The PR Executive, Ray Ortlund, and the T4G Leaders: Who Do They Serve?

"You're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed, You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord, But you're gonna have to serve somebody." Bob Dylan link.

D. Sharon Pruitt from Hill Air Force Base, Utah, USAScared Child: USAF

The PR Executive and Janet Mefferd: Who Serves the Truth?

Today, we sent in the ad. We went through every comment left by our readers and did our best to incorporate your thoughts. We needed to keep it to the length of the ad taken out by Lyall Mercer in order to make it economical for us. We want to thank an anonymous reader who contributed the money to place the ad.

It is timely that we did so. Lyall Mercer is establishing an office in the United States since it appears that some of the Christian churches and organizations around here need some image refurbishment.

Janet Mefferd did not participate in the writing or financing of this ad. It was purely a spontaneous response on the part of TWW. However, we did want to defend and honor Janet Mefferd whose character, we believe, was called into question by a poorly conceived ad. Although our ad addresses a couple of the issues raised by Lyall Mercer, we expressed our concerns about Christian public relation firms in general.

The ad will appear on Monday or Tuesday. There may be some minor tweaking of the following submission. We hope that we have represented you well.

This is a paid release to correct a public relation executive’s point of view. In a CNS ad, he claimed that a crisis is occurring within the church which is caused by people whom he labels as “enemies”. He contends the “enemies” use social media to “attack” churches. As an example, he singled out Janet Mefferd, a Christian radio talk show host, who asked Mark Driscoll to respond to charges of plagiarism during an interview. These charges have been well documented by Dr. Warren Throckmorton.

This ad represents the combined thoughts of a number of The Wartburg Watch readers who represent a plethora of church traditions. A few readers are outside the church. While some of us might disagree with Mefferd on certain secondary issues, none would consider her an ”enemy of the church”. She is our sister in Christ.

It is the duty of all Christians to stand up for truth. When Mefferd questioned well-documented instances of “citation” issues, she did not speak for herself.  She spoke for many Christians who believe that truth matters far more than image.

"The world has changed," said Galadriel in the Lord of the Rings. The Internet allows the “little guy” to speak truth to the big guy with the money and the microphone.

Come to our blog. Read about rogue pastors, rich pastors, leaders who cover up child sex abuse, minimize domestic violence and those who brag about leaving piles of bodies under the bus.

We believe that when we ignore or gloss over sinful behavior among Christian leaders we become complicit in that behavior. Could some negative publicity be deserved? If so, should a well-oiled PR machine conceal negative publicity that might well be justified?

How can a PR executive or firm claim that it functions in the best interest of the church when it attempts to minimize sin?  The true enemies within the church are those who cover up sin and ignore pain. We would suggest that PR firms try to figure out how to manage that crisis because it affects the entire church.

We leave you with this question. Does the Gospel tell us to polish the image of man or to project the image of God?

Ray Ortlund and the Ministry of Advocacy: Who serves the victims of child sex abuse?

In this post, Ortlund references an article by Matt Perman, 4 Types of Mercy. In his post, Perman differentiates between encouragement and advocacy.

Advocacy is different than encouragement. Encouragement is something you do to the person — building them up and strengthening them with your words. Advocacy is something you do for them in relation to others. When the real need is advocacy, encouragement alone can come across as hollow. 

In his post, Ortlund refers to the widow in Luke 18:1-8. From the NIV Bible Gateway

Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up. 2.He said:“In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared what people thought. 3 And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, ‘Grant me justice against my adversary.’

4 “For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, ‘Even though I don’t fear God or care what people think, 5 yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won’t eventually come and attack me!’”

6 And the Lord said, “Listen to what the unjust judge says. 7 And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? 8 I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”

Here is Ortlund's assessment of this parable. Note how he talks about powerless people.

The parable also implies the advocacy we should assert for powerless people.  Every one of us knows someone who has suffered wrong, someone who needs and deserves justice.  If we say, “But justice is a misguided goal,” read the parable again.  The key word in the text is “justice,” appearing four times.  Justice is the very thing Jesus makes prominent.  Or if we say, “But there is always wrong on both sides,” read the parable again.  Jesus includes no hint that the widow too was at fault.

Ortlund makes a call to put our lives on the line in order to advocate for justice for those who are powerless. He decries cowardice!

to stand by in silence when we could make a real difference for a person under fire is cowardice.

This is confusing in light of Ortlund's history. The question he does not address is "Who are you gonna serve since you gotta serve somebody?" Years ago, this blog started with a simple "prime directive." We stand up for the victims of abuse. We take to heart the simple advice given to us from Barbara Dorris of SNAP. We always keep the victims of abuse in the forefront of what we are doing. 

For whom does Ortlund advocate with his life? He was on the committee that exonerated CJ Mahaney, saying that he was fit to be a pastor at Sovereign Grace Ministries. This was with the full understanding of story after story of the alleged cover up of child sex abuse. Where was Ortlund on the issue of the powerless? Was he bravely standing up for the powerless?

Perhaps this commenter under Ortlund's post remembers who Ortlund did not serve. (I do have a screen shot.)

Children and their families, whose lives have been permanently scarred both by abuse, and by the encouragement of born again believers to not report the abuse.

They desperately need our advocacy. Their terror, their violated hearts and bodies and and the hopelessness of their isolation is crying out for the love of Jesus. Let the little children come to me, and forbid them not…

We know that Ortlund serves CJ Mahaney. Here is the statement that Ortlund released along with Kevin DeYoung and Carl Trueman. Too bad that none of them mentioned serving the children. But you gotta serve somebody, right? And ya gotta be brave…

The identities of these men were not disclosed until after they rendered their finding on whether Mahaney was fit for ministry. And here is the preliminary panel's conclusion (drum roll please)…

“We do not believe C.J. Mahaney’s confessed sins have disqualified him from Christian ministry. Or to put it positively, from all that we have seen, heard, and read, we believe C.J. Mahaney is, at this moment in time and based on those sins which he has acknowledged, still fit to be a minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ and a pastor to others.”

T4G and the Leaders: Who Do They Serve?

Who are you gonna serve? The children and the widows or the guy behind the microphone? Who does Al Mohler, John Piper, Thabiti Anyabwile, John MacArthur and Kevin DeYoung serve? Is it the children? Who are the cowards? Those who serve the children or those who serve the guy with the microphone? This is a picture reportedly taken at the current T$G conference and posted on Twitter by the brother of Ligon Duncan. (DeYoung is certainly leaning rather far to the left.) Wouldn't it have been wonderful to see some of the plaintiffs up there as well? Why weren't they? Guess you gotta serve somebody and they lost out.

Screen Shot 2014-04-11 at 3.17.31 PM

All of these men are speakers except for Mahaney who was not supposed to be there. Last year, Mahaney had this to say about his attendance at T4G. 

After much prayer, reflection and counsel I have decided to withdraw from participation in the 2014 Together for the Gospel conference. My reason for doing so is simple: I love these men and this conference and I desire to do all I possibly can to serve the ongoing fruitfulness of T4G.

Unfortunately, the civil lawsuit filed against Sovereign Grace Ministries, two former SGM churches and pastors (including myself), continues to generate the type of attention that could subject my friends to unfair and unwarranted criticism. Though dismissed in May (and now on appeal), the lawsuit could prove a distraction from the purpose of this important conference. My withdrawal is not intended to communicate anything about the merits of the suit. My decision simply reflects the reality that my participation could create a hindrance to this conference and its distinct purpose of serving so many pastors. My strong desire is to make sure this doesn’t happen. I believe the most effective way I can serve my friends who have supported me, and continue to support me, is by not participating in the 2014 conference.

My enthusiasm for this conference is undiminished and I believe it will continue to be a powerful context for encouraging and equipping pastors in their efforts to serve their churches and proclaim the gospel. I am immensely grateful for the undeserved privilege to have been involved in previous conferences, and, most importantly, my ongoing friendship with these men I love and respect.

What a man of his word! What statement are the rest of these men making? Well, Julie Anne Smith asked Pam Palmer, a mother of the a plaintiff in the SGM debacle to tell us what she thinks these men are saying to her.

Sometimes I am at a loss for words on what to say at the insensitivity and callousness of C. J. Mahaney and the men who support him. What other conclusion can observant people come to when they see a disgraced (yet undisciplined) leader sitting in the front row at such a prominent event other than the men sitting with him approve of his 30+ year record of covering up child sex abuse.  ~Pam Palmer, mother of plaintiff in Sovereign Grace Ministry abuse lawsuit.

So there we have it. Who is the PR executive serving? Who are Ortlund, Piper, Mohler, DeYoung and others serving? Who is Mahaney serving? Because we all gotta choose and it looks like we know who, and what, they have chosen to serve.

Mavis Staples & Johnny Lang-"Gotta Serve Somebody" 
Point of Light  Tribute 2011


 

Lydia's Corner: Ezekiel 7:1-9:11 Hebrews 5:1-14 Psalm 105:1-15 Proverbs 26:28

Comments

The PR Executive, Ray Ortlund, and the T4G Leaders: Who Do They Serve? — 186 Comments

  1. I will confess to mixed feelings on Janet Mefferd. I don't believe in her anti-gay and pro-tea party politics, that I sometimes think borders on hysteria. That said, she is one of the very few in the evangelical to call out the misdeeds of celebrity preachers and to be a constant voice drawing attention to sexual abuse in the church, which many Christian powers-that-be would just as soon cover up.

    But unlike celebrity preachers, I don't demand 100% agreement with someone's beliefs in order for me to support them when they are involved in a just cause. So a big Thank You to TWW for creating and submitting the ad and to the anonymous donor who made that possible.

  2. @ Deb:

    Brent Detwiler has just reported that “The Judged ruled that Morales is fit to take the stand.” Methinks a little bald man and his pack of in-laws are fidgeting a bit more than normal today.

  3. Deb wrote:

    Funny thing…the term “serve” is very prominent in C.J. Mahaney’s vocabulary.

    Are you sure that isn’t “service” (chuckle chuckle) when applied to Carolyn?

  4. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Spot on, made me chuckle.

    Madame Blog Queens, that article is certain to cause some ripples. I look forward to reading about them.

    “Who are you gonna serve since you gotta serve somebody?”

    What an odd concept.

  5. Dee, let’s not forget Ortlund’s Gospel Coalition ridiculous puff piece on Driscoll’s “apology.”

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/rayortlund/2014/03/17/what-just-happened-2/

    And, just to refresh everyone’s memory:

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2014/03/17/what-i-wish-i-could-say-to-ray-ortlund-but-he-wont-let-me/

    Seems that Ortlund is in the business of being a self-appointed apologist for those who bring dishonor on the name of Christ. He does not have a shred of credibility left. Why do those in the GC choose to let him sully their reputation?

  6. Mahaney must have a different definition of participate than the rest of us.

    participate (according to my Funk & Wagnall’s Standard Dictionary): sharing; taking part in; take part or have a share in common with others.

    He may think that because he’s not speaking, he’s not participating. But, his mere presence there shows that he is. These guys must think that the common folk are stupid.

  7. TW wrote:

    @ Deb: Brent Detwiler has just reported that “The Judged ruled that Morales is fit to take the stand.” Methinks a little bald man and his pack of in-laws are fidgeting a bit more than normal today.

    Thanks for the update. We look forward to covering the trial.

  8. “We believe that when we ignore or gloss over sinful behavior among Christian leaders we become complicit in that behavior. Could some negative publicity be deserved? If so, should a well-oiled PR machine conceal negative publicity that might well be justified?”

    So glad you are addressing censureship within Christian news reporting!

  9. @ Deb:

    “Funny thing…the term “serve” is very prominent in C.J. Mahaney’s vocabulary.”
    +++++++++

    “serve”

    another one of those christian culture words with all the diluted impact of a cup of tea ordered in any American restaurant (made with sort of hot water, usually from the microwave, & served with powdered creamer.) mmmmm, beige warm water.

    I have concluded that “serve” has come to mean pastors doing something for publicity with their circle of pastor friends.

    For us riff raff, “serve” means engaging in any kind of busywork for the church, whether it matters or not, so church leaders can check it off their list of things for viability.

  10. Great ad. My perception is that it is unfortunate some of the group in picture have minimized and whitewashed the sexual abuse case against Sovereign Grace and the abuses and dishonesty of Driscoll. If they are worried it will have a negative impact on evangelism their complicity in whitewashing these scandals has done more harm to the cause they espouse than the negative press they are trying to minimize. They are party to evil doings if they are attacking those who publicize as “evil doers.”

  11. @ JeffT:
    You get it! It has to start somewhere. We must prove that we can get along without demanding strict adherence to a set of rules unlike the “Gospel Politburo.”

  12. chris wrote:

    I feel so honored, I’ve been quoted by TWW. One more thing of my bucket list.

    I need to help you with your bucket list!

  13. TW wrote:

    ” Methinks a little bald man and his pack of in-laws are fidgeting a bit more than normal today.

    De Young must be leaning almost sideways!

  14. dee wrote:

    chris wrote:

    I feel so honored, I’ve been quoted by TWW. One more thing of my bucket list.

    I need to help you with your bucket list!

    Hahaha!

  15. Very nice job on the ad!

    Strunk and White would be proud – “be brief” was achieved!!! (and many other good hallmarks of great writing were adhered to.)

    Can’t help but think that this verse and the commentary apply somewhere in the last week:

    http://biblehub.com/james/1-21.htm

    James 1:21
    New Living Translation
    So get rid of all the filth and evil in your lives, and humbly accept the word God has planted in your hearts, for it has the power to save your souls.

    Pulpit Commentary

    Verse 21. – With the form of expression in this verse, comp. 1 Peter 2:1, “Putting away, therefore, all wickedness (ἀποθέμενοι οῦν πᾶσαν κακίαν), and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil-speakings, as new-born babes long for the spiritual milk,” etc. Filthiness (ῤυπαρὶαν). Here only in the New Testament, never in LXX.; but the adjective ῤυπαρός is the word used of the “filthy garments” in Zechariah 3:3, 4 – a narrative which illustrates the passage before us. Karts is not vice in general, but rather that vicious nature which is bent on doing harm to others (see Lightfoot on Colossians 3:8). Thus the two words ῤυπαρία and κακία comprise two classes of sins – the sensual and the malignant, Engrafted; rather, implanted. The word is only found again in Wisd. 12:10, where it signifies “inborn.” St. James’s teaching here is almost like a reminiscence of the parable of the sower (Matthew 13:3, etc.). The “implanted Word” is the gospel teaching. “The seed is the Word of God” (Luke 8:11).

  16. Excellent job, everyone ! Pro-active, I love it!

    Thanks to Deb/Dee for the idea and for writing it and also to the person who paid for it.

    It’ll be fun to see if anything comes of it.

  17. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    That pic:
    The Gospel Politboro.

    Those folks constitute some kind of Politburo, that’s for sure. What, if anything, it has to do with the Gospel remains to be seen.

  18. I completely agree that Mahaney lied by stating he was not going to participate and then showing up. But has John MacArthur publicly supported Mahaney after the lawsuit was announced? Perhaps he would have withdrawn from the conference if he knew Mahaney was showing up. I’m not a MacArthur apologist, but I haven’t seen direct evidence that he is complicit in support for Mahaney.

  19. I agree. And knowing MacArthur, he’s not afraid to speak his mind and tick people off. I don’t always agree with him, but I do think he is probably not a Mahaney-ite.

  20. But Ortland is an advocate for the powerless!

    Poor powerless neocal leaders, the Annointed, why they are:

    SURROUNDED BY THE LYNCH MOB ONLINE for “every single perceived fault”…

    BRUTALLY ATTACKED by jezebels like Mefferd who dare to hold them accountable for little insignificant perceived faults like plagiarism, smear campaigns, slander, abuse…

    HELD ACCOUNTABLE by ugly whispering sin-sniffing Pharisees who actually expect them to not sit in the Front Row with the Louisville Sluggers for all the World to See when they promised, just promised that their “undiminished….love for these men” compelled them–just compelled them (sniff, violins) to withdraw from participation in T4G.

    There poor poor leaders with their 16,000 sq ft houses who have to fly business class (sniff) rather than being able to afford their own jet places like properly acknowledged demigods like Kenneth Copeland, forced to put up with all these nattering nabobs and truth tellers and busybodies, like the ones who relentlessly pursued poor Richard Nixon.

    Why Ortland is “making real difference” for people “under fire”. Don’t go accusing him of “cowardice”. He’s bravely standing up for these poor men under fire!

  21. John Macarthur is the one preacher in the politburo picture, I have some respect for. The others are suspect and complicit. I don’t agree with him regarding complementarianism, though I feel his reasoning is more nuanced and thought out than most. He doesn’t parrot out a doctrinal line he hasn’t carefully considered. He has remained mum through most of the neocalvinist scandals, so he will probably weather the storm unscathed. I may sort of an apologist because I have actually met John Macarthur and he left a good impression on me. We will see.

  22. @ LawProf:
    LawProf, isn’t playing the poor poor victim and grooming third parties to feel sorry for them a characteristic of sociopaths?

    Remember that high-profile murder trial going on right now in South Africa? Afternoon drive-time radio described the defense strategy as “defendant sits there in front of the judge blubbering hysterically”. One (probably drunk) phone-in went a little further doint improv of it as “WAAAH! WAAAH! WAAH! Milsdy. WAAH! WAAH! WAAH! Milady….”)

  23. My speculative thought projection since seeing the picture of CJ Mahaney in the front row:
    1. He’s one of the 4 in T4G. It’s really difficult for founders to bow out of their own organizations. What if he took his quarter of the cross logo and they had to design a new stamp? How would they explain that?
    2. A passive aggressive statement to the bloggers saying that the watchperson’s voice means nothing.
    3. An actually aggressive message and the picture was deliberately taken BECAUSE Mahaney was on the front line of action against his accusers.
    Anyway, whatever their motive, I went from sad about it and deflated to mad about it and charged up. I think that’s a good thing.

  24. I know this subject has been dealt with before on this blog, but it doesn’t hurt to read it again. How many of these T4G celebs fit this description?

    “On the other end of the continuum, pathological narcissism is characterized by at least five of the following characteristics:
    A need for constant attention and admiration
    A sense of entitlement
    Interpersonally exploitative (i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends)
    Lack of empathy (is unwilling or unable to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others)
    Envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

    An arrogant and haughty behavior or attitude

    A preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

    A belief that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people

    n between a healthy degree of self-interest and pathological narcissism is a group of people who don’t fully fit the diagnostic criteria of pathological narcissism but do have a lot of leanings in that direction. They tend to be self-centered and not deeply concerned about others and may have only three or four of the criteria listed above. Among others they can include physicians, lawyers, and athletes who are overly controlling, “cocky,” proud of their accomplishments, or possibly use labels and license plates like “Top Doc,” “Super Lawyer,” or “Top Jock.”

    Some very successful politicians, religious leaders and businessmen and women are rather narcissistic. They have great vision and drive to succeed, but they like things their way, eat up the admiration of their followers, exploit others to fulfill their understanding of the needs of their business, church or society, but lack deep caring for others and true humility. They may be admired from a distance or seem successful in terms of growth, numbers, outreach, and influence, but not in terms of their close relationships with others. When it comes time to give up the leadership reins, they struggle to let go since that means giving up prestige and control.

    When narcissistic people are placed in positions of leadership in a church or missionary organization, both their strengths and weaknesses impact those who work with them. On the positive side are the narcissist’s vision and capacity to stir people to set new goals and accomplish great things. They are often able to mobilize a congregation or group of people—especially if the people don’t work closely with them or if they trust them implicitly because of their leadership position.

    “If someone disagrees with the narcissist’s vision, the narcissist labels the dissenters as uncooperative, lacking vision or being unspiritual and out of God’s will.”
    On the negative side, narcissists need to be the focus of attention, have difficulty receiving advice and input from others, and may view members of their congregation or missionary team as people who should unquestionably accept and follow their vision.

    If someone disagrees with the narcissist’s vision (whether it is to build a larger church sanctuary or start a new outreach), the narcissist (and his or her loyal followers) labels the dissenters as uncooperative, lacking vision or being unspiritual and out of God’s will. In their arrogance, narcissists naively assume that they know God’s will and that anyone who disagrees with them is opposing God rather than simply expressing a well considered opinion. Needless to say, this is extremely discouraging to members of a team or congregation who feel ignored or minimized or pushed aside as the narcissist pushes ahead with his or her own agenda.

    Other narcissistic leaders try to subtly (or sometimes not so subtly) take credit for everything positive that is happening in a church or team. They can’t stand seeing anyone else getting credit or being in the lime light—unless they put them there and can share in the reflected admiration.

    Many churches have been fractured or lost many fine members because of a narcissistic leader’s need to have everyone under his or her control. Even very successful ministries in the congregation of a narcissist are too big a threat to be tolerated if the narcissist can’t control them or take the credit.”

    http://lifecounsel.org/pub_floyd_understandingNarcissism.html

  25. TW wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Hey! Sixth!

    Congrats Nick! Eagle has really lost his touch. Not only is he not first, he is nowhere to be seen. Must have a broken wing!

    47….just enjoying the commentary!! I read that comment about The Gospel Politburo from HUG and I can’t stop laughing.

  26. TW wrote:

    Envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

    Awesome points, all, but above all, I especially love this one!!!

    Many people forget that men can be jealous, too, lol.

  27. TW wrote:

    When narcissistic people are placed in positions of leadership in a church or missionary organization, both their strengths and weaknesses impact those who work with them

    From the recent “Act Like Men” conference this past October:

    James MacDonald:

    Stop asking your pastor to be more than he can be! One of the greatest sins in the church is harvesting indiscriminately all the benefits of a person’s strengths – and then bitching, and BITCHING about his weaknesses. It is a great wickedness. Stop doing that!

    “Bitching”? These narcissistic “pastors” are so full of themselves that they see the peons beneath their exalted thrones as “harvesting indiscriminately benefits” from these “pastors'” own wonderful storehouse of magnificence and extraordinary intellect.

  28. The thing that saddens me so much about seeing that T$G picture is the way in which supposedly solidly held convictions are simply ignored when it is no longer profitable. TGC has built a reputation on a rigorous application of Paul’s writings to Timothy regarding the qualifications of an elder. While many disagree with their interpretation, they have gone so far as to say that these qualifications keep women (not specific women, but the entire gender) out of the pulpit, etc., etc. And yet, Paul also writes that a pastor is supposed to be held in high esteem by outsiders and be above any charge. Even if Mahaney is completely innocent, he does not fit Paul’s test for eldership. The good old boy network has a very clear double standard; I just wonder if they are so blind by material success that they don’t see it. I kind of hope that is the case; otherwise, one might conclude that they are devious and duplicitous.

  29. @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:

    I’m really having a hard time viewing celebrity Christian leaders as elders. Mahaney being above reproach, along with Furtick and Driscoll, is one aspect. My other problem is that most of these celeb Christians don’t “function” in a local church doing what elders should be doing. Are they teaching in their churches, praying with people, speaking at funerals, caring for the sick, encouraging the downtrodden, living a quiet, simple life? I just don’t view them as elders at all, no matter how rich and popular they are. This may seem harsh to some, but it’s reality to me.

  30. @ chris:

    There is a man who comments here. I will not embarrass him by naming him but he is a hero of mine. He lives and works outside of the US and fellowship can be hard to find. This man followed the CJ Mahaney story long distance and decided to stand up for the children. His church loves Mahaney and SGM publications.

    He made a stand and left his church over their willingness to compromise on this matter.This affected him and his family. MacArthur is no fool. His stand on charismatics was not well liked but there are plenty of Neo-Calvinists who supported him. If he had some real guts, he could have stood up and said he would sit elsewhere.

    I am not impressed with his consorting with the "leaders." CJ Mahaney has been a regular speaker for John MacArthur-just Google it. On this matter MacArthur is one of the boys. Perhaps child sex abuse isn't as important as charismatic teaching.

  31. @ dee:

    That was my thoughts in Mac as well – silence is not always golden. Silence doesn’t help victims.

  32. One thing I was wondering about was that many people objected, on the T4G blog, to Mahaney taking part in the conference. I wonder how many people went to the conference believing that Mahaney wouldn’t be there and maybe only came when they were sure he wasn’t participating. I’m wondering if any attendees were upset and surprised to find him sitting in the front row, like I was.

  33. TedS. wrote:

    From the recent “Act Like Men” conference this past October:
    James MacDonald:
    Stop asking your pastor to be more than he can be! One of the greatest sins in the church is harvesting indiscriminately all the benefits of a person’s strengths – and then bitching, and BITCHING about his weaknesses. It is a great wickedness. Stop doing that!

    Typical manipulation tactic. Tell the victim that, because they get some benefits, they aren’t allowed make any complaints. Ridiculous logic, of course.

    I have a friend who works with Child Protective Services as a social worker. He said that abusive parents use this logic all the time with their children.

  34. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    And yet, Paul also writes that a pastor is supposed to be held in high esteem by outsiders and be above any charge. Even if Mahaney is completely innocent, he does not fit Paul’s test for eldership. The good old boy network has a very clear double standard; I just wonder if they are so blind by material success that they don’t see it. I kind of hope that is the case; otherwise, one might conclude that they are devious and duplicitous.

    Great comment Procto!

  35. Anon wrote:

    Mr.H wrote:
    Typical manipulation tactic. Tell the victim that, because they get some benefits, they aren’t allowed make any complaints.
    You want to really get sick to your stomach?
    Here’s the audio clip of MacDonald, acting “like a man”: https://soundcloud.com/user1125186123/james-clip-1

    Ugh. That IS sickening.

    It seems so absurd to me that these guys (TGC, Neo-Cal, etc.) continually baby pastors and yell at lay folks for speaking out. Doesn’t the Bible seem to command the opposite: hold them to higher standards, subject them to more rigorous critique, etc.?

    To answer the question, “Who do they serve?” – I think we can safely eliminate one potential answer: the congregation. To borrow and adapt from JFK, these guys want lay folks to ask how they should be serving their pastor, not how the pastor should be serving them. (Which, of course, seems quite counter to Jesus’ teachings on servant leadership…)

  36. dee wrote:

    On this matter MacArthur is one of the boys. Perhaps child sex abuse isn’t as important as charismatic teaching.

    Purity of Ideology, Comrade.
    Purity of Ideology.

  37. Although I hate to even give the impression that I am defending him, Ortlund, and the two other members of the hastily put-together “council,” exonerated Mahaney rather soon after Brent’s first documents were published. So this happened way before the reports of child abuse were reported publicly. Of course, Ortlund may have known about it before it became public, but we don’t know that for sure. The issues they looked at, and even the ones they ignored, had nothing to do with child sexual abuse at SGM.

    It’s true, though, that, since the truth came out, Ortlund has remained silent, and, at the least, has indirectly supported Mahaney. I don’t recall if he has specifically referred to the lawsuit. He may have been one of the writers of the two notorious defenses of Mahaney after the lawsuit was stalled, but I don’t remember.

  38. @ JeffT:

    I too understand what you are saying about Mrs. Mefferd. I was one of the folks in her corner on the Mark Driscoll thing. I was excited to be part of her FB page and looked forward to commenting on her stories. I was not prepared however for her fundamental disdain and lack of love for my gay friends and their families. What followed for me was the immediate banishment of not being able to comment after I took her to task for using the term "gaystapo". It was tasteless and hurtful, and a little racist. I have many fine Jewish folks in my family, and holidays are a mixed bag of Christmas and dredels, Shabbas and Easter. So for me comparing gay people to Hitler's gestapo police forces during the war was disgusting to me. To say that for me was the limit and I let her have it. I was promptly thrown under the bus and had my ability to comment taken from me. Now while I really am glad she stood up to Driscoll I have really mixed feelings about her, she seems to really hate gay people based on her word choices and attitudes, and that does not seem Christlike to me at all. I am really excited about the ad and think it is very well written. Cannot wait to sit back and watch what happens honestly. I hope it has a positive impact. I am praying for all victims of abuse in our churches and I am hoping the lawsuit will go forward and continue to give these good old boys a hard time. I cannot believe anyone would support the hiding of molestation of children over the idea of justice. It makes me quite sick. These guys have a alot to answer for….

  39. @ JeffB:

    I understand what you’re saying, but this panel — comprised of Kevin DeYoung, Carl Trueman, and Ray Ortlund — was supposed to be OBJECTIVE, which means:

    3 a: expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations

    It is obvious from the celeb photo taken at T4G that Kevin DeYoung (sitting beside his buddy CJ) failed to meet that criterion. Of course, we already knew how close they were prior to the preliminary panel's decision being rendered. 

    Mahaney introduced his 'Cheap Seats' readers to DeYoung long before he was selected to serve on the three man panel. In December 2009 Mahaney wrote:

    I first met Kevin DeYoung in the pages of his book Why We’re Not Emergent (Moody, 2008). Somewhere around page 50 I became his fan. Since that time I’ve also had the privilege and joy of becoming his friend.

    Kevin is the senior pastor of University Reformed Church in East Lansing, Michigan, and the author of four books (more on his books in a forthcoming blog post). I asked him 14 questions on topics like books, devotions, preaching, and sports, which he was happy to answer.

    Meet my friend Kevin DeYoung. 

    Then in July 2010, Mahaney wrote the following about DeYoung in his post Plodding Visionaries:

    Local churches are built when humble servants commit, and remain, and serve, and do so over a period of years. Local churches are built by those Kevin DeYoung identified as “plodding visionaries.” In his message at our Next conference in May, Kevin DeYoung made this compelling point.

    And last but not least, in a post published a half year after Mahaney was deemed 'fit for ministry', C.J. wrote:

    Today I want to share with you a similar interview I did with Kevin DeYoung. Kevin is a close friend, a fine pastor, and one of my favorite authors. He is also one of the brightest and most discerning guys I know. He happens to be a Michigan State fan, and although I think the Big 10 is overrated we both hate Duke basketball and that only strengthens our friendship. Kevin is also no stranger to the Next conference—he has spoken there every year since 2009.

    Guess who else spoke at those Next conferences together with DeYoung – C.J. Mahaney… 

    And DeYoung was no stranger to the SGM Pastors Conference, where he spoke in November 2010, just months before being chosen to serve on the preliminary panel.

    Now let's take a look at how many times C.J. Mahaney has spoken at Kevin DeYoung's church.  He delivered a message entitled Evidences of Grace on January 31, 2010, as well as Keep Yourself in the Love of God on November 21, 2010.  Then on July 15, 2012, Mahaney was invited back to DeYoung's church.  The title of his sermon was A Surprising Punchline.

    Now you can understand why Kevin DeYoung was sitting beside C.J. Mahaney at last week's T4G conference. 

    (As an aside, it's important to remember that the identities of the three men on the preliminary panel were kept secret until their opinion was rendered). 

    Despite his criticism of ‘celebrity pastors’, Carl Trueman also failed the ‘objective’ test by speaking at T4G 2012.  I am left wondering whether he was asked to speak at T4G before or after serving on the panel.  Not only that, he continues to link to the "Meet Carl Trueman" post written by C.J. Mahaney on his faculty profile.  The interview first appeared on View from the Cheap Seats in January 2010 here and here.

    Finally, we had Ray Ortlund speaking at the Worship God conference on August 10-12, 2011, a mere two weeks after the preliminary panel rendered its opinion.  The July 27, 2011 opinion was published on the SGM website almost a week late.  The Worship God conference took place at Covenant Life Church – the then headquarters for SGM. 

    Let's not forget that C.J. Mahaney and Ray Ortlund serve together as Council Members of The Gospel Coalition which was established a decade ago.   From all outward appearances, it looks like they had known each other for a good number of years before the opinion was rendered.

    In an October 14, 2011 post entitled C.J. Mahaney, Ortlund defended his colleague by writing:

    I have grieved for C. J. Mahaney in recent months, as he has been openly spoken against.  I have never in my life witnessed a campaign of slander on such a scale as that aimed at C. J.  This behavior is clearly unbiblical and therefore self-discrediting.  To those few criticisms which rightly struck home to C. J.’s conscience, he has responded humbly.  He has taken those accusations before the Lord, in community with other responsible men, and has received them as he believes is right in the Lord’s sight, with repeated attempts to reconcile with his accusers.  No one could reasonably ask for more.  Personally, it appears to me that C. J. has even over-confessed to his critics.

    Many others, like me, distant in location but close in sympathy, hope that C. J. will return to his full ministry soon.  We will rejoice to see it.

    All of this LOOKS REALLY BAD from my vantage point!

  40. Part 1 of 3 before leaving for the local recycling centre

    Bridget wrote:

    …silence is not always golden. Silence doesn’t help victims.

    Indeed. When Peter said that love covers over a multitude of sins, I do not believe he was encouraging us to conspire together to keep our mutually-unrepented sins hidden in the dark. Those who “sin” by questioning church CEO’s don’t often have their “sins” covered over by love, for instance.

    God declared himself repeatedly during the OT period as one who defends the fatherless and the widow, and Jesus’ life threw this into even sharper relief. Hence, to my mind, Peter’s instruction to “love each other deeply” does not grudgingly include those who lack influence, rank or a lofty platform from which to state their own case. It extends especially to them.

  41. Part 2 of 3 before leaving for the local recycling centre

    TedS. wrote (citing James MacDonald):

    Stop asking your pastor to be more than he can be! One of the greatest sins in the church is harvesting indiscriminately all the benefits of a person’s strengths – and then bitching, and BITCHING about his weaknesses. It is a great wickedness. Stop doing that!

    I strongly suspect I’m barking up the same hymn-sheet as you are here, Ted. But ironically…

    MacDonald is right about not expecting a pastor – or anyone else – to be more than he can be. But again, that courtesy is not typically extended to the hard-working anonymous people in a “megachurch” business on whose freely-donated money and labour the business-model depends.

    It is surely no less a sin to harvest indiscriminately all the benefits of a person’s serving and tithe contributions, then throw them under the proverbial bus when they cease to be useful or when their intelligent commitment to the authenticity of the gospel becomes inconvenient.

    And if a CEO (or “pastor”, if you must) has so many weaknesses, then why burden him with so much prestige, privilege and recognition? If he is so conscious about his weaknesses, then why does he not step out of the limelight and focus his efforts on supporting others?

  42. @ Deb:

    I know almost nothing about Ray Ortlund, so I’m not commenting on him or his relationship with Mahaney. But on the generic subject of finding a person fit for ministry: the low-profile, anonymous believers who are thrown out of “churches” and shunned as “rebellious” for asking necessary questions of a church CEO don’t have high-profile committees of influential people standing up for them. Nobody at Together For The Gospel Coalition 29 published a report declaring Bent Meyer and Paul Petry, and their families, fit to serve God’s people. It was left to the blogsphere even to give them an opportunity to speak openly for themselves.

    Whatever the interweb is – and it undoubtedly gives a platform to some very malicious and unpleasant people – it is a place where it is very difficult to hide things in the darkness. Men whose deeds are evil will always love darkness, and thus will always hate the blogsphere.

  43. @ rebeccalynn:

    I hear you. I remember that old saying from childhood about sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me. How wrong that is. It may be OK for a child on the playground to at least be able to sing-song that, but it is not true. Words are powerful weapons of mass destruction, and when people get to slinging them around indiscriminately there can be a lot of collateral damage. In the cultural and religious battles of today there is a lot of unnecessarily harmful stuff being said.

    I have no personal position on Ortlund or Mefferd, not having paid any attention to either one and therefore being totally uninformed on the specifics. But “gaystopo” is insulting.

  44. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    It is surely no less a sin to harvest indiscriminately all the benefits of a person’s serving and tithe contributions, then throw them under the proverbial bus when they cease to be useful or when their intelligent commitment to the authenticity of the gospel becomes inconvenient.

    I suppose you have already seen this?
    https://archive.org/details/JamesMacDonaldHarvastBibleChapel

    Hope the link works.
    Because if it does, you will get to see the stepford-elder puppets support their lord, Jimbo McDonald.

  45. As to that lineup of the (apparently bored and none too happy) front row there… And as to the ease with which those few have the power at the expense of the masses…How exactly is this better than the denominational and hierarchal church structures with bishops and such? How is a system built on free-for-all better than a system which includes the procedures of judicial decisions?

    It looks to me like any system in which the pastor(s) of the local churches are not answerable to anybody, and when the only way to deal with corruption or heresy or such is when there is a huge and public fight which includes the church membership and seems to include other like-minded churches and don’t forget the media, that very system needs to be re-evaluated.

    And, yes, since the baptists have admitted that the issue of bishops, for and against, cannot be determined by scripture alone, then the time has come to wrest some of the power away from the power-hungry folks in the pulpit and revisit the whole issue of administrative authority in the church.

    And, yes, all systems can become corrupt, but it is easier to clean up things when there is a system for doing so, than it is to deal with a stampeding, frenzied and panicked herd.

  46. Nancy wrote:

    How is a system built on free-for-all better than a system which includes the procedures of judicial decisions?

    It’s not! Nice post Nancy. (I guess that is because I agree with you!)

  47. @ rebeccalynn:
    i have long believed that a fellowship that encourages people of differing beliefs to come together is the healthiest for all of us. I was in two such churches. Although the leadership would be considered “middle of the road” the members were “all over the road.”

    Because of this we challenged one another to stretch beyond our comfortable isolation. John Piper loves his brick walls as he calls them. He says we can toss love bombs over that wall. Sproul calls those who do not believe like he does “barely Christian.”

    I say bull to all of them. We are to be brothers and sisters in our differences. We all grow and change when we do. The moment I heard Mefferd called an “enemy of the church” for pointing out plagiarism, I got mad. We need one another, no matter how messy and confused we are.

    Plus, it is rather amusing that I, a dedicated OE/CE, am defending someone whom I think believes in YEC. It confuses our detractors.

  48. @ dee:

    Here, what Dee said and how she said it, is a good example of how people can talk, state ideas and take positions without being hostile or insulting or dismissive.

    You go, girl!

  49. http://t4g.org/media/2012/05/celebrity-pastor-indecent-exposure-2/

    @ Deb:
    Hi Deb, I watched the T4G Panel Discussion video from 2012 in which Trueman presented on “Celebrity Pastors”, which was then discussed. Mahaney, Platt, Chandler, Anyabwile participated and it was moderated by Duncan.

    Mahaney is his characteristic self in this video. First, he’s The Humble Court Jester, laughing and attracting attention to himself, claiming he was there to “die”. He seemed to be simultaneously acknowledging himself as a likely subject of Truman’s topic while behaving as though within the group, he was the stand-out. His body language, with his arms taking up space in front of the others, drew attention to himself and infringed upon the space of the others at the table.

    Since Mahaney is on camera his behavior is little more subdued and not as overt, but it’s all there. Its easy to observe him deflect unwanted attention away from himself while working to minimize and discredit the person speaking the truth. Mahaney typically does this at lightening fast speed, clokes his attacks, takes control then obfuscates what he did so as to confuse others so that the idea he planted remains unchallenged, which then feeds his pride. He feeds on that. It’s something he does all the time because hes constantly in “game on” mode, it’s a competition he’s engaged in, and he’s guarding the basket and he’ll commit as many fouls as it takes just to win the game.

    So, immediately Mahaney starts with his laughing, joking routine. Look how winsome he is! How can such a funny guy be guilty of anything bad? He’s one of us hahaha, right? And, of course, he’s so open to correction and willing to DIE (as he says) – like it’s some kind of joke hahaha.

    Then he pulls out his little princess tiara and puts it on, and by the power invested in him as not just one participating as an equal member of the panel discussion, but as one of the founding members of T4G, he leans over and puts his arms all around Trueman, telling everyone that “they’re friends”. Yet Trueman appears unfazed and unaffected by Mahaney’s antics. In fact he looks somewhat put-off. But Mahaney, being the wannabe point-guard that he is, is covering Trueman so he doesn’t score any points against him, and gets a feel for his body posture and can tell the guy intends to score against him and presents a challenge. He’ll need to do something to defuse his opponent.

    Carl presents his message for discussion and pretty much describes Mahaney although I’m sure he’s not the guy Trueman necessarily had in mind. That doesn’t stop Mahaney, however, from feeling the heat, assuming as he did at the beginning that it was all about him. Mahaney is probably uncomfortable, thinking more about how he can steal the ball than anything. Then when Platt waxed on about how convicted and humbled he felt, and that it had scored points, Mahaney was probably mad he stole a play from his playbook, and even madder that he had hair and appeared athletic in doing so.

    As it was coming down to the buzzer Mahaney wasn’t going to fake & take it anymore. It was time for him to make his moves and pull rank, arresting the job of moderator away from the puffy looking Duncan in his suit, take control of the game, and start asking the questions. Finally at the end, he put Trueman in his place, reminding him in that Mahaney-spiritually-abusive-manner, that he needs to be humble. That he needs to show gratitude. That he needs to be thankful. That he’s indebted to him and to the T4G conference for the fact he’s even there. And is Truman even enjoying the conference Mahaney wonders?

    Was he also subtly throwing the sense of the advantage Trueman is gaining monetarily from being there too? Surely CJ would never use money as a tool of manipulation, right?! No Carl should feel indebted to The Powers That Be, know his place, and be grateful for their benevolence.

  50. @ Paula:

    Interesting that Trueman was at the 2012 T4G less than two years after he declared CJ fit for ministry. Trueman also claimed he did not know CJ well, but only as an acquaintance (maybe that all changed after he was on the panel of four?). So what made him, or the other three, authorities to determine CJ fit for ministry (according to their own denominational beliefs)? I don’t get Trueman at all. He seems to be confused within himself about what he is doing. CJ seems bent in drawing him in to the circle, much like the frog in the pot.

  51. @ Bridget:
    Actually, it was about 8 months. I wrote a post in August 2011 about the upcoming T4G (2012), and Trueman has already been invited by then.

    Have you read Trueman’s take on T4G? He believes it’s just a conference, NOT A MOVEMENT. You can read his assessment here.

    http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2012/04/t4g-made-me-look-like-a-girlym.php

    ironically, the prequel event to the 2014 T4G conference put on by CBMW boasted this theme – BRAVE NEW MOVEMENT.

    I respectfully submit that Trueman was wrong. T4G, TGC. and CBMW are all part of the same ‘movement’.

  52. @ Deb:

    Trueman doesn’t seem to know that “the guy who cries” can also be known as the “great manipulater.” Trueman probably doesn’t think that a man would go there, but they can.

    Was Mahaney declared fit in 2010 or early 2011?

  53. @ Paula:

    “…the T4G Panel Discussion video from 2012 in which Trueman presented on “Celebrity Pastors”, which was then discussed. Mahaney, Platt, Chandler, Anyabwile participated and it was moderated by Duncan.”
    +++++++++++++++++

    hah — seems to me that most of those at that table discussing how to handle their own celebrity were quite delighted for the opportunity to be highlighted. They seemed to be enjoying all the attention immensely.

    amazing

    and cj looks like Kermit the frog. but with the false lament, “it’s not easy being celebrated”

  54. JeffT wrote:

    Anon wrote:

    You want to really get sick to your stomach?
    Here’s the audio clip of MacDonald, acting “like a man”: https://soundcloud.com/user1125186123/james-clip-1

    MacDonald’s such a puke. ‘Don’t bother me and don’t you dare criticize anything I do or say! I talk, you shut up and listen and do what I say.’

    This is wrong on so many levels, I really don’t know what to say.

    He is most definitely referring to himself.

    Interesting to me how he says in one breath that the Pastor is not prideful, God’s is seeing to that then follows that up by saying the pastor’s not perfect, only Christ is.

    So a Pastor can fall short, but never due to pride. Id love to see any of us defend that Scripturally. Pride is the most common of all sins……

  55. In fairness, I want to say I wrote my above analysis after having listened to the T4G from 2012 on Celebrity Pastors in the past, and I decided to give it a second go.

    Overall I found the discussion an excellent one. Trueman, Anyabwile, Platt, Chandler, Pratt & Duncan all adding to the discussion in meaningful ways. I took the time to transcribe Trueman’s initial presentation because I think it was so relevant. I disagreed with him on one point, where he mentioned Paul’s letter to Timothy, and how he extrapolated from that a Pauline formula for the preservation of all churches, for all time, down through the ages. I think Paul’s concern was addressed to that particular church, to the particular crisis it was facing, Paul’s concern for the survival of that particular church, and his remedial recommendations and counsel that he believed would help it to survive. But Trueman treated that with this huge, broad brush that I think removes the verses from their context and misapplies it within the context of the discussion.

    Apart from that, it was all good. But of course, what concerned me was not only Mahaney’s presence, but his contribution. And not only his contribution, but the apparently lack of understanding of the other men at the table which I found incredible.

    So, if you give a listen, here are a few observations of mine about what Trueman said and how it relates to Mahaney (sorry I dont have all time stamps to add to this). Bear in mind that Mahaney never once acknowledged any personal involvement in the kinds of things Trueman was addressing, other than his false joking around at the outset about Trueman being there to “take him out” and that Mahaney was there to “die” – something that Mahaney failed to demonstrate within the context of the discussion if you ask me:

    (Quotes are close but not exact word for word)

    1. Trueman – “I think one of my major concerns in the western culture is celebrity culture. We tend to invest peculiar power and authority in specific individuals…We invest this huge power and authority in them. Knowing that our culture is set up to receive the “big individual” in that way, it places an onus on the church to be very careful in how it presents the influential figures within the church…(speaking of his students in seminary) When asked who is the most influential…? They almost never say, well its the man who preaches at my home church. They will mention names, some of whom are represented here today, and that concerns me because here you have a detachment of the preaching of the Word from the day to day pastoral ministry that’s going on. And that’s one concern. The second conern would be, when students are asked who they want to be like…? The “Aspirational Model” is increasingly wrong because its nothing like what they are actually going to experience. Most of my students are going to go out and pastor small, unknown churches. And if htey have an aspirational model taht they have to be a David Platt or a CJ Mahaney or a Matt Chandler, thats a problem for me as an educator.”

    Mahaney and his wife cultivated the ‘aspirational model’. There’s no doubt about this. It was systematic and systemic. Not only did they promote themselves as models of biblical manhood and womanhood, but SGM’s flagship CLC, was considered THE model for ministry. The Pastor’s College was housed there, and those who attended were to use CLC as the blueprint upon which to build their ministries. Not only that but the praise, adulation, honor and recognition of Mahaney, his family, and his leadership was CONTINUOUS. There was NO END to all the standing ovations. The practice of Mahaney having the members praise himself and those in leadership was so routine, I reached the point where I got up and walked out. It was EXTREME. I reached a point on this matter where I literally couldn’t stomach it anymore because it had evolved into WORSHIP. There was so much of this going on and it happening with such frequency that it became literally sickening and offensive to my biblical sensibilities. Im sure others who attended CLC know what I’m talking about. This was no small thing. It was a HUGE problem and definitely cultish.

    2. Trueman, “But when it becomes an aspirational model for most students, that’s a real problem and its a problem on the ground in seminaries. I wonder if it has some impact on the burn-out rate. There’s a high burn out rate of students leaving seminary & going into pastoral ministry. Many of them leave within 5 years. Is that because they look to guys like you, and they think, “that’s what Im giong to experience.” And they end up in a church in the middle of nowhere with 50 people who are fighting all the time and it’s nothing like the aspirational model they’ve picked up. So, I would say my two primary concerns are: 1. the detachment of the preaching ministry from pastoral influence and 2. the creation of an unrealistic aspirational model.
    All that to say it is the result of the reception many church pastors in the culture. Its not maybe the fault of mega-church pastors themselves, though I would then counter and say…those who are “big names” and very influential need to do everything you can to make sure that you’re not promoting yourself, even if it’s surreptiously, but that’s you’re promoting Christ…so my hope and prayer is that the very influential pastors of very large churches do everything they can to minimize themselves.

    Mahaney created a culture around himself in which everything about him was promoted, including his likes and dislikes. The Pastors would parroted descriptions of CJ as being so “humble”, “authentic” and a “gifted leader”. You only have to watch the youtube videos in which the Mahaney girls and Carolyn honor CJ the way even his family was brainwashed into portraying Mahaney as a man in possession of an unattainable stature, head and shoulders above all others – a Saint. The same exact thing was practiced in the development of what Trueman calls an ‘Aspirational Model’. Within SGM, the brand Mahaney created was THE template upon which all churches were to be built, and which should all function according to the Mahaney playbook.

    3. Trueman, “We need to make a distinction between Intention and Perception. Because of the proclivity of the culture (to make celebrities), one has to have more than good intentions. One also has to take steps.

    Mahaney steps in and defines the conference by saying, “The conference exists to dissuade people from aspiring to a celebrity pastor. This conference exists to honor ordinary pastors as doing the most important and difficult work. That’s why this conference exists.”

    So, CJ has been inspired to create a conference for the purpose of honoring ordinary pastors???? If that is true, why didn’t he mention anything about the “ordinary” pastors within SGM that he DEGIFTED because they weren’t extraordinary enough?? Such hypocrisy.

    4. Ligon Duncan question to CJ: “This presents a challenge to those brothers who don’t have people coming in with TV cameras, wanting to do interviews. Do you have counsel for our souls when the Lord has…not called us to….London or New York City…and who instead have small congregations…our brothers who are faithful…who hare faithful…who have been given a larger platform?”

    Mahaney: “Well, I think what’s helpful to recognize is there are temptations in the heart of someone who is know and someone who is not known. And there are temptations and tendencies among every congregation. So, you have congregational temptations and tendencies to assign, I think, exaggerated significance to someone in pastoral ministry. I think the Corinthian problem exists and that temptation exists in every church. A pastor has to be aware of that and has to teach into that and then, yes, a pastor has to study his own sould also.”

    Temptations? Hello? The “temptation” to assign “exaggerated significance to someone in pastoral ministry: was CULTIVATED BY HIM BIG TIME!!! It was Mahaney and his staff that exaggerated their significance, NOT the congregation. He led the people of CLC into sin and temptation – which is why anyone who really knows him, understands he routinely blamed people in the congregation for sin, accused them of pride, and blamed anyone inside the church for talking about the sins the leadership were involved with and worked to cover up. The members weren’t sheep, they were scape goats. He was the victimizer who played the victim who could easily lie about that on a national stage and be believed by the people who didn’t know the real man because he’s such a chameleon.

    Mahaney continues, “If you have come to this conference and are struggling in relation to the numerical size of your church, I don’t have any unique counsel for you.”

    Again, thats because Mahaney viewed this as a cause to remove someone from their pastoral position and ‘degift’ them! If a church wasn’t growing, it was because the pastor wasn’t “gifted” enough to lead. (Hmm, by now shouldn’t the Louisville church be huge with all that gifting and talent they have there? With CJ at the helm along with his brother-in-law Gary Ricucci, his sons-in-laws, Bob Kauflin, and Jeff Purswell, why isn’t that church fat and thriving? By CJ’s standards, he should be degifted.)

    Mahaney continues, “It is simply PRIDE being revealed in your heart and a process of identifying that, weakening that. But also cultivating an appreciation for men who are pastoring large churches, or do have more influence. I don’t think it’s wise to simply become pre-occupied with the prideful tendencies of my heart.”

    Wow. Way to encourage the pastors he just claimed the conference existed to honor and to serve. If any of those guys were feeling discouraged, Mahaney just discouraged them more. But may it never be that one of those little guys tells CJ Mahaney they think his pride was revealed in the discussion on Celebrity Pastors, and far be it from Mahaney to confess he had been convicted of any sin. He already stated that for him to be “pre-occupied” with his sinful tendencies wouldn’t be “wise”, yet he’s fine focusing on the sinful tendency of pride within the heart of a small, country pastor who is hoping to see his church grow. Mahaney’s influence is creepy at best.

    5. Ligon Duncan in closing says, “But the ministry of the local church – its the great concern of all our hearts.”

    CJ looked so affected by this statement, putting his head down on the table, appearing to be deeply concerned. But my question is, if he is so concerned about the local church, then why did he leave Covenant Life? I guess it was because the congregation’s “tendencies & temptations” – the ones he cultivated. Yet it was that same local church (CLC) Mahaney had said at an earlier T4G that he expected to die in, and that his ministry there provided proof of his “faithfulness”. But he faithlessly walked away! He left! He took no responsiblity for the mess and left it behind for others to deal with.

    I guess the church Mahaney led for so long was full of “temptations & sinful tendencies” – and why would that be if he was such an amazing leader, declaring for years CLC to be “His happiest place on earth”. If CLC was so bad that he had to leave, how does that reflect upon the quality of his pastoral ministry all those years and how does that prove his faithfulness? And how is it guys like Duncan, Dever, Mohler and Trueman don’t connect those dots??

    CJ wasn’t sufficiently humbled by what went down at CLC. He hasn’t been sufficiently humbled by the “unfortunate” lawsuit. He hasn’t been sufficiently humbled by the message on Celebrity Pastors. And he hasn’t been sufficiently humbled enough to not appear at this year’s T4G Conference, choosing instead to take a front row seat because, you know, he’s so full of love and concern for the gospel and didn’t want to be “a distraction”.

  56. @ Bridget:

    I had forgotten that Trueman was one of the guys involved with Mahaney's exoneration. I think some of these guys look at the presence of complementarian belief and if it's been successfully worked into the church structure, it serves as a reason to declare someone "fit for ministry". Complementarianism has become their hill to die on.

    ps. My apologies for the really long post above. But it comes at bedtime for many of you. So, you can thank me for helping me put you to sleep!

  57. “It is the duty of all Christians to stand up for truth.”
    And if you can’t find it within yourself to stand up for the truth, you don’t deserve to wear that uniform!

  58. @ Paula:
    Thank you so much for writing this all out. You definitely took one for the team to put that much time into it… Not sure if i could stomach listening to all that right now. Here’s hoping it will help me to sleep, lol.

  59. In all fairness (and I disagree with Trueman on several points), Trueman wrote a piece on why Comp vs. Egal. should always be regarded as a secondary issue that should not divide the church.

    He’s a Comp who has made it clear that the issue is no more important than the infant baptism vs. believer baptism debate.

    Other than that, I don’t know. I’m praying that he of all people will really wake up to this, and be filled with compassion for the victims. He is fearless about writing against anything he disagrees with, and his insights are razor sharp.

    When he does get his eyes opened (and I plead with all of you to pray that he does), G.C. is not going to have a good time of it. His writing is like Presbyterian Minister meets Monty Python…..

  60. @ chris:
    I will definitely pray as you ask…I will also look up this guy’s writings. ..sounds interesting. ..

    And just to clarify, reading Paula’s wonderful summary of that conference is really all I can handle right now. Ty again for writing that out. Much better than taking up a great deal of time with listening

  61. Paula wrote:

    So, immediately Mahaney starts with his laughing, joking routine. Look how winsome he is!

    Look how HUMBLE he is!

    How can such a funny guy be guilty of anything bad? He’s one of us hahaha, right? And, of course, he’s so open to correction and willing to DIE (as he says) – like it’s some kind of joke hahaha.

    No, “chuckle chuckle”.
    Like when he demanded Carolyn service him sexually while she was throwing up from morning sickness. “ME MAN! ME HUMBLE! ME HORNY!”

    Then he pulls out his little princess tiara and puts it on…

    “BUMP BUMP SUGAR-LUMP RUMP!”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc57lcoVfrU

  62. @ Steve Scott:

    Yes, we made that discovery back in 2010 when we first started discussing TOGETHER FOR THE GO$PEL here at TWW.

    What's the Beef About Christian Conferences?

    Have you been watching the countdown on the TOGETHER FOR THE GOSPEL blog with great anticipation? http://www.t4g.org/blog/ The long awaited T$G Conference is next week. Hooray!!! (OOPS! I was typing capital letters and forgot to take my finger off the shift button when I typed the "4" in "T4G"… Why is the dollar sign located just above the number 4 on the computer keyboard? Hmmm……) In honor of this important occasion on the New Calvinists' calendar, here's a re-post of our June 11, 2009 article…

  63. @ Paula:

    Thanks for taking the time to share the key points of that discussion with us. I will definitely take the time to listen to the panel discussion with Duncan, Trueman, Mahaney, et al AGAIN.

    When I first learned about Carl Trueman (in early 2010) and read his criticism of celebrity pastors, I was quite impressed and applauded him in a post entitled The Danger of Personality Cults Among the New Calvinists.

    Here is an excerpt from that post:

    Recently, we discovered that Carl Trueman, a Professor of Historical Theology and Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, is also concerned about what’s happening in the “New Calvinist” movement.  He wrote an excellent article in September 2009 entitled “The Nameless One”, which can be found at this link:

    http://www.reformation21.org/articles/the-nameless-one.php

    If you are enamored with the New Calvinists, please take the time to read Trueman’s article. He begins by explaining that in recent months he has been asked what he thinks about the young, restless, and reformed (YRR) movement.  While he is overjoyed by the positive aspects of this movement — that more Christians are reading their Bibles, going to church to hear the gospel preached, and studying the writings of the reformers (Calvin, Owen, etc.) — he is beginning to realize there may be some “shortcomings and potential pitfalls”.

    Trueman writes:  “One striking and worrying aspect of the movement is how personality oriented it is.  It is identified with certain big names, rather than creeds, confessions, denominations, or even local congregations.”

    That’s why I was SO DISAPPOINTED in two key things:

    (1) His exoneration of C.J. Mahaney

    (2) His participation at T4G 2012

    Perhaps Trueman went because he thought he could change things?

    It’s never too late to apologize and say you were wrong…

    But who am I to say this?  I'm just a 'weaker vessel' (aka a woman)… 😆

  64. TedS. wrote:

    From the recent “Act Like Men” conference this past October:
    James MacDonald:
    Stop asking your pastor to be more than he can be! One of the greatest sins in the church is harvesting indiscriminately all the benefits of a person’s strengths – and then bitching, and BITCHING about his weaknesses. It is a great wickedness.

    Making up sins now, are we? Nothing cultic about that.

  65. @ TedS.:
    Ugh!
    @ Marie2:
    It did take some time, thanks! I do what I can to serve, and to help cure sleeplessness 😉
    @ chris:
    Intrigued. Good suggestion – prayer. A bad sign would be if Carl shaved his head so I’m going to keep an eye on that.
    @ Deb:

    That’s why I was SO DISAPPOINTED in two key things:

    (1) His exoneration of C.J. Mahaney

    (2) His participation at T4G 2012

    Perhaps he went because he thoughts he could change things?

    I share your sentiments. And I think Truemen was the only guy sitting during the discussion who used the word “sisters” – and did so in a positive sense. That probably made Mahaney grind his teeth.

    But as to why he was there, he had this to offer:

    Mahaney: “Were you reluctant to come to the conference?”

    Trueman: “You know I was.”

    Mahaney: (Doubles over in peals of laughter. This must be what Mahaney meant at the beginning of the discussion when he told Trueman that he was there to “die”. We know he couldn’t have meant “die to self” so of course it must have meant “die laughing”)

    Trueman, allowing Mahaney time to recover and catch his breath adds: “Dever asked me to speak. So, they put the guy on me who cries (referring to Mahaney).

    Mahaney: (again, peals of laughter because, you know, he giggles whenever someone says his name)

    Trueman: It ruins my reputation as a hard-nosed OPC guy, but it melted my heart.

    Mahaney: (on oxygen now, trying to catch his breath, but then suddenly comes up for air) “I didn’t just cry. I challenged him.” (Yes, thank you for that CJ. It restores our faith in your biblical manhood. So essential.)

    So apparently Trueman was reluctant to attend the conference but was cajoled by the Jolly Roger.

    @ Headless Unicorn Guy:

    No, “chuckle chuckle”.

    Or more like “cackle, cackle” 😐

  66. (Earlier comment @ 9:55am in moderation because I was a hog and responded to 5 people in one comment. Either that or the name “Mahaney” has been added to the list of cuss words, which I understand and support.)

  67. Paula wrote:

    CJ wasn’t sufficiently humbled by what went down at CLC. He hasn’t been sufficiently humbled by the “unfortunate” lawsuit. He hasn’t been sufficiently humbled by the message on Celebrity Pastors. And he hasn’t been sufficiently humbled enough to not appear at this year’s T4G Conference, choosing instead to take a front row seat because, you know, he’s so full of love and concern for the gospel and didn’t want to be “a distraction”.

    There are some who are beyond being humbled, by all appearances, based upon his demeanor at the Trueman roundtable alone, I’d say CJ is perilously close to this status. Whether this is so is ultimately the province of God, though.

    “They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.”

  68. @ Paula:

    Paula, I just can’t picture you as a hog!!! Must have been those curse words…Mahaney, Mahaney, Mahaney….has a shiny hiny… Must be a child’s rhyme somewhere for this.

    Instead of Jehovah, Jehovah, Jehovah from that Monty Python movie where some old guy is arrested and I think about to be stoned….I think I need to do a sound edit of that clip where the old guy says the M word instead.

    All of which to say, Paula, you rock, and I look forward to hearing what you have to say!!! I’m sure you’ll get out of moderation soon, or learn to break up the longer posts in to parts, ala Nick B.

  69. @ Paula:z

    And here is a wonderful Life of Brian clip to ponder:

    stoned for saying jehovah (life of brian)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYkbqzWVHZzI

    No women are allowed at the stoning, the leader is just as culpable as the accused, there is a cottage industry (selling packets of gravel ahead of time) surrounding stoning….YUP, it applies for today!!!!

  70. @ LawProf:
    One has to wonder. I’d agree he’s in a perilous position. He spent years telling his congregation I was in that our hearts were full of sin and deceit. Years telling us we were full of pride. Years impressing upon us that we were all doing better than we deserved. Years making people of God think and believe we were the problem and that we need to submit to his authority. Years saying he was the worst sinner he knew, but then walk away leaving the sin at the doorsteps of families like those whose children were molested and they were to blame, or the doorsteps of the children themselves, who needed to forgive, as though they were the one’s with the sin of unforgiveness.

    Mahaney has spent enough time talking about other people’s sins and the idol factory of their hearts. He has spent enough time browbeating people with indwelling sin. He’s done in my book with telling pastors at conferences designed to “encourage and honor” them that they need to examine their hearts for the presence of pride if he gets up there and acts like he’s Somebody and enjoys advantages they don’t because he managed to lie and cheat his way into building a large church and a “family” *cough* of churches.

    If he is a true believer, then there will be evidence of the presence and work of the Holy Spirit in his life “who convicts of sin and righteousness” John 16:8. Instead, what I hear within his messages are a continuous stream of accusations against the people of God, and according to scripture, that doesn’t proceed from God.

    The very essence of the boastful pride of life is self-preservation. Mahaney likes to talk about the men at a conference like T4G as having “world class” gifting (including, of course, himself). He’s world-class alright. The world. Not the Kingdom. In the Kingdom people are led by the Spirit and I’m not seeing Mahaney behave in relationship to the Body of Christ like a man who is part of it. These are the types of things we’re supposed to judge. That’s my viewpoint. And my seat ain’t cheap. It was purchased by the blood of the Lamb.

  71. @ Marie2:
    The link says the video is unavailable.

    But I am available.

    Just using this as an opportunity to put that out here on TWW. Shameless, I know.

  72. @ Marie2:
    But now for something completely different….

    She’s a witch! And we shall use our largest scale!

    (love Monty Python 😀 )

  73. @ Paula:

    Well here is another link to the same basic scene….Maybe there was an over abundance of people accessing that clip, from people reading TWW???

    This one includes a trailer for an upcoming movie….but you can skip the ad after like, 5 seconds…

    monty python’s the life of brian ( good enough for Jehovah )
    mrtaffy Duck mrtaffy Duck·64 videos
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbO5h8Ctfs8

  74. Paula wrote:

    @ Marie2:
    But now for something completely different….
    She’s a witch! And we shall use our largest scale!
    (love Monty Python )

    – If she weighs the same as a duck…
    – she’s made of wood.
    – And therefore?
    – A witch!

    http://www.qedcat.com/moviemath/holy_grail.html

    Mathematics Goes to the Movies

    by Burkard Polster and Marty Ross

    Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)

    17:03

    – Crowd: A witch! A witch! A witch! We found a witch! We’ve got a witch! A witch! A witch! We have found a witch. May we burn her?
    – How do you know she is a witch
    – She looks like one.
    – Bring her forward.
    – I’m not a witch! I’m not a witch !
    – But you are dressed as one.
    – They dressed me like this. – No, we didn’t.
    – And this isn’t my nose. It’s a false one.
    – Well? – We did do the nose.
    – The nose? – And the hat. But she is a witch !
    – Did you dress her up like this? – No, no!
    – Yes. A bit.
    – She has got a wart.
    – What makes you think she’s a witch?
    – She turned me into a newt!
    – A newt?
    – I got better.
    – Burn her anyway!
    – Quiet! Quiet!
    – There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
    – Are there? What are they? Tell us. – Do they hurt?
    – Tell me, what do you do with witches?
    – Burn them!
    – And what do you burn, apart from witches?
    – More witches! – Wood!
    – So why do witches burn?
    – ‘Cause they’re made of wood? – Good!
    – How do we tell if she is made of wood? – Build a bridge out of her.
    – But can you not also make bridges out of stone?
    – Oh, yeah.
    – Does wood sink in water?
    – No, it floats. – Throw her into the pond!
    – What also floats in water?
    – Bread. – Apples.
    – Very small rocks. – Cider! Great gravy.
    – Cherries. Mud. – Churches.
    – Lead. – A duck!
    – Exactly.
    – So, logically–
    – If she weighs the same as a duck…
    – she’s made of wood.
    – And therefore?
    – A witch!
    – A duck! A duck! – Here’s a duck.
    – We shaIl use my largest scales.
    – Burn the witch !
    – Remove the supports!
    – A witch!
    – It’s a fair cop.
    – Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of science?
    – I am Arthur, king of the Britons.

  75. Paula wrote:

    @ LawProf:
    One has to wonder. I’d agree he’s in a perilous position. He spent years telling his congregation I was in that our hearts were full of sin and deceit. Years telling us we were full of pride. Years impressing upon us that we were all doing better than we deserved. Years making people of God think and believe we were the problem and that we need to submit to his authority. Years saying he was the worst sinner he knew, but then walk away leaving the sin at the doorsteps of families like those whose children were molested and they were to blame, or the doorsteps of the children themselves, who needed to forgive, as though they were the one’s with the sin of unforgiveness.
    Mahaney has spent enough time talking about other people’s sins and the idol factory of their hearts. He has spent enough time browbeating people with indwelling sin. He’s done in my book with telling pastors at conferences designed to “encourage and honor” them that they need to examine their hearts for the presence of pride if he gets up there and acts like he’s Somebody and enjoys advantages they don’t because he managed to lie and cheat his way into building a large church and a “family” *cough* of churches.
    If he is a true believer, then there will be evidence of the presence and work of the Holy Spirit in his life “who convicts of sin and righteousness” John 16:8. Instead, what I hear within his messages are a continuous stream of accusations against the people of God, and according to scripture, that doesn’t proceed from God.
    The very essence of the boastful pride of life is self-preservation. Mahaney likes to talk about the men at a conference like T4G as having “world class” gifting (including, of course, himself). He’s world-class alright. The world. Not the Kingdom. In the Kingdom people are led by the Spirit and I’m not seeing Mahaney behave in relationship to the Body of Christ like a man who is part of it. These are the types of things we’re supposed to judge. That’s my viewpoint. And my seat ain’t cheap. It was purchased by the blood of the Lamb.

    Think you’re definitely on to something. This is what I’ve been trying to learn myself and point out to family, friends, various people on the net: wolves behave like wolves, they attack the Church, the true believers, they exalt themselves. Sheep behave like sheep, they support the Church, they exalt the shepherd–as in Jesus, not some self-appointed, self-aggrandizing leader so-called.

    When someone continually attacks the Church and lifts themselves up on pedestal, why are so many Christians afraid of calling them a wolf?

  76. TW wrote:

    I finally came across something that I can almost guarantee Mark Driscoll actually wrote:
    “Pastor Mark Driscoll is the founding pastor of Mars Hill Church—based in Seattle, Washington—and one of the most popular preachers in the world today.”
    http://marshill.com/pastors/mark-driscoll

    What gave it away, this sentence perhaps? “He has been grilled by Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Walters on The View”

    That’s so funny because when I watched it I thought they were so nice to him. Maybe they ‘grilled’ him before or after, but it didn’t shop up on TV. Poor thing, so sensitive.

  77. LawProf wrote:

    When someone continually attacks the Church and lifts themselves up on pedestal, why are so many Christians afraid of calling them a wolf?

    I think in part because these pastors have redefined what a “wolf” is. For these guys, a “wolf” is anyone who critiques them or disagrees with them. So of course the pastor can’t be a wolf – he is the pastor! (irony font) Instead, all of the sheep are themselves terrified of being “a wolf” (i.e. critiquing the pastor/elders).

    In Scripture, however, “wolves” are generally understood to be (a) those who malevolently misuse their authority (Ezek. 22:27; Zeph. 3:3), (b) those who claim to be working for the kingdom when in reality they are false prophets spreading lies (Matt. 7:15-23; Acts 20:28-31), and (c) non-believers who forcefully oppose the kingdom (Matt. 10:16; Lk. 10:3).

  78. Patti wrote:

    TW wrote:
    I finally came across something that I can almost guarantee Mark Driscoll actually wrote:
    “Pastor Mark Driscoll is the founding pastor of Mars Hill Church—based in Seattle, Washington—and one of the most popular preachers in the world today.”
    http://marshill.com/pastors/mark-driscoll
    What gave it away, this sentence perhaps? “He has been grilled by Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Walters on The View”
    That’s so funny because when I watched it I thought they were so nice to him. Maybe they ‘grilled’ him before or after, but it didn’t shop up on TV. Poor thing, so sensitive.

    Maybe he didn’t actually watch the segment? I heard from someone who used to work on the production of that show that they tape hours of format, then edit it down to the one hour…..Maybe he was part of that editing process, to edit out the grilling, who knows….

  79. Patti wrote:

    Poor thing, so sensitive.

    That’s the thing.
    He can dish it out, hand over fist. But he can’t take anything.
    For some reason he doesn’t get it that if he comes out swinging, he’s going to have to expect a few hits.
    If he doesn’t want to deal with those hits, he needs to quit swinging.
    Poor victim?
    Nope, he thinks it’s cool that he has ‘never owned a pair of kid gloves’ while thinking everyone else should hand HIM with kid gloves.
    He’s a sociopath.
    Plain and simple.

  80. Patti wrote:

    Poor thing, so sensitive.

    I remember an essay years ago which spoke of today’s attitudes cultivating “an exquisite sensitivity to any insult or injury to oneself, coupled with utter indifference to insults and injuries inflicted BY oneself upon others.”

    Carry this far enough and you get a King Joffrey or Ramsay Snow(Bolton) from Game of Thrones.

  81. LawProf wrote:

    Think you’re definitely on to something. This is what I’ve been trying to learn myself and point out to family, friends, various people on the net: wolves behave like wolves, they attack the Church, the true believers, they exalt themselves.

    Which is actually unfair to RL wolves, which are magnificent creatures.

  82. Some allowances must be made, of course, for typical sin. I can be a perfect ass: I often aggrandize myself, get defensive when accused of wrong-doing, act insensitive to others’ feelings, put my needs ahead of others. My family and friends can attest to these unfortunate traits. This is the tragedy of the world and of everyone who’s ever drawn breath (save one).

    We all battle against selfishness, but we are not all stuck there and incapable of anything else. My general experience has been that people–even me–can be kind and giving, can put others before self, and that this is generally my experience with real Christians (and for that matter athiests).

    But some people seem pathologically incapable of doing anything that does not serve their own interests. Even their apologies, when unwrapped, are selfish and hateful. An extremely high percentage of religious hypocrites seem to fit within this category, many of them are leaders, many of them seek fame, some of them acquire it. But they do acquire it by boastfulness, heartlessness and ruthlessness, and when they’ve gotten their desires–the power and control–they prove themselves to be foolish haters of God, inventors of evil, insolent when presented with evidence of their sin, slanderers of those who expose them, haughty and without true faith, heartless towards the Church, and banding together to give approval, support and a clean bill of spiritual health and exoneration and approval to others who practice these sins.

    IMO, Romans 1 deals with the situation under discussion with laser precision.

  83. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    The thing that saddens me so much about seeing that T$G picture is the way in which supposedly solidly held convictions are simply ignored when it is no longer profitable. TGC has built a reputation on a rigorous application of Paul’s writings to Timothy regarding the qualifications of an elder. While many disagree with their interpretation, they have gone so far as to say that these qualifications keep women (not specific women, but the entire gender) out of the pulpit, etc., etc. And yet, Paul also writes that a pastor is supposed to be held in high esteem by outsiders and be above any charge. Even if Mahaney is completely innocent, he does not fit Paul’s test for eldership. The good old boy network has a very clear double standard; I just wonder if they are so blind by material success that they don’t see it. I kind of hope that is the case; otherwise, one might conclude that they are devious and duplicitous.

    Well said!
    In ‘ Helps for Ministers’ (Mennonite Publishing House), the following advice is given

    “The only difference between a preacher and a lay member is (or at least ought to be) a difference between positions in the Church. In all other respects they should be alike, on the same level, the minister having a taste of the same problems that the members have because he engages in similar pursuits and therefore from experience knows the trials of the rank and file of the people. It is thus that he has an opportunity—not as a superman but as a fellow member with themselves—to set a real example in meeting the issues of life and showing his people by example how to overcome them. In home life, in business life, in social life, in church life, in community life, in personal appearance, in sympathetic support of the poor and needy, in faithful testimony, in everything pertaining to life and godliness, in personal work among both saved and unsaved people, will the pastor thus have an opportunity to set a proper example to his fellow members. There is no sense in which there should be “a middle wall of partition” between the pastor and his people. If the influence of our example does not tend to lift the membership to a higher plane of living, we are betraying a sacred trust, missing a golden opportunity.”

    Perhaps they should all be sent a copy to refresh their memory as to what they should be doing and how they should be behaving.

  84. Marie2 wrote:

    Maybe he didn’t actually watch the segment? I heard from someone who used to work on the production of that show that they tape hours of format, then edit it down to the one hour…..Maybe he was part of that editing process, to edit out the grilling, who knows….

    Oh, that’s interesting. If that’s so then maybe that would explain why I thought it kind of out of place that a couple of others on the view panel seemed perturbed but they didn’t say anything and I remembering thinking that they actually looked like maybe they had been ‘shushed’ for some reason. It’s been very long time I’m going to have to see if it’s still online somewhere.

  85. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    That would be “au Nick B” or “à Nick B”. “A la” is feminine, and we men have been feminised enough in church. Apparently.

    OOOPS!! Many apologies here….I had forgotten that “courage” is masculine, as well, as in “bon courage”. My bad. I will now self-flagellate myself 20 times for this infraction, hoping it’s not a mortal sin. 🙂

    And then enjoy some pie ala mode…..Pie with style, of course. 🙂

  86. Marie2 wrote:

    ala mode

    Yes yes yes I was totally lazy with that one….

    à la mode

    is the correct way to spell that….I have not yet memorized the escape key sequence for the accent grave. At least I can tell my aigu from my grave….Fun to see many French expressions that mix that up….

    Ok back to the regular discussion.

    Au Nick B, I hope this was helpful.

    Wanted to include the definite article there, because you are in fact THE Nick B.

  87. @ LawProf:

    “We all battle against selfishness, but we are not all stuck there and incapable of anything else. My general experience has been that people–even me–can be kind and giving, can put others before self, and that this is generally my experience with real Christians (and for that matter athiests).

    But some people seem pathologically incapable of doing anything that does not serve their own interests…

    IMO, Romans 1 deals with the situation under discussion with laser precision.”
    +++++++++++++++++

    perhaps personality disorder/mental illness left on its own in a warm, non-challenging environment, & breeding spores. for years.

    I think such a person can still know God & Holy Spirit, but still retain their pathological lack of capabilities where self & others are concerned. and remain a menace and a danger.

  88. elastigirl wrote:

    @ LawProf:

    “We all battle against selfishness, but we are not all stuck there and incapable of anything else. My general experience has been that people–even me–can be kind and giving, can put others before self, and that this is generally my experience with real Christians (and for that matter athiests).

    But some people seem pathologically incapable of doing anything that does not serve their own interests…

    IMO, Romans 1 deals with the situation under discussion with laser precision.”
    +++++++++++++++++

    perhaps personality disorder/mental illness left on its own in a warm, non-challenging environment, & breeding spores. for years.

    I think such a person can still know God & Holy Spirit, but still retain their pathological lack of capabilities where self & others are concerned. and remain a menace and a danger.

    Certainly possible. A personality disordered person could know the Lord I think (who am I to say who can and can’t?) and yet still do a lot of damage to others. It’s very sad though that the Christian environment would be non-challenging to those do wrong, whether they be disturbed sheep or simple wolves, it should be the most challenging. There are enough admonitions against trotting along after everyone who claims to be a leader but does not meet the test of being a true servant, 2 Cor 11 could hardly be more blunt about what to do with such people.

  89. @ elastigirl:
    Hahaha my parents had that EXACT SAME CAR when I was a kid!!

    Wow. I had forgotten about that.

    The bucket seat in the rear that opened up and faced backwards.

    Our english bulldog slobbering all over the back window and terrifying drivers.

    Passing trucks and making the universal sign of a horn honk, and celebrating with truckers honked.

    Ah, yes. Life in the suburbs.

    The Station Wagon. Yesterday’s Minivan.

  90. @ Deb:

    Of course, you’re right, and thanks for all the info and links. As I recall, the council members were told to examine a ridiculously small amount of the evidence, and make their judgment based on that. I think it was Trueman who wrote an article explaining exactly what they were given to evaluate. It was so rigged.

  91. @ Paula:

    Since he smiles so much, I imagine Mahaney was always smiling when he said that he was the worst sinner he knew. That alone would show that he didn’t believe it. That’s a very sobering thing to say about oneself. I doubt that Paul was smiling when he said or wrote something similar.

  92. @ JeffB:
    Exactly. And maybe I just don’t get Mahaney’s world class sense of humor. I must lack the gifting or something.

  93. @ JeffB:
    Also, seems I recall he wrote the book, “The Cross-Centered Life” (sarcasm). Yes. It would follow then that he would joke around about “dying”. Adds that extra-special Mahaney-esque layer of complete disingenuousness that characterizes everything in the opposite sense of what Christians do. It’s like he’s fake salt.

  94. @ Marie2:

    Look you stupid b@stard, you’ve got no arms left!
    ……………………………………………….
    You’re using coconuts!

    😉

  95. Deb wrote:

    @ Steve Scott:

    Yes, we made that discovery back in 2010 when we first started discussing TOGETHER FOR THE GO$PEL here at TWW.

    What’s the Beef About Christian Conferences?

    Have you been watching the countdown on the TOGETHER FOR THE GOSPEL blog with great anticipation? http://www.t4g.org/blog/ The long awaited T$G Conference is next week. Hooray!!! (OOPS! I was typing capital letters and forgot to take my finger off the shift button when I typed the “4” in “T4G”… Why is the dollar sign located just above the number 4 on the computer keyboard? Hmmm……) In honor of this important occasion on the New Calvinists’ calendar, here’s a re-post of our June 11, 2009 article…

    I’m sorry I missed this. Thanks for the history!

  96. Paula wrote:

    @ Marie2:

    Look you stupid b@stard, you’ve got no arms left!
    ……………………………………………….
    You’re using coconuts!

    You don’t vote for king.

  97. @ elastigirl:
    Oh, wait…ours wasn’t powder blue. Ours was beige with the wood paneling.

    I dont remember the seats. Im sure they weren’t blue. Brown probably, or beige.

    I remember we took it camping. Us kids and my Dad slept in tents but my Mom would fold down the seats and sleep on soft cushions in the station wagon. After a while it was just my Dad taking us camping lol. She was the Park Avenue to his Green Acres, or when he was driving the station wagon he was the “Country Squire” haha

  98. @ Paula:

    Good point about “I came here to die.” Another serious thought which he tosses away; in this case, probably, also to impress the others on the panel that he’s “serious.” The guy makes me nervous just watching him, even before I knew about all the problems at CLC and elsewhere. And he’s so obviously manipulative – I like to think that Trueman was feeling bitter when he mentioned “the one who cries.” I guess people stuck with him because he was successful in drawing crowds and/or they had a low level of discernment as far as suspicious characters were concerned.

    I heard (you probably know this) that, at a Ligonier conference, he made such a fool of himself that they determined never to invite him back. Glad there is discernment somewhere.

    I went to CLC for a few months before Detwiler’s documents were published. One day they gave away that tiny book, “The Cross-Centered Life.” As I recall, it had a lot of law and not much grace.

  99. Marie2 wrote:

    @ chris:
    I will definitely pray as you ask…I will also look up this guy’s writings. ..sounds interesting. ..

    And just to clarify, reading Paula’s wonderful summary of that conference is really all I can handle right now. Ty again for writing that out. Much better than taking up a great deal of time with listening

    Just read this piece he wrote on Rushdoony (among many others) We seriously need to band together and pray for Carl. We all have pur faults, but with his talent for cutting through the crap, we really need him on the side of justice for these survivors. His writing is just wicked sharp and almost impossible to beat.

    http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2006/12/rushdoony-a-final-clarificatio.php

  100. LawProf wrote:

    IMO, Romans 1 deals with the situation under discussion with laser precision.

    Unfortunately, all anyone quotes about that decline narrative is the clobber verse about homosexuality. Or they redefine everything to apply to homosexuals and ONLY homosexuals.

  101. JeffB wrote:

    @ Paula: Good point about “I came here to die.”

    I mean seriously, if you’re the guy that wrote the book on “The Cross-Centered Life” and you’ve made “The Cross” THE central theme of your ministry (“We will never move away from the Cross, only into a deeper understanding of the Cross”) wouldn’t you be dead serious about this?

    I hate to harp on this, but it begs the question, “Who was supposed to be doing all the dying?” Who was it he expected to bear the burden of suppressing “any evidence of pride” so that they were “a joy to lead and pastor”? Where is the evidence of his “Cross-centered life” that caused him to be a joy to follow?

    I mean if that is what Mahaney was allll about, since this is what he talked about allll the time, then ‘show us the money’. In light of everything, what’s become of all that humility? Where has it gone? Has anyone seen it?

    So here we see, once again, Mahaney at the 2012 T4G conference, during a discussion on Celebrity Pastors. Normally, he would have been him be the first person at the Table to say something about his sinfulness, being the worst sinner he knows, right?

    But notice, at the 16:15 mark, after Ligon Duncan asks David Platt what he does to protect his heart, and you can observe Mahaney’s wheels turning, he’s surprised and taken off guard when Platt, who is seated right next to him, shares the following:

    “To be honest, this whole conversation is really frightening, personally. I feel like this conversation brings to the fore a poison that is just put before my own soul in a scary way.” David Platt

    Does Mahaney enter into that with his typical head nodding, yes and amens? Does he offer any support? Does he say anything to validate Carl Trueman’s message and David Platt’s reaction & response?

    No, because apparently Mahaney has planned to use the Conference to release his New Song. Maybe Bob Kauflin helped him write it. Here are the yrics:

    “I don’t think it’s wise, simply, to become preoccupied with the prideful tendencies of my heart.”

    What did we just hear?? That’s certainly a 180°. But Platt really sold it, and that’s a problem for Mahaney and his popularity.

    Soooo, now it’s not wise for CJ to be preoccupied with his sin, but it’s never going to be of style for him to tell pastors of small churches that they’re prideful if they struggle with not seeing numerical growth. Got it.

    JeffB wrote:

    “I guess people stuck with him because he was successful in drawing crowds and/or they had a low level of discernment as far as suspicious characters were concerned.

    Yes, and although this has been discussed a lot by survivors, I believe there are/were deceptive forces at work. It’s why so many ex-SGMers like ourselves talk about “drinking the kool-aid”. It wasn’t just regular kool-aid; there was poisin in it.

    JeffB wrote:

    I heard (you probably know this) that, at a Ligonier conference, he made such a fool of himself that they determined never to invite him back.

    No, I didn’t know. I missed hearing about that. Can you provide further details? What happened?!

    JeffB wrote:

    As I recall, it had a lot of law and not much grace.

    I’ve never read the book. What a rebel. But I’m not surprised. Can false teachers write books about the Grace of God without using little, modest, handsewn outfits of legalism to restrict and cover-up the freedom and splendor of the Gospel?

  102. chris wrote:

    Marie2 wrote:
    @ chris:
    I will definitely pray as you ask…I will also look up this guy’s writings. ..sounds interesting. ..
    And just to clarify, reading Paula’s wonderful summary of that conference is really all I can handle right now. Ty again for writing that out. Much better than taking up a great deal of time with listening
    Just read this piece he wrote on Rushdoony (among many others) We seriously need to band together and pray for Carl. We all have pur faults, but with his talent for cutting through the crap, we really need him on the side of justice for these survivors. His writing is just wicked sharp and almost impossible to beat.
    http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2006/12/rushdoony-a-final-clarificatio.php

    I am just seeing this now. Thank you for posting about this person. I will definitely keep him in prayer. I can see how someone like this could truly stand up to the “Big Ones” – he has the gift.

  103. Paula wrote:

    @ JeffB:
    Exactly. And maybe I just don’t get Mahaney’s world class sense of humor. I must lack the gifting or something.

    All these people are “World Class” if you believe their own press, their co-Louisville Sluggers, their sheep and sycophants. But what I’ve noticed is that none of them–without a single exception–seems to be legitimately world class at anything. They are not great writers, thinkers, theologians, comedians or speakers. E.g., I am very weary with hearing what a Brilliant Talented Gifted Sublime speaker Mark Driscoll is. As a professional speaker of sorts for years in at least two different professions that emphasize public speaking, as a person who has spoken to professional societies, given keynote addresses, speaks at conferences (not Christian), given thousands upon thousands of lectures, one who’s studied speaking and what makes for effective public communication, in my opinion he is a relatively dismal speaker, competent, marginal, acceptable, but nothing like the hype, not even particularly good. Not by a mile. He’s very good at setting aside ethics and other considerations so as to enable him to do anything to get attention and promote himself, but he does not deliver a particularly good product, even if he did have sound theology and treat people well. He is not a great speaker.

    And don’t tell me about church size proving up his merits. If you wanted to build a big congregation, it’s quite simple: cuss, make vulgar jokes, make regular references to porn–and not all of them negative, tell men that their wives ought to fellat them regularly, on demand, or to wake them up that way in the morning. Put a religious sheen upon it all so it can be justified no matter what. Think you can’t fill a building that way? Heck yeah, you’ll fill it with a lot of young, brash, immature, sex-obsessed men trailing bewildered wives and girlfriends. Once they’re in, you’ll sell the wives on the sense of “community”, they’ll make a few friends, then they’ll be locked in. Does that take talent? Insight? Good theology? Anything in particular other than ruthlessness?

    Celeb pastors think that because they get easy laughs when they’re behind the pulpit they are comedians–but they would flat die in a comedy club. Because they get adoration for their insight when they’re behind the pulpit that they’re great thinkers–but they would get rhetorically undressed and humiliated if they espoused their theories before a legitimate crowd of thinkers (such as what academics have to face when they present at conferences). Because they hear how inspiring their sermons are from adoring parishoners, they think they’re great speakers–but the average celeb pastor would get maybe fourth place at the local Toastmaster’s Club.

    They’re not on the whole particularly good at much of anything. They’ve just created a narcissist’s fantasy world in which they imagine themselves to be.

  104. Paula wrote:

    @ Marie2:
    Look you stupid b@stard, you’ve got no arms left!
    ……………………………………………….
    You’re using coconuts!

    zI’ve had worse…….Black Knight: Come on ya pansy.

  105. LawProf wrote:

    but they would get rhetorically undressed and humiliated if they espoused their theories before a legitimate crowd of thinkers (such as what academics have to face when they present at conferences)

    My experience exactly. Thank you for being here and posting this.

  106. @ Paula:

    Yes, when CJ is pushed to the wall, he changes his old song to a new one. Good observation.

    Years ago, a friend, whom I’ve always found reliable, told me about CJ at a Ligonier conference. I may have tried to find evidence; at any rate, I never did. Just now, I found a Q&A discussion at the 2008 Conference, with CJ, RC Sproul, Sinclair Ferguson, and John Duncan as moderator. It confirms what my friend told me. Particularly in the opening minutes, CJ does his usual clowning and hogging the spotlight. Though Sproul and Sinclair sometimes laugh along, it’s evident from their expressions and body language, here and later, that they are annoyed. Sproul shakes his head, Ferguson pretends to hit CJ with the mic, and at one point stands in front of him to stop him from interrupting Sproul.

    As usual, CJ talks about only getting through high school. Ferguson says (paraphrase): “What kind of high school did you go to? Were their dogs walking around the classrooms?”

    CJ always brings the conversation back to himself. Later he uses his whispery, hesitant way of talking, and the audience dutifully responds with applause at his great show of “sincerity.” And, of course, he several times mentions that he’s the worst sinner he knows. At least he doesn’t smile on this occasion. He’s truly obnoxious. If it’s true that they didn’t invite him back, it’s evident why.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4M3POWw3Bk

  107. LawProf wrote:

    E.g., I am very weary with hearing what a Brilliant Talented Gifted Sublime speaker Mark Driscoll is.

    Perfect in Every Way.

    Sounds like the stuff you hear on North Korean media about Comrade Dear Leader.

    Or Ayn Rand describing herself as “The Only Truly Rational Mind Who Ever Existed.”

  108. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    LawProf wrote:

    E.g., I am very weary with hearing what a Brilliant Talented Gifted Sublime speaker Mark Driscoll is.

    Perfect in Every Way.

    Sounds like the stuff you hear on North Korean media about Comrade Dear Leader.

    Or Ayn Rand describing herself as “The Only Truly Rational Mind Who Ever Existed.”

    Ah yes, Ayn Rand, patron saint of mediocre minds who think they are great minds.

  109. @ LawProf:
    Oh, but let us not forget that one of the “Louisville Sluggers” made Time Magazine’s “50 Faces of the Future” list in 1994.

    That was 20 years ago.

    What kind of future did Al Mohler contribute to, we ask, while seeing him today supporting his good friend & T4G co-founder CJ Mahaney?

    I think the indications of what that would be happened when he fired Dr. Molly Marshall as his first act of taking over the SBTS back in ’94.

    If you stand Marshall next to Mahaney, there’s no comparison. Yet, Mohler stands by someone like Mahaney over someone like Marshall. What kind of future has it become with Al Mohler leading people in this kind of direction?

  110. Paula wrote:

    Oh, but let us not forget that one of the “Louisville Sluggers” made Time Magazine’s “50 Faces of the Future” list in 1994.

    Must have gone to his head….I had looked up some things about Time Man of the Year, and how sexist it was as an award, ignoring many qualified females….

    Yes I am dodging your question, for the totally selfish reason to point out how much those Baptists just reflect the portion of American culture that pretty much ignores women and their many contributions to society.

    First a pretty neutral thing from about.com, with interesting stats:
    http://womenshistory.about.com/od/lists/a/Time-Magazine-Woman-Of-The-Year.htm

    Beginning in 1927, TIME Magazine has picked an annual “Person of the Year” to be featured on its cover.

    As of this date (August, 2013), how many women have been named Person of the Year? If it weren’t for 1975, that number would be incredibly low.

    How many have been named Person of the Year by herself, that is, other than as part of a group? Still incredibly low.

    Until 1999, the official designation was “Man of the Year.” Then it became “Person of the Year.” No woman has been named to the honor as a single individual since that change.

    http://feministing.com/2013/12/09/times-person-of-the-year-reminds-us-that-women-dont-matter/

    The odds of TIME picking a woman this year are less than a third, because there are only three women on the ten-person shortlist: HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Supreme Court gay rights activist and newly-enshrined legal precedent Edie Windsor, and Miley Cyrus. Add in the fact that they almost never pick a woman, and the chances are very slim indeed. Then again, they picked ALL AMERICAN WOMEN back in 1975, so we really don’t have the right to complain.

    A quick look at the most-searched for and most-read news stories just in the US suggests that Paula Deen, Jodi Arias, and The Duchess of Cambridge should also be on that list…

  111. @ Marie2:
    Interesting that you should share this, Marie. Thanks. And Ive wanted to find out who the 15 women were on the list in 1994. But I don’t want to pay for the subscription lol.

    It’s almost Easter and I’m going cheap, cheap 😛

  112. @ JeffB:
    Jeff! I’m so intrigued by this. Again, there’s a lot of good stuff in that discussion including:

    ** CJ’s admission that he’ll be asking the questions in the Panel Discussions at T4G. I’ve mentioned this before that I’ve noticed he manages to get himself in the position where he’s asking the questions. Seeing him in that video on the Panel at Ligionier with Duncan, MacArthur, Ferguson…yeah, he was drowning 20,000 leagues under the sea.

    ** The way he plays to the audience. There was one time they clapped for MacArthur. The other times Mahaney was the only one being applauded. And they were the ones buying his books, of course. All part of the plan. Notice how he kept trying to get out of answering questions. Might hurt his book sales, dang!

    ** And did you hear at the beginning when Mahaney said he was hoping or trying to get kicked off the Panel?? What was that about? Oh, that’s right. He’s a prophet. Because that happened haha.

    ** Oh, and one last thing: When they were talking about the various joys. Mahaney had asked (of course) Sinclair a question and Sinclair got up and put his hand on MacArthur saying, “German Joy” and then Duncan and said “French Joy” and then himself “Scottish Joy” and then Mahaney “Im not sure what kind of creature this is Joy” (something to that effect) to which CJ responded “Pauline Joy” and you could hear the audience react to which he explained, “I’m the worst sinner like Paul and its his kind of joy that I have” (or something like that). Awesome! 😛

    I’m going to take the time to transcribe some of that Panel discussion. Like with Carl Trueman, there were things Ferguson and MacArthur said that were so applicable, especially when MacArthur started talking about Evil, Justice and Righteousness. Brilliant!

  113. @ Paula:

    Actually, that was RC Sproul, not MacArthur. I’m glad you’ll be transcribing some of it.

    I missed (or forgot) him saying he wanted to get kicked off. Since he keeps talking about how unqualified, uneducated, etc., he is, I wish one of them had said, “Maybe you shouldn’t be in leadership.” Of course, he’d laugh hysterically. Then, I’d hope, the same guy would say, “I’m serious. Why are you in leadership? Besides the fact that you can draw large crowds. Even Benny Hinn can do that.” Well, it’s fun to dream.

    Sproul is a very bright man, and, apparently, so is Ferguson. I’d love to know how Mahaney got into the Ligonier conference in the first place. I would guess through flattery and crying. And, no doubt, a large donation.

  114. @ JeffB:
    RC Sproul. Of course! What was I thinking? Yes, I was impressed with him, whatever his name is haha jk

    Working on transcribing now. ..

  115. Paula wrote:

    @ JeffB:
    RC Sproul. Of course! What was I thinking? Yes, I was impressed with him, whatever his name is haha jk
    Working on transcribing now. ..

    Cool!! Looking forward to reading the transcription! Ty 4 doing this!!!

  116. @ Marie2:
    Sorry it’s taken me so long to get back with this! Here goes…

    Panel Moderator: John Duncan (the guy asking the questions that were submitted by the conference attendees)

    Panel Members:
    R.C. Sproul (I got it right this time!)
    Sinclair Ferguson
    CJ Mahaney

    The excerpts are in chronological order. I’m breaking them into segments and posting them in separate comments to make them easier to read.

  117. Duncan: (speaking to Mahaney) “I see what Mark Dever is up against at Together for the Gospel; you’re a force of nature.”

    Mahaney: “Well, actually, you know, at Together for the Gospel this year, I am leading the panels.”

    Duncan: “You’re kidding (jokingly). So, why are the others going to be up there?” (laughter)

    Mahaney: “Well, no, I think, that is the small contribution I make, is, I can ask questions, and they should be answering questions, rather than putting me in a position……can I ask one more question?”

  118. Ferguson: (putting his hand on Mahaney) “This species is, at yet, unidentified in the history of the Christian church.” (laughter)

    Mahaney: “Pauline joy.”

    Ferguson: “Ohhh.”

    Mahaney: “Yup. Amazed by grace, joy; worst sinner in the world, joy.”

    Duncan: (speaking to Mahaney) “You have a beautiful joy my friend.”

    Mahaney: “Well, I have been forgiven of many sins so it should be easy for me to be joyful. Thank you John, over to you.”

    Duncan: “Thank you field reporter. We’ll be back to you soon, I’m sure.” (laughter)

    Duncan: “During the Q&A yesterday, one of you said that man, through prayer, cannot change the mind of God. Please address how Abraham ‘changed the mind of God’ regarding the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.”

    Sproul: “I’m the one that said that, so…”

    Mahaney: “Why don’t you take that one R.C.” (laughter)

    Sproul: (taking glasses off, shakes his head looking slightly annoyed, crowd laughs)

    Ferguson: (gets up and stands in between Mahaney and Sproul) (crowd laughs)

    Mahaney: “He’s going to kick me off this panel, and that’s actually my desire.”

  119. Duncan: “Please explain your views on the Emerging Church and how it’s impacting ordinary Christians, and how should Evangelicals counter this trend or interact with it?”

    Ferguson: “CJ knows far more about this than I do.”(laughter)

    Sproul: (speaking to Ferguson) “Get that on tape for your Mother.”(laughter)

    Mahaney: (laughing) “That’s excellent. As I mentioned yesterday, I have no formal education, but I do have street smarts. And I’m street smart enough to know, that, any questions you ask, I will be glad to make a contribution, after I have heard from these two men. And I don’t know more than these two men about anything except sports.”

    Sproul: “I don’t believe that.”

    Mahaney: (laughs) “If you have any sports questions over there, I am your go-to guy.”

    Duncan: (to Mahaney)“Seriously, you know you have made valuable contributions in this area, and tell people what’s going on in that (Emergent Church) movement, as you see it, and how they should respond, because it is prevailing in our day in some ways.”

    Mahaney: “Well, I don’t think I can give you a concise answer to that, because there is much complexity to that which is described as the Emerging Church Movement. So, I’m not that close to this movement or involved with his movement, which is why I’m reluctant to make any statements about this movement. I have my hands full. Here’s what you need to know: I have my hands full with my own heart on a daily basis; preaching the gospel to myself on a daily basis; weakening the subtle pervasive presence of pride in my life on a daily basis; by the grace of God cultivating humility on a daily basis; seeking to serve my family on a daily basis; be a faithful leader and pastor on a daily basis and, hopefully, effectively serve Sovereign Grace on a daily basis so…”

    Sproul: (smiling) “…getting enough sleep on a daily basis?”

    Mahaney: (laughs) “Ha-ha no, it doesn’t leave much time for sleep. And, so, while I am aware of what’s happening as I look up from my role in Sovereign Grace, I would not say I’m intimately familiar with, nor have I studied in any detail, the Emerging Church. The defining book on the church, or the book I think will serve most about the Emerging Church, would be Dr. Carson’s book. So, if I was to recommend a go-to book, that’s the go-to book, and anything I say would simply be derived from that book and repeating the content of that book. What is the title of that book?”

    Sproul: “Is it simply The Emerging Church?”

    Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church, by D.A. Carson

    Duncan: (to the other men besides Mahaney) “Any thoughts, guys?”

    Mahaney: “I think one aspect….” (laughter from audience as he cuts in)

    Duncan: “Sorry, any thoughts CJ?” (More laughter)

    Ferguson: “CJ, CJ, CJ….”

    Mahaney: “Sinclair.”

    Ferguson: “What high school did you go to? (Lots of laughter from the panel and the audience) I heard someone yesterday say, ‘That must have been some high school.’”

    Mahaney: “That’s kind of them.”

    Duncan: “Cats and dogs roaming the halls?” (Laughter)

    Mahaney: (putting himself in the driver’s seat) “We talked yesterday, Sinclair, about the whole issue of Conversation and the difference between Proclamation, the Primacy of Preaching and Conversation. So, I would like to hear you two men address the Primacy of Preaching and provide your critique, along with any suggestion that we are to be neglecting the Primacy of Preaching for the sake of Conversation.”

    Ferguson: (pauses, laughter from the crowd) “Let me go…”

    Mahaney: “Because it’s not a conversation.”

    Ferguson: “Let me go back to the question…” (laughter from crowd)

  120. Duncan: (reading a question) “This person says that we’ve been talking about, in the conference, going to the people from every country and background, but we have not mentioned, specifically, homosexuals. And this person is saying, ‘How do we proclaim the gospel to them?’ There seems to be a struggle, here, in the question, with that practice, and how to witness to them. And this person confesses, ‘I personally have a difficult time in doing so and I feel like Jonah not wanting to go to the Ninevites.’ What should I do?”

    Mahaney: “Well, for me, this wouldn’t just apply to someone in homosexual sin, this would apply to anyone in sin: If I’m not the worst sinner I know then I don’t think I’m going to be effective in communicating the gospel to someone, either in content or tone. So, for me, when I become more aware of someone else’s sin, or more affected by someone else’s sin, then I’m immediately alerted to this reality: ‘I am not longer the worst sinner I know.’ Therefore, Spurgeon exhorts us to ‘Dwell where the cries of Calvary can be heard.’ What I seek to do each day is dwell as close to those cries as I can, ah, because, those cries remind me of my sin and the seriousness of my sin, and convince me that I am the worst sinner I know – which I should be convinced that I’m the worst sinner I know because I’m more familiar with my own sin than I am with anyone else’s sin. That, then, makes all the difference in when I encounter any individual, regardless of their sin, that day.” (Applause from audience)

  121. Mahaney: “We must all be clear on the content of the gospel. We must not alter the content of the gospel in order to appeal to culture. But we must be careful to present the gospel with gentleness and humility. And as I’m communicating the gospel with somebody, I’m monitoring my heart because there should be no perception on their part of any moral superiority or self-righteousness. They should discern somebody who has been truly humbled by the gospel so that, even if they don’t grasp the gospel on that occasion, as they leave our presence they are affected by the effect of the gospel in the form of humility and gratefulness and the absence of arrogance and self-righteousness in the heart and life of the one who has shared the gospel with them.” (crowd applauds)

  122. Sproul: “For the sake of getting in as many questions in as possible, why don’t we just have each one of us – just one person – answer each question instead of all three of us chiming in on every one. How’s that?”

    Duncan: (aside to Sproul) “And you can decide who….”

    Mahaney: (cuts in) “Could I get….the easiest question…?” (crowd laughs)

    Duncan: “Sure.” (laughter)

    Mahaney: (to Duncan) “How about if you ask and I’ll give the assignments? We’ll work together on this, John hahaha.” (laughter) (Ferguson motions with his microphone and pretends to bop Mahaney over the head) (laughter)

    Duncan: “How does God receive glory from evil, since He is the Creator and Author of all things? This person says He created evil. Why? And how does He receive glory from it?”

    Mahaney: (pointing first at Sproul and then at Ferguson) “That would be you, sir. And then you, sir (laughter from crowd)…and I’ll be taking notes.”

  123. Sproul: “Most of what I was preaching about in that thing I got from Edwards, the study of it. So, if you really want to get insights into the agony of that horrible Cup, read Edwards on Gethsemane.”

    Ferguson: “There’s a sermon isn’t there, RC?”

    Sproul: “Yes.”

    Mahaney: “Representing the average individual, I do read Edwards. I try to read
    Edwards. I find, at times, Edwards a little challenging to comprehend. So, actually, I learn more from listening to you (laughter, applause from crowd).

    Duncan: (to Mahaney) “I’ll give you my Edward’s Cliff Notes” (laughter).

    Ferguson: “CJ, you can buy spectacles these days that magnify the small print” (laughter from crowd).

    Mahaney: “But you can’t buy anything for a limited mind my friend, that’s the challenge.”

    Duncan: “How do you respond to someone who believes you can lose your salvation?”

    Mahaney: (pretends he’s done and prepared to leave) (laughter)

    Ferguson: “I think maybe by showing them from the New Testament that you can’t” (laughter).

    Sproul: (to Mahaney) “Was he going too fast?” (laughter)

    Mahaney: “I can do that!”

    Sproul: (still laughing)

    Ferguson: “I went to high school as well.” (more laughter)

  124. Last one!

    Duncan: “How do you respond to someone who believes you can lose your salvation?

    Mahaney: “Excellent question. I think one of our challenges here – we have limitations. I would want to interact with that person personally. I would want to draw them out in order to discern how best to address their soul in relation to scripture, in relation to this question; which is why we would all recommend that that individual take this question to their local pastor, so that their local pastor can help them with their soul. And I would recommend as well that they study the doctrines of grace, because those doctrines will make all the difference in relation to assurance. And Don Whitney’s book How Can I Be Sure I’m a Christian is an excellent book for them to read as well.

  125. BTW, in case anyone is wondering, I posted these excerpts because I am firmly convinced that everything Mahaney has said or taught under the guise of “the gospel” can be effectively dismantled and torn to shreds. He doesn’t preach the gospel. He can’t. He’s unable to do so.

    Anyone familiar with the man and his ministry should know, by now, he is neither a man of his word nor a man of The Word.

    There are times when Mahaney is honest and exposes his lie. For example, when he says during the Ligionier panel discussion, “I’m street smart enough to know that any questions you ask I will be glad to make a contribution after I have heard from…(the others)” and you combine that with the fact he admits to “never having had an original thought” – what emerges is the picture of a guy who claims to be a “pastor” and a “spiritually gifted” leader but who is wholly uninspired.

    Where does the man receive his inspiration if he is never inspired? If he is so dependent upon the thoughts and ideas of others regarding spiritual things, then what has been the driving force of his ministry?

    He talked about having “Pauline Joy” in the panel discussion, claiming his joy is that of the Apostle Paul’s because he’s “been forgiven of so many sins” and because “he is the worst sinner he knows”. Yet, do we know of Paul post-conversion, in possession of a vicious character? Do we know of Paul distaining others, working to gain and hold on to power by means of intrigue and deception, consumed by pride and competitive, or lacking the ability to enter His rest?

    SGM has been built and sustained on the thoughts and ideas of others that were gleaned by a “street smart” CJ Mahaney. But the “the gospel” that’s been constructed hasn’t created something true and authentic becausae without the guidance, inspiration and involvement of the Holy Spirit, there can no church; it can only be something that calls itself “church”.

    The message of “the gospel” according to CJ Mahaney basically boils down to this:

    *We are sinners
    *Sin is a constant problem
    *Sin has the upper hand
    *You must weaken sin
    *Sin is alive within you
    *You must consistently work to oppose sin
    *You are full of sin
    *Your life is characterized by sin & deceit
    *You are full of pride
    *You must submit to the authority of the local church
    *Leaders have spiritual authority over God’s people
    *Your obedience to God is expressed by your obedience to pastors
    *You must be consumed by and committed to your local church
    *You must think according to what is taught
    *You must not think outside of what is taught
    *You must submit to your pastor
    *You should not question your pastor
    *You should be a joy to pastor
    *You must trust those in authority because they are watching over your souls
    *The gospel is about order and hierarchy within the church
    *The gospel is about order and hierarchy within the family
    *The gospel is about men being in positions of leadership
    *The gospel is about wives submitting to their husbands
    *The gospel is about women not being in leadership
    *The gospel is about women not being in authority
    *The gospel is about complementarianism
    *The gospel is about obeying assigned gender roles
    *The gospel is about men being in authority
    *The gospel is about following those in authority
    *The gospel is a specific lifestyle
    *The gospel is something you attend
    *The gospel is something you read
    *The gospel is a conferences
    *The gospel is a meeting
    *The gospel is in preaching
    *The gospel is something you purchase
    *The gospel is powerless
    *The gospel is a brand

    When you hear CJ Mahaney say “the gospel”, keep in mind, this is what is meant by “the gospel”.

    But Hallelujah!! The Gospel IS Jesus Christ!! He is our Life! He is our Righteousness!! Because of HIM we have been declared RIGHTEOUS and through HIM we inherit eternal life!!

    Woo-hoo and Happy Easter SAINTS!! 🙂

  126. Paula wrote:

    But Hallelujah!! The Gospel IS Jesus Christ!! He is our Life! He is our Righteousness!! Because of HIM we have been declared RIGHTEOUS and through HIM we inherit eternal life!!
    Woo-hoo and Happy Easter SAINTS!!

    Amen! to this.

    To the rest – blah.

  127. It’s kinda funny how everyone thinks they know the hearts of these men. You don’t actually know if they do or don’t give a damn about anyone and they don’t really owe it you or anyone else to prove otherwise. Just sayin’. And be careful…you almost always become what you hate the most.

  128. Tim wrote:

    And be careful…you almost always become what you hate the most.

    You have exposed yourself in this comment. Child sex abuse is rampant in churches today. If you read this blog you would see that this is a consistent concern here. We always know where a person stands by how they comment. You did not mention the victims in your comment. You only mentioned “the leaders” and your concern for them.

    Word of advice: next time try to throw a bone to the many, many people who have been abused by churches. It would go a long way in helping us to listen to you “advice.”

    As for becoming like that which we hate, I can assure you that we will never, ever defend those who cover up child sex abuse nor will we coddle those who do so. As for those men, we don’t know their hearts. Our comments only speak to their actions. And yes, we can say we do not like their actions.

    That picture with CJ Mahaney speaks volumes to those children and their families who have seen the ugly side of child sex abuse.

  129. @ Paula:
    Thank you for keeping alive the history of CJ Mahaney and SGM. He must not be allowed to morph one more time and leave the past behind.

  130. Tim wrote:

    It’s kinda funny how everyone thinks they know the hearts of these men.

    So, what is that dimwitted comment supposed to mean?
    What sort of self-righteous comment is that coming from one who is in denial and utter blindness?
    You do not need to know what is in the hearts of men to judge their actions.
    And, often their actions reveal what is in their hearts.
    What is in your heart?