Christian church? For example, in Dubai you might expect a church to have new believers to have difficulty with the deity of Christ. Similarly, the indigenous religion of Ephesus was one of female supremacy where only women could be priests. If you look into the nature of the Ephesian religion and consider that Ephesus was the pilgrimage city for the Ephesian Artemis cult, then I think that you will find that Paul’s argument makes a lot more sense. I think there is a connection to the long narration of Paul’s encounter with the worshippers of Ephesisan Artemis that we find in Acts.

    The problem I see with the comp view of 1 Timothy is that it lifts 2:12 out of the context of the greater argument that Paul is making. One cannot just say that 2:12 is a blanket statement about the relative status of males and females without dealing adequately with Paul’s entire argument.

    Another problem is that the comps ignore the nature of epistolary material. What was the purpose of the letter *as Paul sets forth in the letter itself.* Was it really to let Timothy know that women are subordinate to men by nature because Adam was created first and that women are more easily deceived? I think that is a non-sequitur when we look at the entirety of the biblical record. In 2 Corinthians, for example, Paul uses Eve as a type of all deceived people, both male and female, not just females. And in Genesis, for example, God regularly passes over the firstborn in favor of the younger.

    Another thing I would encourage you to do is to use a good online Greek interlinear so that you can see for yourself the way that Grudem and the others misuse the actual text in order to advance the agenda to which they have dedicated their lives. In 1 Corinthians 11, for example, Grudem approved as editor the addition of “symbol of” to “authority over her head”, which changes the meaning to exactly the opposite of the meaning Paul actually wrote as at is the Greek text. But, the idea that a woman might have authority over her own physical head was anathema to these men, so they just changed the text to something more acceptable to them. I don’t know of a charitable way to characterize someone with the chutzpah to alter God’s revelation. And they say their opponents are the ones who want to evade the authority of scripture.

    I would like to thank you for your courage and your discernment and your willingness to forgo the social perqs that go with being a respected and honored church leader. If only more men and women would do likewise and do the hard work of confronting the teaching and practice of the “shepherds” who abuse their position with respect to the sheep who actually belong to The Shepherd.

    Gram3

  99. Patrice wrote:

    I want to know how one goes about evaluating the frequency and goodness of Pastor Smith’s secret deeds. Check with God?

    God talks ONLY to Pastor Smith, remember.

  100. @ mirele:
    mirele said: “If you think I’m harping on the legal consequences an awful lot, there’s a reason. I want to put the fear of being on the business end of a subpoena or a deposition under oath as the result of overreaching into these 9 Marks types. If I succeed with even one, I’ll be happy.”

    that is a great point you are making. sometimes the people that harp about how this country was founded as a Godly nation seem to forget that we still mostly follow Godly laws and have a lot of Godly judges enforcing them.

  101. @ Fred Rogers:
    Hotter off the 9Marks press (Friday, coincidentally) Leeman recommends we NOT submit to abusive leaders and lists a dozen “Marks” to watch out for. Oddly, “Seldom do good deeds in secret” is one. “Oh no! Pastor Smith seldom does good deeds IN SECRET”. Need to flee!”
    http://www.9marks.org/blog/when-you-should-not-submit-church#disqus_thread

    this amazes me to no end. I was recently working with a friend on trying to discern the errors in doctrine of some really really out there ‘prophets’ that have been evangelizing our town recently. they are related in ministry with Todd Bentley. anyway the amazing thing is how much they preach about being aware of false prophets and how to detect them!

  102. dee wrote:

    You are reading my mind. I saw that post directly after i posted ours. I plan to look at it tomorrow. “Show favoritism”…. Can we spell Mahaney?

    I think at the bottom it says copyright 2012, could be that once he felt that way and then met the good old boys

  103. @ TW:
    I wont be impressed with Paul until he makes a public apology. its kind of what I was getting at in another post, if we get rid of the ‘bad’ guy but go on and build another same structure which includes having select superior standing because you go to the ‘right’ church and you highly encourage people who are dressed less wonderfully than yourself to go somewhere else then you have the same problem wrapped in another wrapper. never met paul, making these observations based on heresay of people who tried to attend and the reception they got from the congregation, and the lack of openness there is around this ministry. cant go there myself to check it out, I am excommunicated from the body of Christ according to the members that attended Bethesda and still live here and still love to share my name around town as “that heretic who is probably crazy”

  104. @ TW:

    I just wanted to say that I love this valley and the people here. My friends and I try to stay out of the way of anyone that is/was associated with all that business. we are busy feeding the homeless and outcasts and really don’t care if there is another mega church like that or not, even the very large Acts29 church that is growing leaps and bounds. my friends and I just pick up the survivors when the Lord lets us see them and mostly try to care for the orphans and widows and the homeless that can’t afford $10 a night at the good christian emergency shelter in the winter. I don’t know why Jesus thought it would be a good idea for me to move back here arghhhhhhhhhhhh hehe

  105. many years ago, when I was sitting in my 5 bedroom 3 bath house, after dinner at the country club, I thought, wow I want to do something to help all those less fortunate than me. I planned to set apart a day of the week where I would go across town to the poor section and help them and lead them to Jesus. The Lord spoke to me that day and said something like this: “I left the riches of heaven and became one of them so that I would know what it was like, I didn’t minister to ‘them’ from up here on my throne surrounded with riches and servants.” I thought that was really cool and decided to go to the poor section more than once a week.
    a couple years later my knee gave out totally right on my way home from work. that way it wouldn’t be covered by L&I. I had to go on disability and therefore rent a apartment in the ghetto of a big city by seattle and live on $550 a month. It was the best thing that ever happened to me.
    In America we build churches for the righteous to gather at. Jesus said He didn’t come to save the righteous. Those women were always washing Jesus’ feet because they were dirty. They were dirty with the grime of walking, not on the marble floors of the temple, but the dusty roads where the common people lived. That is where I found Jesus, that is where He still walks today. I would recommend to any pastor that if he wants to find the heart of God he at least rents a house for a month in the ghetto and lives as “they” live. send your kids to ‘their’ schools, drink their juice, Kool-Aid is called ghetto juice where I lived. see the street fights break out among the desperate hopeless people that would never enter a church because they already feel bad enough about themselves. Hold a dying addict in your arms and remember that no 5 year old little boy ever said, “when I grow up I want to be a heroin addict and die under a bridge.” watch people die of gunshots for real, not on a tv program. and remember that in America we forget that men and women are being killed for their faith daily in other countries. Staring at a gun or machete they are not denying Jesus Christ and dying for it. We in America deny Jesus often at the inconvience of having to step over a bum who is drunk on our sidewalks, saying, I tithed at the church, someone else will care for this man.
    That is the problem I have with the mahoneys, the grudens, the pipers, the mark driscolls, the anyone that thinks they are serving Jesus by having a hierarchy to rule over congregants in a church while the world comes to its end and people perish daily.
    sorry for the going on, its been an emotional week here.

  106. @ Gram3:

    This is exactly what I did shortly before the turn of the century when I changed my mind about the Almighty’s allegedly established gender roles for all times and for all spaces in the life of the Church Universal. The violence which must be done to the rest of Scripture in order to make 1 Timothy 2:12 stand on its own as an absolute Pauline command, is like trying to make the tail wag the dog rather than the other way round’.

  107. Mr.H wrote:

    True story: some ladies tried to start a women’s Bible study. He instituted church discipline on them for [inter alia]… “gossiping about the lead pastor.”

    If indeed he publicly declared himself “lead pastor” then he should be publicly put under church discipline for usurping Christ’s authority, creating a faction within the local church in that city/area, and creating a privileged office/rank in defiance of the clear commands of Jesus.

  108. Anna wrote:

    What are the alternatives to signing membership contracts? Do 9 Marks churches and the like insist you have to or they won’t let you past the doors?

    Anna, there really aren’t any alternatives. You could attend such a church and not be a member…they “allow” such a thing…but you are looked at as a second class Christian at best, and an unbeliever at worst. It you are not a formal member, as they define it, you may run into problems if you have needs.

    Speaking from first-hand experience at a church on the 9Marks map, I was unemployed and my family was in serious need, but the church refused to help my family financially or tangibly because we weren’t “members”, whatever that means.

  109. Gram3 wrote:

    May I respectfully suggest that you not read more books by egalitarians or hierarchicalists before you do your own independent, objective study of the scriptures that are causing your cognitive dissonance? It’s not that the egalitarians are wrong, it is that you may never be sure of your own beliefs unless you go to the scriptures under the teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit.

    Thanks for taking the time to write Gram3. You have shared some wise counsel and I will heed it.

  110. sam h wrote:

    I am working on a web page that discusses the role of men and women in marriage and the church and it is often updated as we learn more about the subject and I would really appreciate your feedback if you get a chance.

    Thanks for the link SamH. I briefly perused it just now, but will go back and read it fully and get back to you. My email is toddlwilhelm@gmail.com – if you care to send me yours I will write back to you privately.

  111. sam h wrote:

    I won’t be impressed with Paul until he makes a public apology.

    I just wanted to say that I love this valley and the people here.
    … we are busy feeding the homeless and outcasts
    …my friends and I just pick up the survivors when the Lord lets us see them and mostly try to care for the orphans and widows and the homeless that can’t afford $10 a night at the good christian emergency shelter in the winter.

    Hey SamH – I will combine two of your posts here as I don’t wish to dominate the comments section worse than I already have! I could be wrong, but I seem to remember Paul did make a public apology and appealed for anybody with anything against him to please meet with him. I, along with a close friend of mine (we roomed together in Bethesda days) who recently moved back to Wenatchee after spending many years in Seattle, spent 4 or 5 hours one afternoon in Paul’s home. I will tell you that Paul is a changed man. He apologized profusely to me even though I didn’t feel he owed me any apologies. He is a truly humble, godly man these days. I came away from the meeting deeply impressed with the guy. He has been through much physical pain the last several years caused by a tumor behind his eye. No doubt that, plus many other life experiences have softened his heart.

    I also love the Wenatchee area. It’s the best kept secret in the country. I left one week prior to Mount St. Helens blowing up and have desired to go back ever since. Maybe someday I will.

    It sounds like you are living a truly “gospel-centered” life. God bless you in your work with the down and out of society. If I ever get back to your neck of the woods I will take you to dinner at that little BBQ restaurant in Cashmere with the big brass pig outside! Great food there. Sorry for the flashbacks, but I don’t get much pork here in the Middle East!

  112. sam h

    I am planning on writing about this and their “contextualization” today. I am gald you are here among us”heretics with a cause”.

  113. sam h wrote:

    I am excommunicated from the body of Christ according to the members that attended Bethesda and still live here and still love to share my name around town as “that heretic who is probably crazy”

    Aren’t they right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed? 😉

    You could not be in better company… And, FWIW, I consider it therefore an honour to read your comments.

    Let us know if they ever call you a Friend of Sinners!

  114. @ Muff Potter:
    Using scripture4all.org and blueletterbible.com helped my own research a also. One example: 1 Tim.12-15 just did not make any sense until I studied it on my own. After seeing several different Bible versions contradicting each other I figured it still doesn’t make sense to anyone. I couldn’t find any written material on what I found in verse 15. According to the lexicons verse 15 is not talking about women at all. So, I conclude that it is talking about Adam and Eve and that they would be saved through the child bearing. It cleared the whole controversial passage up for me. I checked with 3 different extremely educated greek and Hebrew scholars on my interpretation of verse 15 using the two lexicon websites I mentioned above. They said I was correct that ‘she’ or anything simply female was added to verse 15 by translators to ‘clarify’ meaning to readers. All three said that my interpretation was something they had never thought of before but was highly plausible and fit in with the theory that the woman that was supposed to be allowed to learn in peace (not silence), was probably teaching the heresy that Eve was first. Since Paul says that Adam knew what he was doing but Eve was tricked into sin does not matter. They both would have a chance at salvation through faith in the One that would come through childbearing, so don’t be making learning, teaching or anything any more difficult for anyone’s matter their gender. I even believe that the whole chapter is talking to male and female leaders in the church. I do not believe that Paul suddenly diverts his attention away from leaders to talk to the wives when he says ‘likewise women dress …’
    Anyway, I stopped reading everyone’s material and dug in for myself checking every single word even before I had internet my Strong’s KJV comcordance and lexicon was falling apart.

  115. On a barely related note, I really appreciated the picture of Folsom Prison. Why? Because I’m probably the only reader here who has been inside those walls.

    It’s an awesome prospect as you walk through those gates, or at least it was when I walked through them 25 years ago. The guard shacks teemed with weaponry designed to quell any and all disturbance with a lead slug, and the guards looked like they could do the same with their bare hands.

    I was still practicing law back then and was there to see one of the inmates, a man doing 15 to life for second degree murder. He wasn’t my client. He was suing one of my clients. It all happened before his present incarceration. I was there to take his deposition.

    The part of the prison he was housed in is called Old Folsom, the part shown in that photograph above. The door leading in is heavy, thick, made of metal that looks like it would stop a bull elephant – or a stampede of rioting inmates trying to get out. The hallways were lined with gray brick, making it appear as if you were walking into a dungeon carved into a mountainside.

    I saw his attorney in the waiting area, the court reporter too. The deponent (as we call the people giving depositions) hadn’t been brought out from his cell yet. As we sat, we talked. Mostly we talked about how little we’d like to ever be stuck in a place like that as we heard doors clanging shut repeatedly, some close and some far off.

    Eventually a pair of guards brought a man in belly chains and ankle restraints down the hallway and into a small dark conference room, lined with more gray brick. They sat him at the table and we all took our seats around him, his attorney by his side while I sat across from him and the reporter sat at the end of the table. The guards locked us in as they left the room. Another clanging door closing.

    I asked my questions of him and he answered, his attorney occasionally stating an objection for the record or turning his head to quietly consult with his client. During one of these interludes I had a thought: “I am in a small locked room with a convicted murderer.” My only solace was that the door was behind me and he’d have to go through his attorney to get to my side of the table.

  116. Patrice wrote:

    Fred Rogers wrote:
    “Oh no! Pastor Smith seldom does good deeds IN SECRET”. Need to flee!”
    I want to know how one goes about evaluating the frequency and goodness of Pastor Smith’s secret deeds. Check with God?

    I second HUG’s answer at 10:41 pm. 🙂

  117. sam h wrote:

    anyway the amazing thing is how much they preach about being aware of false prophets and how to detect them!

    Maybe they imagine false prophets to be like the man John saw casting out demons in Jesus name–“and we forbade him, because he follows not with us.”

  118. sam h wrote:

    in the ghetto of a big city by seattle

    Once, back when I was alive, I heard that an insult in parts of China was “Go to Tacoma!” Probably untrue.

  119. I don’t want to go into too much detail, because this is her story, not mine, but one of my very good friends is trying to leave a 9Marks church right now and isn’t being very successful about it. The situation is more complex than just leaving (isn’t it always).

  120. Eagle wrote:

    The members in the churches are the nww Dalits, and the Pastors and Elders above them are above approach.

    The members of the church are the new Dalits, and the Pastors and Elders above them are the new Daleks.

    – There, fixed it for ya ?-)

  121. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    The members of the church are the new Dalits, and the Pastors and Elders above them are the new Daleks.

    The members of the church are the new Eloi, and Pastors and Elders above them are the new Morlocks.

  122. Caitlin wrote:

    I don’t want to go into too much detail, because this is her story, not mine, but one of my very good friends is trying to leave a 9Marks church right now and isn’t being very successful about it. The situation is more complex than just leaving (isn’t it always).

    I won’t try and speculate on the details of your friend’s situation, but of course you’re right in saying that it’s always complicated.

    One source of complexity that is always present is the “unequal cost” of leaving. The person or family leaving a congregation has often invested a great deal in that congregation; but to the congregation, they’re just one person or family. Once they leave, they’ve lost contact (sometimes very nastily) with many of their closest friends. But those friends still have each other.

  123. @ Caitlin:

    “I don’t want to go into too much detail, because this is her story, not mine, but one of my very good friends is trying to leave a 9Marks church right now and isn’t being very successful about it. The situation is more complex than just leaving (isn’t it always).”
    ++++++++++++++

    if it’s kept in the realm of the anonymous, can you explain the situation as best you understand it? I’m sure there are a number of layers of complexity. I would like to understand better.

  124. @ elastigirl:

    Not really, though she is thinking about posting here (maybe), so she can tell it better if she chooses to.

    Just… intermingling of church and life that makes simply saying “Good bye for the rest of your lives” impossible.

  125. In other news, I had a conversation with my new boss today, because I’d noticed him posting scriptures on his white board as motivational sayings. Today I passed by his office, and he had posted a quote by Charles Spurgeon. My coworker was in there and I said, “He’s getting all theological on us.” Then later I asked if he’s a good baptist. Well, come to find out he attends, of all places…. drum roll please… Capitol Hill Baptist. I told him that I follow blogs and we had a bit of a conversation. I also did admit in our conversation that it’s somewhat unfair to judge a church by hearsay. He invited me to come and see, and maybe one day. Right now I told him it’s just a miracle I”m attending any church, so I passed. But interesting development.

  126. Wow. This actually happened to me at the Puritan Evangelical Church (www.puritanchurch.com), after I confronted the pastor about his abusive treatment of members both from the pulpit and in private. He used anger and shame to manipulate people and intimidate them into obeying him. When he attacked my character rather than dealing with the issue and the other 2 elders did the same, my wife and I resigned. But the most shocking thing were the nasty letters we kept getting after we resigned. They were absolute poison in tone and content, full of half-truths, innuendo, and outright lies! I could not believe that after all the years we had been faithful members, that this would happen from the new pastor and no one stood up for us. Thankfully, we are now in a wonderful grace filled church rather than our former legalistic church.

  127. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    nick wrote: “If indeed he publicly declared himself “lead pastor” then he should be publicly put under church discipline for usurping Christ’s authority, creating a faction within the local church in that city/area, and creating a privileged office/rank in defiance of the clear commands of Jesus.”

    amen

  128. dee wrote:

    sam h

    I am planning on writing about this and their “contextualization” today. I am gald you are here among us”heretics with a cause”.

    thank you dee, and all of you here. I cant say how much your allowing me to be here means to me. I learn so much from this blog, but more than that I haven’t felt welcome or part of anything for years, except for my few friends here.

  129. Fred Rogers wrote:

    sam h wrote:

    in the ghetto of a big city by seattle

    Once, back when I was alive, I heard that an insult in parts of China was “Go to Tacoma!” Probably untrue.

    hehehe probably (parts of Tacoma)

  130. I’m the friend Caitlin has been referring to in her comments here. My story isn’t as dramatic as many of the others on here, but it’s similar enough that I took this article as confirmation from God that I’m on the right path away from the legalistic, judgmental place I used to be.

    I attended CHBC for two and a half years, during which their teachings had me in a place of constant guilt for not being more involved (despite attending morning and evening services on Sundays and teaching English as a second language on Saturday mornings). When I expressed how tired I was to a friend, I was told I should dump my non-church activities so I could join a small group and stop complaining that it was so hard to get to know people at CHBC.

    Last winter I went through a spiritual crisis that stripped me of all the legalism I’d built around myself over the years. It was brought on initially by my desperate lack of joy at CHBC but turned into questioning of the way CHBC does membership, and further became a rejection of many of their doctrines I’d happily swallowed without question. Leaving the safety of that carefully thought out Calvinistic prison was one of the scariest things I’ve ever done.

    Knowing CHBC’s strict membership procedures, I waited several months before emailing them a vague letter telling them I had learned a great deal at their church but felt called on. They insisted I tell them what churches I was considering joining, although at that point I felt no desire to join a church officially ever again (still don’t). After a series of emails, during which I informed them I was attending a United Methodist Church, and a meeting with my landlord, who is also an elder at CHBC (had he not also been my landlord I would not have agreed to meet), I was informed that they were “concerned” and wanted to “warn” me against the Methodist church, and probably could not say they were “sending me out joyfully” when they presented me to the congregation to be voted out of membership. I said that was fine. They seemed shocked.

    Today I received a letter from yet another pastor stating that they weren’t sure what to do with me, that they understand I do not attend anymore and do not wish to be contacted, but that they felt they could not let me be voted out of membership because they weren’t sure of the “biblical” way to proceed. I started laughing as I read it. They hinted at “church discipline” while trying to keep me in the church while assuring me they were trying to care for me with Christlike love.

    If Christ’s love toward me looked like theirs, I would not be a Christian now.

    I’m not sure what to do now, if anything. CHBC’s position is absurd, but given my current living situation with an elder as my landlord I am doing my best to be civil. Prayers appreciated. What’s truly wonderful is that God has been with me every step of the way, confirming my path when I can’t even see my next step.

    To the moderators and posters on TWW, thank you for what you are doing here. It gave me the courage to walk away from CHBC toward greater freedom and a closer relationship with Christ.

  131. @ Nikita:
    welcome to thewartburgwatch! I think you will like this place! I abosolutely have never heard of something so ridiculous as this: “when they presented me to the congregation to be voted out of membership”

    I have never been to a church like that! dear pastor, I am leaving your church and attending a different church. dear congregant, you can’t do that till we vote on it!

    I am very sorry about the landlord thing also, praying for peace and that he doesn’t even try to ‘bring you to your senses’ or anything like that, Jesus is full of miracles and i’m asking Him to give you one in this area.

    when I was mixed up with mixed up church, the best thing for my getting healed was finding others on the internet that had gone through the same thing so I am sure you will like it here.

  132. @ Nikita:

    I’m normally hesitant to say “And this is what proved God was real” since a certain amount of belief must always rest on faith on things unseen. But. The way that God has worked in both our lives about this issue and the history I’ve mentioned on other posts here at TWW feels like a refutation of everything that the Calvinistas want to say about God, the Gospel, and Christian life. We intertwined and supported each other and fed each other and the thing that one needed, God provided for the other. It really is an amazing thing to think about.

  133. @ Nikita:

    Thank you for sharing your story. I’m so sorry you’re having a difficult time untangling from the church. I’ll keep you in my prayers and let us know if you are hastled or need help.

  134. @ Fred Rogers:
    I had no idea!! the Tacoma method!! wow. the worst part is that some people here where I live that have lots of migrant orchard workers seem to be saying the same thing! unbelievable that I live in the area and know so little of its history, I always knew there were Chinese railroad workers that put in the rails going over Stevens Pass but I had no idea about how they were treated.

  135. Tim wrote:

    On a barely related note, I really appreciated the picture of Folsom Prison. Why? Because I’m probably the only reader here who has been inside those walls.
    It’s an awesome prospect as you walk through those gates, or at least it was when I walked through them 25 years ago. The guard shacks teemed with weaponry designed to quell any and all disturbance with a lead slug, and the guards looked like they could do the same with their bare hands.
    I was still practicing law back then and was there to see one of the inmates, a man doing 15 to life for second degree murder. He wasn’t my client. He was suing one of my clients. It all happened before his present incarceration. I was there to take his deposition.
    The part of the prison he was housed in is called Old Folsom, the part shown in that photograph above. The door leading in is heavy, thick, made of metal that looks like it would stop a bull elephant – or a stampede of rioting inmates trying to get out. The hallways were lined with gray brick, making it appear as if you were walking into a dungeon carved into a mountainside.
    I saw his attorney in the waiting area, the court reporter too. The deponent (as we call the people giving depositions) hadn’t been brought out from his cell yet. As we sat, we talked. Mostly we talked about how little we’d like to ever be stuck in a place like that as we heard doors clanging shut repeatedly, some close and some far off.
    Eventually a pair of guards brought a man in belly chains and ankle restraints down the hallway and into a small dark conference room, lined with more gray brick. They sat him at the table and we all took our seats around him, his attorney by his side while I sat across from him and the reporter sat at the end of the table. The guards locked us in as they left the room. Another clanging door closing.
    I asked my questions of him and he answered, his attorney occasionally stating an objection for the record or turning his head to quietly consult with his client. During one of these interludes I had a thought: “I am in a small locked room with a convicted murderer.” My only solace was that the door was behind me and he’d have to go through his attorney to get to my side of the table.

    That’s a great story, Folsom, yowzers! Back in my practicing days I did some “of counsel” work for a criminal defense firm but never set foot inside a prison. Then branched out on my own and took a little criminal defense case, robbery. First time I stepped into the county jail to interview my client and heard those bars go “clunk” behind me I realized if there was ever a riot, the prisoners would be debating who to kill first, the guards or the lawyers. Was a creepy feeling. Never took another criminal case after that.

  136. Caitlin wrote:

    I don’t want to go into too much detail, because this is her story, not mine, but one of my very good friends is trying to leave a 9Marks church right now and isn’t being very successful about it. The situation is more complex than just leaving (isn’t it always).

    I’ve left this sort of place, went out with a bang, when the pastor stood up in front of me, spouse and one of my children and said “You’re divisive, you’re destroying the church!” I flipped it back on him and proceeded to run down a list of reasons why he was the enemy of the church and divisive, that evening I flat shut down pastor and right hand man elder. Would not be silenced. They were left stammering and just looking at each other. They could only say: “Not fair, you’re using your fancy lawyer stuff”, but I’m not a particularly great debater, it was as my wife said: “I wouldn’t have wanted to be them defending their position, because everything they tried to defend was so ludicrous.” Was one of the most satisfying evenings of my life. Didn’t care what they tried to do because I wouldn’t want to have anything to do with a church that would give five seconds of consideration to what they’d say about me without hearing me out.

    But I understand it’s complex. If you’re particularly beholden to these types of churches and want to attend another, they can very well poison the well for you and scare you into one-sided submission. But that’s the problem, one shouldn’t care a bit what they think, because they’re the types Paul described in Rom 1 and 2 Cor 11, they’re thugs masquerading as angels of light.

  137. @ LawProf:

    Well, like she said, she has an elder for a landlord. I told her she had some legal protections, but who wants to actually rely on that?

    I’m a lawyer too, and very unafraid of debate. In fact, I can dismantle their talking points quite easily. God had to put a lot of “Hush up now” on me to keep me from obliterating Nikita when she was knee-deep in it, since that would not have been an effective way to love or care for her.

    On the other hand, leadership is not the same as a parishioner, and I would have no qualms unleashing my tongue against them, not that they would deign speak to me, I’m sure.

  138. @ Nikita:
    Firstly, I am sorry that I just got to this comment. I overlooked it since I was focusing on the new post. Thanks to some friends who called my attention to it.

    I am so glad that you had the courage to walk away from people who actually think they have ownership over your conscience. It is incredible to me that they said the Methodist church is “concerning.” i received an email from someone who told me that 9 Marks allows a broad number of churches that they will “allow” one to join.

    Overlooking the hubris of that statement, as well as your right to take a break and think things through, it is now evident to me that they do not allow a broad range of choices.

    We would love to post your story if you would allow us to do so but do not feel any pressure from us. Besides the Roman Catholic church, the Eastern Orthodox church and now the Methodist church, it seems like 9 Marks has become the Calvinista Inquisition.

  139. @ sam h:

    This is a powerful and moving story. I hope I don’t sound too pretentious when I say there are several parallels between it and my own (to wit, a sense of calling towards the poor and oppressed, and a set of life-circumstances that have meant I have little choice but to work among them).

  140. @ dee:

    I probably should have mentioned that the doctrinal issue that got the CHBC elders up in arms was that the Methodist church near me is one of the “reconciling” branch, meaning they affirm gay couples. Being still unclear of where I come down on that issue myself, I actually tried several other churches which struck me as slightly less strict doctrinal versions of CHBC before I broke down and crept warily into the Methodist church one Sunday morning. Since then, God has consistently used the sermons and the kindness of the body there to speak to me. I’m still not sure where I stand on this issue (thank you so much for your posts on it, which have helped me think through some of my previous assumptions), but I know that at least for now I am where I’m supposed to be.

    A main issue at this point is that CHBC said the other, independent church I was considering was fine because they didn’t mention their stance on homosexuality on their website (although my impression from that body is that they would come down in a different place than CHBC), but because the Methodist church did, they had a problem with me going there. The elders just skim the church websites to check them out, when my experience has been that a website can tell you very little about the actual church. They’re making calls on church bodies based on very superficial criteria, which is why they need to step back and let an individual believer’s discernment and desire to follow where the Spirit leads be their guide.

    Dee, I’d be willing to write up my experiences in more detail; just let me know where to send them once they’re written up. They’re not terribly dramatic, but at least they could serve as a source of encouragement to people who are in the same place I was, questioning their perceptions, motives, and desire to follow God, wondering if it’s really as bad as these articles say. It is that bad.

  141. sam h wrote:

    I have never been to a church like that! dear pastor, I am leaving your church and attending a different church. dear congregant, you can’t do that till we vote on it!

    What is required for church membership? Is it simply filling out a piece of paper and handing it in to the church office or does membership requires something more, such as going through an interview process and being approved by the elders? In the latter case, it may make sense for the elders to vote, even though it is a formality, when a congregant resigns from membership.

  142. @ Joe2:

    CHBC requires new members to go through six classes explaining doctrine and the reason for the church (as they see it), after which you have a membership interview during which you must recite the Gospel as outlined by 9Marks. Then the elders present you to the entire congregation at the next Members’ Meeting, give their recommendation to voting you in, and the congregation pretty much votes in line with what the elders say. Same voting process in reverse for exiting – you tell the elders where you’re going, they decide if it’s okay, and then they tell the congregation they approve of voting to release you from membership at the next MM. In my case, even though I haven’t attended since February, the elders haven’t even brought it before the congregation yet because they don’t know how to “release me from membership in a biblical manner.”

  143. @ Nikita:

    “I’m not sure what to do now, if anything. CHBC’s position is absurd, but given my current living situation with an elder as my landlord I am doing my best to be civil”
    ++++++++++

    I say have fun, have parties, enjoy life as much as you can. Celebrate life, freedom and that you are you. Schedule fun into your life. Go skating. Picnics. Have game nights in your home. Play monopoly or canasta with hours of Beatles music and appetizers galore. Have a margarita and then go see a movie as it mellows away. Get an interesting cookbook, get 6 people to all make a different recipe and all gather at your home for an extravagant meal (perhaps your landlord can be one of them).

  144. @ elastigirl:

    My favorite part of The Screwtape Letters is when the Patient drinks hot chocolate. That to me exemplifies all there is to say about freedom and identity in Christ- stuff you enjoy because God designed you to be a person who enjoys it.

  145. Caitlin wrote:

    @ LawProf:
    Well, like she said, she has an elder for a landlord. I told her she had some legal protections, but who wants to actually rely on that?

    I understand now regarding the landlord situation, only read that AFTER making my post–and as we both know, for most people legal protections are oft more trouble to pursue than they’re worth.

    Also, I really mean it when I say I’m not some great debater, it’s one reason why I’m no longer practicing, at least trial practice, because my speaking skills tended to go south at such moments (once stuttered and stammered so much during trial my client had to prompt me to get me unstuck–now that’s embarrassing! — but on the bright side I do a whiz bang job of putting together concepts and teaching them to a classroom). That evening dismantling the two cultic neocal church leaders was simply a matter of having all the facts on my side and not having to twist the Bible to make it work for my point-of-view.

    This is why they like to outnumber you, shame you, shout you down and use various forms of manipulative, abusive rhetorical tactics like ad hominem when dealing with those who refuse to bow down to them, it’s because perhaps on some level they know they can’t win a straight up fair fight because they’re the ones in the wrong. How many hit-and-run cult leaders who have posted here have ever used anything close to a debate tactic that wouldn’t get you a D- in Rhetoric 101? They virtually always call you insane or use other forms of invective, change the issue, attack you personally. Why? Because they simply must if they’re going to “win”.

  146. LawProf wrote:

    They virtually always call you insane or use other forms of invective, change the issue, attack you personally. Why? Because they simply must if they’re going to “win”.

    Yes, sometimes the moment you engage is the moment you lost, and it’s important to remember that.

  147. elastigirl wrote:

    I say have fun, have parties, enjoy life as much as you can. Celebrate life, freedom and that you are you. Schedule fun into your life. Go skating. Picnics. Have game nights in your home. Play monopoly or canasta with hours of Beatles music and appetizers galore. Have a margarita and then go see a movie as it mellows away. Get an interesting cookbook, get 6 people to all make a different recipe and all gather at your home for an extravagant meal (perhaps your landlord can be one of them).

    Elastigirl, I think you’re taking this far too seriously.

  148. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    hee hee… church takes itself SO DANG SERIOUSLY!!! take a break from it — the sky will not fall. take a break from stress and the burden of guilt and the extra-heavy burden of shouldering the co-dependent responsibility for everyone and everything including God himself.

    life is WAY too short for all that totally unnecessary misery.

    Have fun. Laugh. Eat delicious food. Spend time with loved ones. Go to loud, raucous sporting events with thousands of people and yell. Run, swim, and bike hard. Sweat and laugh out all the toxins of Church of Dysfunction. Eat chocolate. Rally all those great endorphins.

    CHURCH CAN WAIT. God thinks you’re the bees knees, church or no church. you can do great exploits for God, church or no church. it won’t pay the pastors’ salaries, but really, who gives a flying fick.

  149. @ TW:
    TW said: “that little BBQ restaurant in Cashmere with the big brass pig outside! Great food there. Sorry for the flashbacks, but I don’t get much pork here in the Middle East!”

    I went to school with the owners, love that place!
    I guess knowing what you said about Paul I will go a little easier, but to me a public apology is different than an apology to people that go to your church. it effected the whole valley in one way or another. people still don’t want to hear about Jesus because of the fear of joining a church like that. I have to tell people right off the bat that I am not asking them to join a church, just want to share Jesus with them. also there is the matter of restitution, so many people lost houses and lands and savings that I think it would be a small token of apology if those involved would at least make an attempt to make amends instead of building big churches that are still excluding common people because of their financial status. that is what I was trying to say earlier, that is what people that have tried to join his church and not been made to feel welcome have told me, and the people I try to share Jesus with are very leery of anything related to church around here.
    hope you are doing well there, God bless you in Jesus!

  150. @ LawProf:
    that is awesome that you get your presence of mind and had an answer
    But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
    Matt 10:19 (KJV)

    I have experienced fleeting moments of this, but im in therepy for ptsd so I sometimes just take it or half believe what they are saying instead of coming back with the truth.
    when I read your post I pictured the Holy Spirit speaking with authority like Jesus did when he rebuked the Pharisees, but that through a lawyer, wow watch out!

  151. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    I am still learning and sometimes pride still lifts its ugly head in my life, but I would choose this road that leads to heaven over any other. really appreciate you being on this blog nick

  152. LawProf wrote:

    I flipped it back on him and proceeded to run down a list of reasons why he was the enemy of the church and divisive, that evening I flat shut down pastor and right hand man elder. Would not be silenced. They were left stammering and just looking at each other.

    LawProf wrote:

    I’m not some great debater, it’s one reason why I’m no longer practicing, at least trial practice,

    “That evening dismantling the two cultic neocal church leaders was simply a matter of having all the facts on my side and not having to twist the Bible to make it work for my point-of-view.”

    May I also suggest that you were angry and embarrassed and who knows what else and your body and brain were probably awash in fight or flight chemicals. Amazing what that will do.

    But and also, based on what you told them, perhaps Himself was whispering in your ear and used you to deliver a message to those guys. Happens sometimes, you know.

  153. Caitlin wrote:

    @ elastigirl:
    My favorite part of The Screwtape Letters is when the Patient drinks hot chocolate. That to me exemplifies all there is to say about freedom and identity in Christ- stuff you enjoy because God designed you to be a person who enjoys it.

    “Oh no!” saith Desiring God (pastor JP). “The patient is sinning by drinking hot chocolate unless he’s trying really, really hard to enjoy and glorify God with each sip!” Grit yer teeth an enjoy god, patient! That’s an order! There’s a good fellow! Stiff upper lip an a’ that!”

  154. @ sam h:
    Lord willing I’ll be visiting the former “Armpit of Puget Sound” (so-named due to the former aroma) in a couple days and plan to visit the Chinese Garden and Reconciliation Park.

  155. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    If indeed he publicly declared himself “lead pastor” then he should be publicly put under church discipline for usurping Christ’s authority, creating a faction within the local church in that city/area, and creating a privileged office/rank in defiance of the clear commands of Jesus.

    I’m tempted to send this his way, but at this point it would just be stirring the pot. But I like it!

  156. @ elastigirl:

    The other thing, besides a heavy dose of the grace of God, that has gotten me through some really tough times this year (all this mess and wedding planning and severe family illness and personal illness and joblessness, joblessness, joblessness) has been going to a climbing gym and just working it out until I can’t hear or think anything but what hold comes next.

  157. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    i was thinking about our life circumstances and if you’re like me, long ago we prayed, I want to be like Jesus! hehe I was thinkin probably not= no hot water, dusty roads, occasionally no electricity, those lepers that have icky puss, and having dinner at anyone that asks you’s house, even if the dinner is well, different! I have learned so much and it reminds me of a song ‘gently broken’ and its getting now so I hear the Masters call, and cringe for a millisecond and then say, yes Lord, where we going today? I cant wait to die and be resurrected in Your amazing Love! before it was me trudging up a very long hill to the end of my will and laying at the cross making a really big deal out of everything and like my friend Zoanne said, ‘I don’t mind dying to self, as long as all the right people come to the funeral’ rofl that’s how Jesus gets all the glory, lol people know its not me lol

  158. @ Joe2:
    Jesus did not say, go into all the world and make disciples and make sure they sign this piece of paper…no where do any of the disciples/apostles suggest that people have to go thru an interview process and sign a paper and have a vote to become a member of the church. Judas was a member of Jesus’ church and you all wouldn’t let him in but Jesus clearly did and didn’t even fire him when they all knew he was stealing the tithes.
    back to your original question? what is church membership? teaching for doctrine the commandments of men? oh that was the Pharisees and the temple…

  159. @ Haitch: It should be noted however that the forced emigration of the Christian population of the Middle East would be almost as tragic as their extinction, given the implied loss of ancient churches and monasteries, filled with priceless relics, manuscripts, iconography and other aspects of our Christian cultural heritage, many of which already have been desecrated. It was the Syriac monks, for example, who preserved the writings of the Greek philosophers and transmitted them to the great Arabic scholars (Avicenna, Averroes, Al-Kwarizmi) while Western Europe was going through the Dark Ages. The Arabic translations of this material were then retranslated into Latin, sparking the Renaissance.

  160. @ Nancy: I am glad you were able to depart without difficulty. Unless 9Marks churches are implementing the most extreme measures associated with cults such as the Scientologists, the Palmerian Catholics (a group based in Spain that started out as a traditional Latin mass community, but later became highly insular, building a grandiose, heavily fortified “Holy See”, and substantially rewriting the Bible, dominating members with the kind of shunning and physical control measures taken from L Ron Hubbard’s playbook, as it were), it should be possible to depart.

    I should further think one could sue any church furthermore that encourages its members to shun you upon your departure; I don’t see how such a practice could be implemented without constituting slander, although I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. 9Marks, in coercing members to sign “legal contracts,” has already abdicated the Biblical and Apostolic Christian tradition of not using the civil courts to resolve disputes between members of the Church, and in fact, the 9Marks churches I would argue have, through their own heresy and schism, separated themselves from the Church in general, and thus legal retaliation would be fully appropriate for any harm they inflicted upon someone leaving them. While one should in general turn the other cheek, one can, with Biblical support, draw the line when it comes to those who preach another gospel, i.e. heretics, and in my mind, the subjugation that 9Marks inflicts upon its members is definitely heretical; in its rigor it reminds one of the extremist Montanist sect that Tertullian joined (which is why Tertullian, despite his enormous theological influence, is not regarded as a saint by any of the ancient churches).

  161. sam h wrote:

    i was thinking about our life circumstances and if you’re like me, long ago we prayed, I want to be like Jesus! hehe I was thinkin probably not= no hot water, dusty roads, occasionally no electricity, those lepers that have icky puss, and having dinner at anyone that asks you’s house, even if the dinner is well, different!

    Yes, I prayed the same prayer. I had in mind the calling of being a celebrity preacher, though, travelling the world and preaching to thousands who hung on my every word and talked about what an anointed man of God I was. Actually, God decided I was the man for the “unemployed community” gig. You don’t move house to join that community, of course; you just find yourself unable to get a job for love nor money *.

    That’s one thing that colours my dislike of what Park Fiscal has done with his life (and that of others too). He and I are roughly the same age, both became Christians at age 18 – i.e. at roughly the same time – and both set out with the same youthful pride and ambition. It’s only by the grace of God that I failed to achieve mine.

    I say this in all seriousness: had I accomplished what I wanted to when I first “got saved”, I would probably now be one of the topics of blogs like this. And not in a good way.

    * “Can’t get x for love nor money” is – I believe – a UK idiom which I’m trying to spread. Obviously, it simply means you really can’t find x anywhere.

  162. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    I grew up in the USA with that phrase: “can’t get (or buy) that for love nor money”, meaning that it could not be had, period, and anyone who had it, got it inappropriately.

  163. @ Fred Rogers:
    hehe we always knew we were near when we started smelling the Aroma of Tacoma!
    my uncle called that smell, the smell of bread and butter though, we import all our lumber from Canada now, and complain about no jobs…

  164. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    * “Can’t get x for love nor money” is – I believe – a UK idiom which I’m trying to spread. Obviously, it simply means you really can’t find x anywhere.

    It’s a common expression in Australia. We also say “Buckley’s” (meaning = no chance) a lot, eg “he or she has Buckley’s” (also used dichotomously – where you have the option of Buckley’s chance or none – meaning no chance either option). See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Buckley%27s_chance There’s a great poem about having ‘Buckley’s chance’ that you can commonly find on teatowels and country dunny walls!

  165. William G. wrote:

    It should be noted however that the forced emigration of the Christian population of the Middle East would be almost as tragic as their extinction, given the implied loss of ancient churches and monasteries, filled with priceless relics, manuscripts, iconography and other aspects of our Christian cultural heritage, many of which already have been desecrated. It was the Syriac monks, for example, who preserved the writings of the Greek philosophers and transmitted them to the great Arabic scholars (Avicenna, Averroes, Al-Kwarizmi) while Western Europe was going through the Dark Ages. The Arabic translations of this material were then retranslated into Latin, sparking the Renaissance.

    YES, a thousand times yes. And I have seen nil reporting on the subject in the mainstream media. Early in the (Western) second Iraq war, I won’t ever forget the daylight pillaging of Iraq’s antiquities from the museum straight past the US soldiers who were posted there. The desecration of the nation was complete.

  166. @ An Attorney:

    I suspect that narcissistic tendencies will impair a person’s ethical judgement especially if that person is religious, because really a narcissist will worship nobody but himself.

    I’m not an expert on psychology – though I cannot help but be fascinated by the subject, and have thus read around it a bit – but my reasoning is fairly simple here.

    When he encounters some kind of religious faith, he will be faced with the same three choices anybody faces: 1) embrace it, 2) reject it, or 3) assimilate it, keeping the bits he likes and discarding the bits he doesn’t. He is likely to go with 3). It allows him to use his religious faith as a tool in his own self-glorification: God has told me to be somebody great. Insofar as God is invisible, pretending to worship him is not a threat to the narcissist, because he can lead everybody in worshipping or following “God” whilst keeping all the real attention in the room on himself. Or, back in the workplace, he can use his religious conviction to sustain his belief that he is special and/or his vision is something everyone should follow.