Park Street Church 2014
“But I will not tell you how long or short the way will be; only that it lies across a river. But do not fear that, for I am the great Bridge Builder.” C. S. Lewis
Well, the meeting to affirm Mark Booker lasted around t 6 hours and 30 minutes. At one point, I chuckled, thinking about raucous business meetings in SBC churches. It seems like the Congregational/Anglican crowd would fit right in in the business meeting department. I don’t have all my thoughts together, but I have received emails from folks asking me about the outcome, so I thought this would get the general idea out to the public.
Many years ago, I attended a Boston Bruins versus the Edmonton Oilers game with a bunch of people at PSC. Those days were when inviting “anyone who wants to go” to just about anywhere would attract up to 40 people. Restaurants dreaded our arrival. One of the members was working on his doctorate at MIT (yep- he had credentials) and came from Edmonton. We cheered for the Bruins but lightly clapped as Edmonton did well to support our friend. This was in the old Boston Gardens. The Bruin fans around us were annoyed, and one, sitting directly in the back of our friend, dumped a large cup of warm beer over his head. We helped him out and were annoyed, but the “typical” fans surrounding us thought it was rather funny. I was about to jump into the fray and yell at them, but he pulled me back and said it would turn into a melee. So, I silently fumed for the rest of the game. He insisted we stay.
Silently fuming describes my attitude yesterday.
Christianity Today was there and wrote today.
I have heard that the leaders, elders, and their hangers were displeased by the CT post. Today, it posted In Six-Hour Meeting, Park Street Votes to Affirm Current Leadership. Although reporting on the fractious meeting, the article took a more positive tone. I, on the other hand, felt the meeting was incredibly problematic.
It is clear there has been a break of trust at the elder, minister, and staff level,” Booker told the congregation during the fractious six-hour meeting on Sunday. “This break of trust among the leaders of this church has spilled over into the congregation as well, causing deep pain for all of us, and all of us bear it in one way or another. The Christianity Today article revealed these breaks to a wider audience. And I understand that this is and has been unsettling for our community.”
Booker characterized CT’s reporting on the division at the church as an “oversimplified binary picture” and called it disappointing.
…Twenty-one staff members also wrote an email saying they were frustrated with CT’s reporting and “upset with the way it characterizes our church.”
- Booker claims he made mistakes, not mentioning the word “sin.” He claims others bore the responsibility with him. Uh oh…
In his annual meeting speech, Booker said he and many others bore responsibility for the “fences” that had broken down in his community. But he asked the congregation to affirm his calling as senior minister despite his mistakes.
- The post spoke positively about Booker’s wife, Mandy, who spoke. I found this one of the most cringeworthy episodes of the evening.
- What the post picked up is most important. Mark Booker isn’t going anywhere. Indeed, at this point, he cannot. His ministry is now in the dog house, and few “important” evangelical churches would find him appealing. So, PSC, get ready for him to stay for years.
The affirmed senior minister said that no one took joy in the result and that moving forward would require “a lot of grace.” He asked the congregation to commit themselves, in the coming months and years, to the work of repair. He promised he would be a shepherd to the whole church, even those who voted against him.
- Michael Balabonni isn’t going anywhere, either. He spoke at the meeting and prevailed when others tried to shut him up.
“The 60 or 65 percent who have won today, you haven’t won. You haven’t won. Because love has not won, and when love is overcome by power, we all lose and Jesus is defamed and our church has reproach upon us,” Balboni said at the meeting. “We’re all going home having been proven broken.”
Some in the congregation complained that Balboni was off topic and asked the moderator to stop him, while others shouted, “Let him speak!”
…Nevertheless, he said, the conflict is not over.“This is my last word. I will not give up. And I will not give in. Until there is a fair process that hears what has happened to me, what has happened to other ministers, I will not stop,” Balboni said.
Now, on to my thoughts.
Police presence:
It appears at least one member of the venerable Boston Police Department was present. That speaks volumes to me. It seems the leadership was fearful of those with opposing points of view. The fact that they were noticed by some means they had uniforms. If the leaders were “afraid” of those who disagreed, it would have shown some class to hire nonidentified security dressed in plain clothes. Therefore, I believe the presence of law enforcement speaks to the view of church leadership toward those who disagree.
Ben Rey’s former wife was not allowed to speak.
Shutting off the microphone when Ben Rey’s former wife tried to speak shows the leadership’s fear of hearing another point of view. I wrote about Ben Rey on Friday. I believe they knew she would not talk “glowingly” of Booker. Ben was one more pastor fired by Booker.
Mandy Booker’s testimony of her husband was cringeworthy.
Who’s idea was this? Wifey says hubby is a good guy. I was embarrassed for her. How many of you shudder when a politician in trouble gets his wife to stand up with him while he takes questions? One can almost hear Tammy Wynette singing, “Stand by your man.” Would one expect a wife to say, “My husband is a jerk and always yells at me?” Of course not. This is political staging at its lowest. They are obviously attempting to manipulate the narrative. It was humiliating at best.
Pastor Booker did not show his credentials.
Seriously, folks, isn’t anyone embarrassed by this obfuscation at this point? How many folks who come to PSC work day and night to achieve the degrees that they proudly display? They then feel comfortable when a pastor hides his degrees. Really?
Leslie Liu’s testimony was well done.
She spoke movingly of the divisions in the church. Her remarks are critical as one evaluates the “affirmation” vote, which I will get to momentarily.
The PSC members were upset, and the meeting indicated a great divide.
There were disagreements on how to count votes, especially those votes that were standing. People spoke out in favor of allowing some folks to speak who were being told by the leaders that they could not. The leaders tried to impose the Rogers Rules of Orders but occasionally were shouted down. As I listened in, I could hear the shouts, loud disagreements, raucous clapping, etc. There was no question that this was a deeply divided group of folks. I wished that Booker and the elders would demonstrate more understanding of the hole they find themselves in.
Michael Balboni speaks the truth: the ones who think they won haven’t.
CT stated the vote was:
67 percent for Booker, 33 percent opposed.
When I heard the count, I realized that the church is in a world of hurt that will result in long-term divisions and disagreements. According to CT:
The 60 or 65 percent who have won today, you haven’t won. You haven’t won. Because love has not won, and when love is overcome by power, we all lose and Jesus is defamed and our church has reproach upon us,” Balboni said at the meeting. “We’re all going home having been proven broken.”
The leaders tried to prevent him from speaking, but he persisted and spoke what I believe is the obvious truth. Mark Booker came and succeeded, miffing off 30+% of those who voted. This is pitiful. Folks were not voting on who would be the county animal control officer. They were talking about a pastor who should be able to show love and kindness to far more than 65% of the people in the church. Even secular groups expect far better performance of their people in the healing arts.
Physicians are now under the gun to have good patient and staff reviews. My husband, a Duke cardiologist, told me if 30% of his patients said they didn’t like him, he would be out of a job. They expect ratings for their folks to be in the high 90s. Looks like PSC has far lower standards than secular organizations.
Yet some are saying they won with that vote. I bring PSC some difficult news. In March, I will have been writing for 15 years and have seen many churches in crisis. If 30% of the people are dissatisfied, the following will likely happen: Contributions will slow down. Think about it. I guess that the people who cared enough to vote and fight for what they believed in are the ones who contributed. What happens if 15% decide to give their money elsewhere? There are plenty of startup churches in Boston. The SBC has targeted the area for growth, and they have lots of money (at least for now, but that’s another story.) They are covert Baptist churches, so the denomination does not turn off people who attend. What happens if 100 people leave?
What makes people think Mark Booker will be a kinder, nicer pastor? A one-week “being sweeter” course usually lasts until the next conflict. So I have several suggestions to see if he is “sweeter.
- His credentials should be presented to the membership.
- Remember, he’s already hinted that he’s not going anywhere. This was a political game.
- A competent psychiatrist should assess him to see if he has issues. Many churches are looking at requiring pastors to be evaluated before hiring. PS I’m not saying he has this problem, but many pastors have mental illness.
In 2013, Glenn Ball and Darrell Puls conducted research to determine the prevalence of narcissism in pastors[1]. They surveyed 1,385 pastors, of which 30% participated by completing the survey. Of those participants, 31% were in the spectrum of having Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). What is NPD? According to the American Psychological Association’s DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual), it’s “a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy.”
- A third-party, independent investigation should be performed by a competent organization that is versed in spiritual abuse as well and is trauma-informed.
- He should meet with his senior-level ministry team regularly, and the notes of the meetings should be available if questions arise.
- The firing of a pastor needs to be carefully assessed, and since this is a congregational church, membership input/voting should be rigorously expected.
- The church constitution and bylaws should be available to any church member.
- Mark Booker will stay at PSC. Given this conflict, I suspect he will not be eagerly sought after. He needs this job.
- Support one another who share similar points of view. You probably have lots more in common. You are not alone. Go to dinner with one together. Pray for those who disagree with you.
- The change to top-down governance should be revisited if this is to remain a congregational church. If not, tell the church it is becoming elder-dominated. They have a right to know.
- Do not expect the leaders to inform the members of the above suggestion. Be smart. Look into it.
- There will continue to be a serious divide. It could get worse. Accept it and decide what you will do.
Finally, enough church members voted “no” to affirming Mark Booker. You have far more power than you can imagine, and the leaders know it. Hold their feet to the fire. If you don’t like something, consider sending your dollars to a trustworthy ministry. For example, if your church donates to a homeless shelter, send your money directly to the shelter. Such actions will be noticed. Be strong. Demand answers. Be Bereans. Pray without ceasing.
As of this moment, PSC just got hit over the head with a bucket of warm beer. I will be watching to see how they clean up.
Thank you, Dee, for listening to this interminable meeting and reporting back!!
Yes, the former wife of Ben Rey should have been allowed to speak. The PSC leaders are full of fear and a desire to control the narrative.
I am SO thankful for the guts of Tim Leary, PSC minister who spoke out yesterday (who CT failed to mention), and Michael Balboni, now-fired PSC associate minister, who they’ve tried desperately to silence. (PSC attempted to purchase Balboni’s silence by offering him severance pay in exchange for signing an NDA, which Balboni refused).
The most striking fact in the whole CT follow-up article is that PSC Elder Leslie Liu went on the record as saying that the PSC elders should have commissioned a truly independent investigation, after they’d received complaints from 3-4 PSC ministers.
It’s not too late!!! Please do this. It’s the only way towards transparency, true repentance, healing, and rebuilding trust.
“Pastor Booker did not show his credentials. Seriously, folks, isn’t anyone embarrassed by this obfuscation at this point? How many folks who come to PSC work day and night to achieve the degrees that they proudly display? They then feel comfortable when a pastor hides his degrees. Really?”
“If” he has the elusive credentials …
Arrogance says “I don’t have to show you anything!”
Humility says “Sure, give me a minute and I’ll go get them.”
“The question I believe will be before you in a few minutes is whether you would like for me to grow as I shepherd among you,” Booker said. (from today’s CT article)
Uhhh, was that the reason for the vote? … that Pastor would grow? Grow?! He’s been in the ministry for over 20 years, shouldn’t he be grown by now?! I understand that Christians never stop growing in Christ, but spiritual maturity, honesty, and integrity in the pulpit should be expected.
I wish they had turned him loose in the meeting last night. From his comments in today’s CT article, it appears that the man can preach! His words that the glory of God has departed could be proclaimed over much of the American church … it would be a timely sermon, indeed, for God’s children to hear (in both pulpit and pew).
AKA Hush Money linked to a Gag Order.
I’ve had about half a dozen debriefing conversations with folks who voted not to affirm Booker between last night and tonight, as well as a couple conversations with folks who voted to affirm him.
I’m personally finding it challenging to navigate friendships with members who are seemingly turning a willfully blind eye towards potential injustices and want to “just move forward” without further “division” after this six-hour meeting. Are Christians not called to tend to justice and bring the truth into the light? It breaks my heart.
Booker is incredibly charismatic and has a gentle demeanor, but there are clear discrepancies between his loving words and his current actions. I understand we all want reconciliation and unity in the church, but we need to seek truth first, not cover up potential injustices in the pursuit of unity.
“Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.” – John 3:18, NIV
Here’s the transcript of Michael Balboni’s address to congregation, which I believe was not scripted.
February 25, 2024
Park Street Church Annual Meeting
Michael Balboni comments
Mr. Moderator: permission to have a little bit of latitude to speak a few things.
It does have to do with this [bylaw motion], the question that lies behind everything that’s going on today. And it’s the issue of power, and how to exercise power within community. The truth is, none of us have won. We’re all going home, having been proven broken. And we’re all culpable. Every one of us because we’re not exercising power like Jesus intended.
When I learned that the elder vote to approve my firing was 7 to 6, it was a power play. When I learned how the process that received my allegations against Mark was handled in such a way that I came away from that process believing that it was a predetermined outcome—and then that it was brought to the board of elders with very little time to process everything, all of whom were forbidden to speak to me in any way; and when there were no other witnesses who were interviewed—that is a predetermined outcome in my mind—which is why it has felt like a power play. And I am not at rest.
The 60 or 65% who have won today, you haven’t won. You haven’t won because love has not won. And when love is overcome by power, we all lose. And Jesus is defamed and our church has reproach upon us. We are called to love, we’re called to unity. But we must also have it, Mr. Moderator, in truth.
I know some of you think I’m a villain, a few of you think I’m a hero, but I’m just the chief of sinners and just part of the pack of chief of sinners. That’s not what this is about. As I’ve looked around the room today, and I know many of you have very ill feelings towards me. I want to still say I love you. I love you. I’ve been going to this church—this April will be the 25th anniversary. And I have grown up in this church. I’ve been nurtured in this church and I’ve been privileged to serve. Serving is a privilege. It is not a right.
I’m dismayed and I’m broken. I believe I’ve been scapegoated and it’s painful. It hurts. My family has been exiled and it hurts. And I don’t think Jesus is pleased with any of it. I did not come here today to win and there’s no bylaw changes that can fix this. So I don’t really care quite how you vote.
If we don’t choose love, we will lose. The church will diminish and we will be destroyed. But it must be love with the guardrails of truth. We must be the pillar and ground of the truth. I speak from the bottom of my heart, Park Street Church, that the truth is not known.
Those in power, both in the offices, elected officials, and the majority of this congregation, I bring charges against all of you: That you have put your head in the sand, and you are unwilling to listen to appeals of truth. It is not right. I congratulate you today for winning. But the glory of God is not here unless we choose the path of love.
I want say to Mark and Mandy, we’re broken too. We’re humiliated too. I forgive you. I know Tracy forgives you in the name of Jesus. The blood of Jesus is sufficient to cover over all of these things. There have been those that have slandered me, that I’ve learned of whisper campaigns against me and (against) others. And in the name of Jesus, I forgive you.
You have exerted power play upon power play. Including even this vote today for Mark’s affirmation, (which was) called with a short time and without evidences that have been blocked from being laid forward. It’s a power play. I’m sorry. It is. You have your mandate, Mark. But it wasn’t love.
Now we have a divided church. The exercise of power destroys. Love and humility, (and) a willingness to come together, brings us unity. As we leave today, let’s see how Christianity Today reports this. [Audience member: “Who cares?”] We should care. We should care because it’s about the reputation of Jesus and it’s about doing things correctly.
I hear the angry mums (and sounds) behind me. It’s fine. I understand that you disagree, but if you take a third of the church, a quarter of the church, you take half the church that disagrees, and you have this tiny majority, and you suppress everyone else, (then) it’s wrong. [Applause]
It’s Wrong.
The way to bring us together, Mark Booker, the way to bring us together through the path of love is to humble yourself, and not just say that you’ve done something wrong, but to correct it.
[Audience] Amen. Amen.
If you try to, I, and I’m sure others will meet you [speaker interrupted…]
I’ll be glad to close to, to finish… [speaker interruption]
I want you to hear, congregation, that one… There have been rumors spread that I would sue the church for wrongful termination based on retaliation as a whistleblower. And I want to you to hear from me because people in leadership have been saying that about me despite the fact that we’ve (indicated this in) writing, (but the rumor has) continued to go on. I want you to know, we won’t sue. We will not go to the ungodly courts. I pledge, no matter what happens, we won’t go to the ungodly courts.
But this is my last word: I will not give up, and I will not give in until there is a fair process that hears what has happened to me. What has happened to other ministers. I will not stop. Not in the courts, but I’ll pursue this until it’s over. I do it out of love, not out of hate. [angry audience sounds around speaker]
Thanks very much, Dee, for the much better summary of the meeting yesterday than the CT’s article. As a member who was in the room, I believe that the CT article has selectively chosen to only report the rosiest parts of the meeting (to appear neutral after a lot flak from the previous article?) and/or could only rely on a reporter (not the writers of the article) who left early (understandably since it was so long; I was sitting in the pew behind her) and may have gotten the rest of the information from Mark Booker’s sympathizers.
I would also like to share the perspectives of some of us who have been deeply hurt and heartbroken by what transpired in the meeting. Among others, we were appalled by how openly unfair and biased Jason, the moderator, was when counting the standing votes (his counts were the opposite of the actual counts on the few occasions he allowed us to vote by ballot) to essentially silence people who want to speak and those we would like to hear from, such as some of the elders and ministers that stood in line but didn’t get to speak as well as the representative from Church of the Cross (if someone has that message, please share it with us). It was also incredibly sad and shameful how some of our leaders and members such as our music director and church administrator rudely lectured and assigned motives to those who are simply looking for accountability and justice.
On the other hand, we were very encouraged by and grateful for our elder Leslie Liu, minister Tim Leary, and former minister Mike Balboni, who did manage to speak out against the poison and rot in our church (after many attempts), as well as the other 4 ministers who put their careers/futures on the line when they penned the letter clarifying that the elders’ claims were misleading.
We are simply mourning and grieving now, as well as trying to regroup and decide what to do next with our giving, attendance, etc. Please keep us in your prayers!
Ganym,
Thank you so much for sharing Michael Balboni’s remarks. That was powerful.
Did he get a chance to speak prior to the vote too, or only after?
The vote was before Michael spoke, before Leslie Liu (elder) spoke, and before Tim Leary (minister) spoke. The discussion was closed by a motion that the Moderator, Jason Abraham, accepted by a standing vote that did not visually make the 2/3 needed to close discussion. There was so much that was wrong with that meeting.
seems to me many illegalities have happened.
Park Street Church exists because of the sacrifices of others who have gone before. They deserve better.
when does an attorney factor in?
This is weirdly phrased, as if Mr. Booker views the congregation as a backdrop for his performance of Himself. “Shepherd among you?” Strange.
Totally agree. I wasn’t there, but from the descriptions I’ve heard, sounds like PSC leaders did a lot of what they do best: silencing.
That’s no way to repent and heal.
Ganym,
Thank you for posting Balboni’s entire speech!
I take Balboni at his word, that he will not sue PSC for wrongful termination.
But what’s so interesting about the rumors being spread by PSC leaders here, is how scared they are. Because the fact is, he totally could sue for wrongful termination, and would probably have a strong case, too.
FWIW, I mentioned what was going on at PSC to my atheist stepson, and his immediate response was, “You know, he could sue PSC for wrongful termination.”
Wow. That is so wrong. And I’m totally not surprised. That’s how PSC leaders have been operating all along (except for elder Leslie Liu – thank you!).
Silencing & controlling the narrative is their m.o.
From the CT article about the meeting: ** “I’ve had the sense for some time that we—the staff, the elders, and the congregation—are on the cusp of God’s deeper work,” Booker said. **
Does anyone have any idea what this means in English? One of interesting things about the reporting on this situation is that it seems like everyone is talking in Bible verses and spiritualistical buzz-phrases that don’t seem to mean anything concrete.
It reminds me of myself speaking Spanish: As the Spanish music director, I spend a lot of time with hymns and psalms and the Bible, and when I can’t think of how to say something in Spanish using regular words, I’ll quote something.
A congregation of the Congregational denomination votes by a two-thirds majority to continue with their pastor but the minority refuses to accept the decision and vows to fight on aided and abetted by TWW whose leader “listens in” to the private church meeting. That says it all about how far TWW has sunk. No moral high ground, unethical behaviour, breaching confidentiality. The result no doubt of being saint and sinner at the same time with the promise of sanction-free forgiveness for the bad with no requirement to forsake it.
My final comment –
“ Proverb 10:8 8. “The wise in heart will receive commandments: but a prating fool shall fall”.
The heart is the seat of true wisdom, and a teachable spirit is the best proof of its influence. For who that knows himself would not be thankful for further light? No sooner, therefore, do the commandments come down from heaven, than the well-instructed Christian receives them, like his father Abraham (Hebrews 11:8. Genesis 22:1-3), with undisputing simplicity; welcomes the voice of his heavenly teacher (1 Samuel 3:10. Act 10:33. Psalms 27:8; Psalms 86:11; Psalms 143:10); and, when he knows that “it is the LORD, girds himself” with all the ardour of the disciple to be found at his feet. (John 21:7.)
But look at the professor of religion destitute of this heart-seated wisdom. We find him a man of creeds and doctrines, not of prayer; asking curious questions, rather than listening to plain truths (Joh 21:21-22); wanting to know events rather than duties; occupied with other men’s business, to the neglect of his own. (Luke 13:23-24. 1Ti 5:13.) In this vagrant spirit, with all his thoughts outward bound, he wanders from church to church, and from house to house, a prating fool upon religion; bold in his own conceit (3 John 1:10), while his life and temper fearfully contradict his fluent tongue. Too blind to respect himself (Proverbs 18:2), too proud to listen to counsel (Proverbs 10:17; Pro 15:32), he will surely fall into disgrace, beaten with the rod of his own foolishness. (Proverbs 18:6-7. Ecclesiastes 10:12. 2 Kings 14:8-14.) Let me look at this picture as a beacon against the folly of my own heart. Young Christian! beware of a specious religion, without humility, consistency, love; because separated from close walking with God.”
I am reminded of the Avery and Marsh hymn: “I am the church! You are the church! We are the church together.” Park Street Church is not the building. It’s not the steeple. It’s not the pastor or elders. PSC is the people—the congregation. I pray that the people (however they voted) will love the way Jesus commanded, and will pursue the unity for which Jesus so desperately prayed. And I pray that the Pastor and Elders will do the same. Read 1 Peter slowly and carefully; there is a message for everyone.
Ganym,
Thank you. Rev. Dr. Balboni is, IMO, taking the righteous, but sorrowful, path.
The contrast with the ways of the powerful is vivid.
I think it’s the right thing to do but I suspect that, rather like Jesus and Israel, it will not result in durable repentance in many of the hearers. Eventually there may come a “Day of the Lord”.
The CT article said that 67% affirmed Mark. This is not true. The actual vote count was: 350 affirm, 173 do not affirm, 20 abstentions = 543 votes cast. The 67% figure comes only if you directly compare 350 to 173 with 523 votes in the denominator, which comes out to: 67% affirm, 33% do not affirm. But an abstention is a vote, and not a vote of affirmation. Therefore, 350/543 = 64.4%. Mark Booker did not achieve even 2/3 majority. This is stunning, because the vote happened before they allowed key people to speak (Michael Balboni, Tim Leary, Leslie Liu), and with them controlling all the official channels of communication prior to the meeting. 64.4% is not a convincing number.
Headless Unicorn Guy,
Ganym,
It was clearly way more than 2/3.
Pairing this with what Nick Dedeke (ex-elder) said when explaining his proposed amendments that 3 non-elders are allowed to vote during a board of elders meeting (presumably, the Moderator, Senior Minister and Treasurer), when doing the math, it probably meant that 1 elder or the Senior Minister abstained, and only 4 or 5 out of 11 elders voted to fire Michael Balboni.
So, there seems to be a deeper systematic problem here with only simple majority votes.
It obvious that there are many members that do not support the ministers beginning the Michael Balboni and the four who signed letter saying that they could not support Mark’s letter of support. What I mean by not supporting them is “congregation – believe us there is something wrong with Mark as leader of this church”.
Thank you for your comments and transcript, Ganym.
Thank you for your sermon notes, A Former Member of PSC.
I have tried to keep pretty quiet because I don’t want to bias myself for now: I’m very quietly talking with my friends and contacts with very neutral language and suspect there will be a lot of hours of hard work and listening.
I too, was in person at the annual meeting. I have extensive notes which I have compiled for Dee, including observations of the peanut gallery and body language, but I’m not quite ready to send them yet (still organizing). Yes, I know in social media, fast is important, but truth (accuracy, objectivity, fairness) is important to me.
I have a pretty unusual background: I’m very knowledgeable about abusive churches, totalitarian churches, Christian cults. One insight I do have about the situation is that Information Control is a mark of a cult: people cannot make good decisions (even the right decision) without knowing the facts, the correct information.
Robert Jay Lifton’s first criteria for thought reform (or “brainwashing”) is Milieu Control: control of information, environment.
Let’s say we all got together and I mentioned, “You know what, I know this great restaurant you’d all love.” We go there and place our order. Maybe the cook drops our food on the ground. Seeing that nobody noticed, the cook quickly scoops it back on the plate — but fails to mention it. This very vital piece of information deprives us of making a good decision whether to eat the questionable food (or not).
Not only did Michael Balboni not speak before the vote, non-PSC members were not allowed to speak (of which Ben Rey’s former wifefrom Church of the Cross was present and was disallowed from making a statement) — granted, this may not have been the best place for this.
I will just summarize my initial observations as:
In Christianese, “there was a strong spirit of contentiousness at the meeting.”
It is obvious that PSC is very divided — but I don’t believe it’s not just two groups. The division and the distrust runs very deep.
I really can’t say too much more here but am in the process of trying to figure out this mystery (in the normal sense, not the biblical sense).
My goals are about truth and reconciliation. I’ve always lived my life pursuing the truth, despite however challenging or difficult the truth may be. I became a Christian to pursue the truth. I expose abusive churches with the truth, with the hope they might amend their ways. I am also relational and see many hurt people, which in turn hurts me. Just as we are one body in Christ, that people are silenced, wounded, hurt — also hurts me. I am in pain for them.
Baby pastor needs to grow up? This is a game. Booker is not who they thought he would be and “won’t grow up” because he is what he is. He’d also have a hard time going anywhere else given the publicity. So, PSC is stuck with him unless they can figure out an alternative situation. They need a third-party investigation. They need to backtrack on the ridiculous decision to fire Balboni.
This indicates that PSC is going the way of many authoritarian evangelical churches. The NDA is routinely despised by many, except for the ones who have something to hide. An international movement of Christians is seeking to ban the NDA in church life. https://www.ndafree.org
Re: Dee ‘Listening In’, and your Allegations of Unethical Behavior, etc.
Park Street Church (PSC) is affiliated with the Conservative Congregational Christian Conference (aka 4Cs or CCCC). I’m from another 4Cs congregation in the area. The denomination supports the autonomy of each local church under the headship of Christ. As part of a tiny denomination (see for yourself: https://www.yearbookofchurches.org/conservative-congregational-christian-conference) member churches generally concentrate more on getting people in the door than barring it against them.
To my recollection, there’s no conference rule as to who may or may not attend any assembly at a local congregation. I welcome correction, should you find otherwise at the website: https://www.ccccusa.com/ or in other official 4Cs’ materials.
Since PSC allowed at least Ben Rey’s former wife and Boston Police officer(s) to attend, not to mention the Christianity Today reporter(s), it does not seem as though attendance was restricted to members only — certainly not in practice. I welcome correction, should you supply documentation to the contrary.
Further investigation led me to this PSC announcement about the Annual Meeting (https://www.parkstreet.org/about-us/annual-meeting-2024/?ct=t(ENEWS_February_22_2024)&mc_cid=f765109cb0&mc_eid=05433997f9), which reads in part:
It does not seem that Dee (or any non-member attendee) acted in any way that could be considered “unethical,” and I hope you apologize to our hostess for your incorrect allegation.
As a member of a 4Cs church, I cannot recall being asked to keep confidential the stuff of Annual Meeting. From a brief scan of PSC’s bylaws, I do not see any mention that meeting attendance is restricted to members only. You can check for yourself, here: https://www.parkstreet.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/PSC_BYLAWS_2020.pdf. It seems to me that if there were such restriction, it would be spelled out in the section labeled “ARTICLE VII: MEETINGS.”
It is possible that, because the membership was voting on a personnel matter, the meeting went into executive session. I did not notice any mention of that in the coverage (even by Christianity Today). If it was specified, and I missed it, I apologize for the oversight.
The Stuff of I John 4:7-8
Note: Lowlandseer did not cite the above passage. I put it there as a reminder to myself.
I would like to bring to your attention the way I felt, when I read your post. Before I do, I want to specify that I understand emotions are high, no doubt because (certainly) the members and former members of PSC will have strong feelings about the situation at their church, but also those of us in the larger Body feel invested in the situation, because we appreciate the longstanding witness of a church like Park Street, in a city such as Boston.
I feel that your use of charged language and accusations (particularly where questions might be more useful) adds more heat than light (or salt) to the conversation.
For example “aided and abetted” comes from legal doctrine related to enabling criminal activity. I think, to the extent that we can dispense with barbed rhetoric, the more constructive (or at least the less damaging) our conversation can be.
Similarly, you wrote, “That says it all about how far TWW has sunk. No moral high ground, unethical behaviour, breaching confidentiality.” Reading that, I am left with the feeling that, had you instead asked Dee questions (e.g. “Was this supposed to be for members only?” “If so, what was your justification for covering it anyhow?”) and waited for and considered her response, prior to passing judgment, you would have better tilled the ground for fruitful conversation.
As for “The result no doubt of being saint and sinner at the same time with the promise of sanction-free forgiveness for the bad with no requirement to forsake it.” I feel that is harsh, but I also feel the part in bold is without textual support (i.e. in Dee’s coverage, and TWW commenters’ discussion of the PSC troubles).
It makes me feel like you are bringing in some other grievance from some other conversation or situation. At any rate, it seems to me to be unfair, irrelevant, and unhelpful in the current situation.
I wish you grace and peace, and I hope you join in the work towards that end.
Hi X
I know how you feel. That happened to me fifteen years ago when I found people in my church wanting to turn a blind eye towards leaders who attempted, in my opinion, to conceal the truth in an abuse situation. We lost many friends when we decided to stand up and seek justice and truth.
I have said that was God’s learning laboratory for me, His student. It led to this blog. We left that church and spent some years traveling through many churches, continuing to see the bad and the ugly until we found our current church, which, surprisingly, is Lutheran (LCMS.) We have been there for years and have made many new friends. Use this time to figure out what God wants you to see and do. It was a life changer for us, and we wouldn’t go back for anything.
Ganym,
I am so grateful to have his exact words. Thank you.
And there’s a playbook, as Dr. Ruth Ben-ghiat’s research, “Strongmen”, details.
Several years ago, I learned much from Jim Abrahamson, my pastor. We are unable to judge the motives of others and even ourselves. he would say, “Even on my best days, my motives are mixed.” We can only judge actions. Those who decide they can judge motives are putting themselves in the position of our Lord, the only One who can see our motives.
If your leaders are judging motives, you are put into a no-win situation. They are unable to judge even their motives since their motives in judging are mixed as well. Your leaders should stop putting themselves in the position of God and get back to what they can do: act according to Scripture.
From what I heard yesterday, PSC has a serious leadership problem, and I have no idea their motives. It’s just not working.
I heard that going on. That dude spoke over decent and questioning people. He just wanted to get the vote done on the mistaken assumption that a vote to affirm Booker would solve the problem. It didn’t, it won’t.
Really good question. I think it should be considered.
That’s nonsense. He sounds as if he is trying to be “godly.”
It is worse than that. I predict PSC will have serious trouble in the days ahead. My husband still laughs at the number of people who disagree with Booker’s affirmation. Only in churchianity does 33% dissatisfied mean the pastor did well enough to continue.
You betcha!! This will play out in the days to come.
I sure have been convinced. What a disaster for such a fine church.
Philaletheian, the friend of truth,
I look forward to seeing your notes.
From today’s CT Daily email (in which they add background to their reported stories.)
————————————————————
From CT’s Kara Bettis Carvalho: Having walked through church conflict, including as a pastor’s kid, I wasn’t exactly excited to attend Park Street Church’s annual meeting, even as an impartial observer covering the meeting for the news team. When the church is a family, the pain factions can cause is deep and long-lasting.
As soon as I stepped into the building, I could feel the tension. While congregants fellowshipped over lunch leading up to the meeting, there were still whispers of conflict in the bathroom lines and beyond. During the meeting, some didn’t hold back their loud dissents, groans, or clapping in support of their “side.” But some broke down crying. Others hugged each other. Many members—from new members to those who had been there for a decade—acknowledged pain and grief at their church’s brokenness.
The meeting itself was brutal: six long hours of debating, voting, discussion, and prayer and worship with no breaks. Parents bottle-fed babies; some teenagers sat through the meeting; some members held their heads in grief; and others shouted comments out of order. My takeaway was that even in the mess, the people there deeply cared about their congregation. Sure, they may have wanted differing solutions. But all wanted the church to emerge stronger from this crisis.
@Dee, I hope you can find an outlet for your energy, passion, and commitment in-person in your local community – RDU is it? Fanning the flames from a remote location for a church body in a difficult time, where you are not a member, is unhelpful at best for building up the church body and helping it heal. Based on the tone and posture of this website, I suspect this suggestion will not be convicting for you. I hope it might plant a seed that could grow.
Dee, thank you for the update! If he won’t show the credentials we are free to assume there are none.
Off topic request for prayer, and some laughter and joy:
Prayer–two trips to the DMV, 1 1/2 hours in very crowded room trying to get my driver’s license renewed and upgrade to real id. Whelp, unless I could provide naturalization papers, green card, or other proof I am in the USA legally my original NM birth certificate will not work. UMM, NM is a state in the USA. Guess along with math and science they are not real big on geography here. I got a regular license, lowered the mask only for the photo. Pray I did not catch covid (not too prevalent at the moment) or flu (highly prevalent) or even a cold, as a dear friend is fighting a recurrence if cancer and we are old and at risk ourselves. I am getting a certified certificate sent to me. My second time in to the DMV yesterday they turned down the woman in front of me for real id because she only had a certified copy, not the original, so prayers for that too!
Laughter: that even today people still do not always know NM is a state, apparently.
Joy: crocus, daffodils, and forsythia are blooming. Some small buds on the lilacs. Hyacinths coming up.
More prayer: false spring is going to be followed by a hard freeze. A fast moving storm front may bring all forms of severe weather.
Yall are in an internet bubble. Balboni come across as unhinged. And the irony of “we need to hold a vote becuase we’re a congreg church”… vote is taken …. Booker wins…. *swithces tactics to “This is a power play!” You can’t have it both ways.
The vote should have simply been “whether you would like me to GO”
That’s what the religious folks said about every prophet of God … too serious, too intense, too critical, too unhinged. One always appears to be that way when swimming against the current of needed change.
Max,
Yeah… that’s also what normal people say about people who are actually unhinged.
Let’s put it this way: if you took the vote again after Michael spoke… the vote would have been even more in Mark’s favor.
Max – do you go to PSC?
And abusers and sociopaths cultivate just the opposite — serene, reasonable, calm, polite, a veritable Angel of Light knowing all the dogwhistles to manipulate.
Provoking the victim or opponent into an emotional outburst to discredit them.
Great arguement against Balboni seeming unhinged…. “Socialpaths are the ones who seem normal!!!” Wild.
Yeah… you don’t go to PSC.
We seem to have acquired a sock puppet Defender of the Faith (and the ManaGAWD).
A veritable Angel of Light.
Happens every time a church comes into scrutiny on a church corruption blog; the comment threads flood with Godly Defenders of the Faith (and the Godly ManaGAWD). Every time.
Though usually they use a more Godly and Spiritual and Christian-sounding handle than “Anon”.
dee,
“you would like for me to grow as I shepherd among you”
Mr. Booker is the subject of the verbs: “me to grow,” “I shepherd among you.” The church members are the objects.
How does a person “shepherd among” others? What if there were a different verb …
You would like for me to grow as I excavate among you … as I tap dance among you … as I puree among you …
Weird.
Why should he grow up?
He’s WINNING.
He’s gotten and will now continue to get Anything He Wants.
It’s a toddler’s dream.
…
… and shepherd among the rocks and rills, woods and templed hills …
Headless Unicorn Guy,
I find it ironic that “Headless Unicorn Guy” is insulting my handle of “Anon” saying it’s not “Godly and Christian” sounding.
Happy now?
Unfortunately, most of Christendom in the 21st century is built around who has the most power, who wields absolute authority. In a last message to His disciples, Jesus said that all power and authority over the church had been given to Him. Yet, in many churches the authority and influence of Jesus has been replaced by an illegitimate authority over God’s people … a “power play” which eventually comes under judgment or as Mr. Balboni said at the meeting “the glory departs.” While he had the mic, he could have also preached another last sermon of Jesus given to the church “Repent or else!”
I find it interesting that you just deleted my reply to Headless Unicorn Guy.
Seems like you are not above the tactics that you accuse PSC of…
Headless Unicorn Guy,
I find it ironic that “Headless Unicorn Guy” is insulting my “Anon” handle as not “Godly and Christian” sounding.
Hopefully my new handle is more acceptable.
Tim – new here. Who’s deleting posts?
One question that I have that came up from what I read on a previous post was whether the church was following its own bylaws. Old time members were not aware of a Charter that trumped the bylaws and were not allowed to see the charter. That sounds fishy.
Churches, as non-profit organizations, have certain legal obligations according to the laws of their state. Not following bylaws is likely one of them. If a church has violated the laws of the state for non-profits, then legal action is appropriate, imo.
… nor allowed to see pastor’s credentials
So much for congregational governance.
We have a rule not to talk about moderation. Since you are new, let me explain….The first time you comment, your comment goes into moderation. If you are a decent sort, the next time around, it will go right through. Since I have a life outside this blog, I may not be there to approve your comment automatically. As much as we desire new folks, I am not waiting breathlessly, hands poised over the approval section, waiting for newbies to post. I do my best.
Where did the minister say he possessed the credentials? Sorry just getting up to speed here.
Anon,
In my experience here, posts don’t get deleted merely because they are expressing a different opinion.
There are various technical things that result in comments going into moderation. They then show up later where they would have occurred if they had not gone into moderation. If something goes into moderation, it will appear to the poster initially as if it posted. But it is not visible to anyone else.
Or you may have violated rules for commenting. Did you read those? 9They are right next to “Leave a comment.”)
Dee – why are you deleting posts that do not break community rules?
You should seriously consider the double standrd here. You’re saying all this stuff about leadership suppressing speech at PSC… but you’re doing that on your messsage board?
I know you’re a person of integrity. Please prove me correct.
My daughter used to teach first grade. One year, she had a little girl who was constantly trying to be recognized during Q&A sessions by raising her hand and shouting “What about me?! What about me?!” Her performance was disrupting the class, so my daughter took her aside and gently said “Honey, this class is not about you … it’s about us.” She said she could tell from looking the child in the eyes that her message struck home. From then on, the class was about ‘us’.
Pulpit and pew across America need to realize that “Us vs. Them” was never God’s intent for His Church. Separation of clergy and laity was never in the divine plan. Overlords ruling over the Body of Christ with a heavy hand is not the New Testament model for doing church. We are in this thing together and need to finish the course in unity … but we have to humble ourselves and repent first.
I think this language comes from uncontroversial strands of protestant pastoral theology; the point, I think, is that the pastor is near to and in the midst of the flock, not remote from or above it. I think it’s valid language; one hopes that it is or will be an accurate description of the realities.
Samuel Conner,
Thanks, it’s good to see an alternative interpretation. There’s nothing unusual about a subculture’s having distinctive jargon that sounds peculiar to those not in the milieu.
Thank you Dee for adding my comments back in. I appreciate you giving a space for dissenting positions to be heard. Blessings.
Anon,
Posting with multiple “handles” but the same email is, I believe, a good way to delay the appearance of comments — it creates work for the troll filter people.
No, I’m a member of the greater Body of Christ; there is only one Church, after all. If I attended PSC, believe me you would have known it last Sunday evening! I’ve been doing institutional church for the better part of a century. I’ve seen the sad saga at PSC unfold in multiple churches. I’ve been through the valley of church experience, gaining insight into what ails PSC. PSC is in a leadership crisis; all the red flags are there – it’s an unhealthy leadership pattern I’ve seen numerous times.
Even though I’m not a member at PSC, Anon, I wish the best for you and the PSC Body of Christ in the days ahead. I’ve been around long enough to know that there is a Church within the church at PSC … I grieve for them right now.
Anon,
Assuming they were deleted were you? Maybe just wait a minute until they are approved? You are coming across like a bull in a china shop at the moment.
I disagree. My impression was that “this is a power play” because the vote was not held with balanced input for the congregation.
Not all members received the email containing the five ministers appeal, but all received the other email (with ~20 staff signing in support).
Additionally, there were times where the BoE was called out for not responding to concerns before the meeting, yet saying “you had time to voice concerns” during the meeting.
My desire is to friendly disagree in the most neutral way possible.
Dee, there is nothing stopping you from starting and pastoring your own church insuring the leadership will be done right – according to you, the founding pastor.
*
You could be the first church doing it right.
*
By the way, is it the “Duke cardiologist” who refuses my comments because surely you would always allow me my say – dryly.
Dear M,
Here’s a seed for you.
Many here, and I include myself, have found healing from this blog. Would you like to know why?
In cases where there is abuse in the church, the person abused is usually the one who ends up ostracized and is in a state of confusion. People they have trusted ended up being untrustworthy. People who had known them for years may end up believing the person who harmed them and not their own testimony.
Coming here and reading about other abuse situations can help the process of healing because seeing the same patterns of behavior elsewhere that happened in your own situation helps bring clarity in the confusion. Many of us stay here to help others as we have been helped.
When a different church suddenly has a situation in which abuse is alleged, the congregants there are very unlikely to already be aware of the patterns. And because abuse always involves deception, it can be very hard for a congregant to discern truth without knowing the patterns. So coming to a blog like this can also help those congregants better discern what is going on. If what people saying here about patterns matches what they are seeing at their church, it’s something for a congregant to weigh.
Abusers groom their communities. By the time the abuse is exposed, the community is likely to see them as the “good guy.” In the church, this “good guy” effect is multiplied if the person alleged to be committing the abuse is the main preacher. However, Jesus says in Matt. 23 to listen to the teaching of the Pharisees, but not to copy their deeds. Are you aware of Ravi Zacharias? No one questioned the truth of his teachings. He is just one example of many.
dee,
Base on PSC bylaws, Booker did not get to the 3/4 majority needed for Sr Minister confirmation threshold. So eventhough he got 67% of the vote, he actually was rejected by the congregation.
What about me?! What about me?!
(see my upstream comment on Tue Feb 27, 2024 at 11:42 AM)
During my 70+ years of doing church in America, I’ve seen a lot of pastors come and go. I’ve never known one who accepted a pastorate with less than 90% of congregational vote. I understand that Mr. Booker initially came into PSC with that level of approval, but that was then.
Thank you for your summary of the meeting, Dee. I have been following your posts on Park Street and appreciate your dedication to bringing the truth into the light.
Does anyone have a transcript or summary of Tim Leary’s remarks? I would be very interested in what he had to say, as he is still employed at PSC for the time being and probably has a unique window into what is going on behind the scenes.
Also, does anyone know exactly what Leslie Liu meant when she said that the elders received complaints from 3 or 4 other ministers? Are these complaints that came to the elders independent of Michael’s testimony that the elders did not bother to investigate? If so that seems like a big deal to me, because to my knowledge the elders have not acknowledged the existence of any complaints except Michael’s. But I don’t know if I’m reading that correctly as there is no explanation in the CT article.
Eyewitness,
Good response to “M”. When you are in the thick of a church mess, it’s tough to recognize that others outside of the ruckus are trying to help. The Wartburg community has been through a range of abuse; they speak from personal experience to help others negotiate the valley they are in. Some listen, some don’t.
100% to all of this.
Also, if PSC leaders & Mark Booker really want the church to heal, then here’s how:
1) Answer your worst critics, openly and honestly.
Be transparent. Stop trying to control the narrative.
Sunday’s Annual Meeting was full of these information-control maneuvers (like holding the pro-Booker vote BEFORE Balboni, Leary or Liu spoke).
Moderator Jason Abraham: do not mediate the Special Meeting in April, which the patient and tenacious petitioners have requested, like that. Pretend you’re not one-sided in support of Mark Booker, and give the concerned petitioners equal time to speak. Pretend that you actually have to care about them, and minister to them.
2) Answer your worst critics by hiring an independent org that really knows how to investigate abuse allegations, is biblically grounded, trauma-informed, and has real credibility with abuse survivors.
A truly independent investigation means: you take your hands completely off the steering wheel in how the investigation is conducted – so the investigators have full rein to determine who they will interview, the scope of the investigation, and what the final report says. And then, make the final report public. All of it.
If an org such as GRACE https://www.netgrace.org/independent-investigations clears Mark Booker of abuse allegations after such a thorough, independent investigation, THEN you can label his behavior as mere “mistakes” in judgment. Not before.
The spiritual abuse allegations must be resolved first, in order for there to be true confession, repentance, healing and renewal.
The allegations must not be allowed to fester unaddressed, as they already have been for months. The VOCA team was simply not equipped to resolve this. Bringing them in was an image repair tactic for Booker and PSC.
3) Answer your worst critics in clearing up what Mark Booker’s educational credentials really are, and whether or not he actually planted Church of the Cross, as he claims on his CV.
Either ask for pictures or photocopies of Booker’s Oxford U. diplomas, or get Booker’s permission for Oxford U. to verify his degrees. That way, you can determine if his 2 master’s degrees were really earned, or if one of them is “the Oxford MA” (a bachelor’s degree elevated to master’s status, with a small fee).
Find out the history of the planting of Church of the Cross from the wife of Ben Rey, from Ben’s co-planter Jamaal Crone, and others who were there.
If Booker has inflated his CV on either or both of these matters (and if the Search Committee and elders are complicit in covering for him), then he, the elders, and the Search Committee need to openly confess this to the congregation.
4) Finally, after you’ve done all this, then have the appropriate org (again, like GRACE https://www.netgrace.org/assessments) conduct a thorough, Organizational Assessment of PSC to determine, how did we get here???
Because it’s not all about Booker. It’s about PSC leaders who have been complicit in all this (and, to a much lesser extent, the congregation putting their heads in the sand).
This is how to deal with your problems, PSC. It is painful, and costly. But this is the path towards healing.
You can’t confess what you refuse to acknowledge, and you can’t repent of what you don’t confess.
This isn’t over. PSC, you all remain in my prayers.
Eyewitness,
i believe that, allegedly, a non-profit’s bylaws are legally binding agreements.
thus, i believe it is, allegedly, illegal to violate them.
(phrasing it as such – i’m not an attorney)
Anon,
in my experience, dissenting opinions are utterly welcome. and will be challenged. and welcome to challenge back.
in the manner of responsible adults.
Did something I said prompt the “allegedlys?” If so, there is a misunderstanding. I was responding to the question, “When does an attorney factor in?” and since Balboni has stated he doesn’t plan to sue for retaliatory firing, the other reason an attorney might be involved would be if a nonprofit were in violation of state laws in the way they were operating.
Eyewitness,
no, not a reaction to you.
i’m just schooled in using terms ‘i believe’ and ‘allegedly’.
It would be useful to be able to read both the by-laws (which may be a relatively spare set of regulations that govern the legal entity that owns the assets and that pays payroll, makes tax filings, etc) and the Charter (which might be a more detailed document regulating day to day operations ad functions of the church as a religious entity, perhaps akin to a Presbyterian “Book of Church Order.”)
One can imagine that the Charter might specify “who reports to whom” within the organizational table, and if the pastoral staff do not report to the congregation at large, the Parliamentarian could have reckoned (as a comment in a prior post reported) that the requested purpose of a special congregational meeting (to seek answers to specific questions regarding past actions) fell outside the parameters of the Charter.
Personally, I think that in the interests of peace, leaders should be willing to publicly explain and defend their actions, and meetings of the kind that were refused should be held for the sake of clearing the air. But it may be that as a narrow matter of legal interpretation, the people with the power to grant or refuse such requests may have been within rights. From my perspective, it looks bad and it may actually have been the wrong decision from the perspective of the peace and welfare of the group, but it may have been within the rights of the deciders.
Samuel Conner,
The charter of Park Street (a.k.a., the 1809 “Article of Faith and Government”) can be found here: https://ia601701.us.archive.org/18/items/articlesoffaithc00park_0/articlesoffaithc00park_0.pdf
The bylaws are here: https://www.parkstreet.org/about-us/bylaws/
Usually when I had a question about the bylaws, I went to the person who architected the 2003 bylaws, since that person is still quite involved.
It is of some interest that the current set of leaders had a parliamentarian “interpret” the bylaws who was not the person who architected the 2003 bylaws.
Here are Park Street Church’s bylaws: https://www.parkstreet.org/about-us/bylaws/. You’ll notice the language about Special Meetings allowed via petition in Article VII.3.C. & D.
Last I heard, the petitioners were unable to view the Charter.
Their 3 petitions for Special Meetings were rejected.
Petition 4 for a Special Meeting has just been accepted (perhaps because of pressure from the 1st Christianity Today article?), and will occur in April.
Successful abusers are masters of camouflage.
“For Satan himself can transform himself to appear as an Angel of Light.”
— Some Rabbi from Tarsus
Old trick to astroturf your sock puppets and increase apparent clout.
Remember when Seneca/Jimmy/Whatever would post with multiple handles and addreses?
All of whom traced to the same IP address?
I have been gone for the last 4 hours. That is why comment approval has been delayed. I’m sorry, but life happens.
Anon,
If you would read about comment approval, I approve all comments held. If you are new or appearing under a new identity, your comment will be held until I have time. I do not sit here with hands poised to approve comments as they appear. I wish I could, but I do have a life.
As far as I know, all comments have been approved. Please read the rules of the road for this blog. Nothing has changed for the PSC posts, and this blog is known for approving all sorts of comments. For example, I approve of HUG’s comments! 🙂 Regulars get this one. I even approve comments that call me names.
Anon,
I did not delete ANY of your comments. You are a new “Anon” commenter and your comments needed to be approved. This is explained in the rules of the road.
Might I make a suggestion? Before you make such a suggestion on a blog, make sure you do some reading. I have covered stories on the Isle of Lewis in Scotland, many in the rest of the UK, and stories in New Zealand, Australia, and the US. I believe this is my first story in Boston. I grew up in Salem and attended PSC, where I met my husband.
I have made both friends and detractors from all over the world. I have exposed sex abuse, which is rampant in the evangelical church across the globe. I have discussed the problems with biblical counseling (ACBC) in depth. I have helped journalists in their search for the truth. I figured prominently in the sex abuse mess in the SBC and even joined the protest outside of the SBC convention a few years ago.
I have counseled victims in seeking to expose their abusers. I have confronted churches like PSC, such as Tenth Presbyterian Church, whose pastor, Liam Goligher, was cited for sexual activity with his deaconess in a Lancaster city park. He has stepped down.
Are you getting the picture yet? If you want to make a constructive suggestion that may cause me to reconsider my view of PSC, try showing you understand your subject.
Commenting on tone is not helpful. It is used by commenters who do not know how to make thoughtful opinions. You can’t tell my tone. You proved that in your comment.
BTW, I publish under my real name, unlike you, which means I take it on the chin every day.. I hope you future commenting will improve as you get used to such a forum.
Smart assessment, IMO.
They should be concerned, but they should not spread false rumors which seem to seek to discredit him.
Agreed. It’s necessary to see both to draw any legal conclusions. My suspicions arise from a previous post in which it seemed the person was not aware of the existence of either a charter or the position of parlimentarian. Some old-timer not currently in power would know whether there was a charter (and what it said) and whether there was a church parlimentarian. A longtime elder, a previous pastor, etc.
100%.
When you hide things, people become suspicious. When people become suspicious, you get a divided church.
What righteous reason could there be to keep the charter of a church top secret? In the US, citizens can refuse consent for a search without a warrant even if there is nothing to find. But in a church? What godly reason could there be? If there is one, someone please share. I can’t think of any godly reason to hide credentials or the charter.
What it looks like instead is, “I don’t have to and you can’t make me,” which is not the mark of a Christian leader who doesn’t “lord it over” his people.
Your comment made me laugh. My husband and I thought the same thing. It is churchianity at its best or is it at its worst?
Jesus love you and me, anyway, lowland seer. I will take your comment under advisement.
Agreed.
Thank you for this comment.
Bingo. It is a systems problem. Who created the systems? There is a current debate on some of the goofier problems that have occurred with Google’s AI. What was the old adage? Garbage in. Garbage out.
Absolutely agree.
I find this quite interesting. It’s got me thinking.
Love this. Don’t worry about lowland seer. His comment is per usual-Dee is awful. He doesn’t like me but he spends lots of time hanging out here. Deep dow inside, I think he enjoys me.
Alice Reads Here,
I loved your comment. You should hang around and help me with Lowland Seer. He is a regular and provides alternative dialogue, which can be fun at times.
Thank you for sharing this.
I decided what you said is far better than what I would have said. Thank you.
So what? This meeting was open to all. He’s playing by PSC rules.
It’s how he communicates when he doesn’t say what he really wants to say, IMO.
From the CT article: “Booker, who was called to lead the church in 2020, proposed a nonbinding vote to affirm his continued leadership at Park Street. The elders approved the ballot measure, adding it to the agenda, as CT reported last week.”
Hmmm. I wonder if the possibility of not meeting the 3/4 mark was the reason the vote of affirmation was nonbinding?
LOL. HUG this is why I enjoy you.
Anon,
Anon, will you please tell everyone that your comment was not deleted? This is how stupid rumors start. You did not read the rules of the road and ignorance does not become you.
*Spiritual*Anon,
Do not change your name again. Each time you do, it makes more work behind the scenes.
No one. He’s being impatient. he is calling a “held for approval” comment a deleted comment. Also, we have words that cause comments to be thrown into moderation. Most every blog on the planet has one of these. If I go out for a few hours,I don’t want to come home and see a bunch of sicko comments. It seems someone is not used to the blogging world, especially blogging with ethical blogs.
Is it possible that the Charter is another, equally early document? This is the Articles of Faith & Covenant.
I skimmed this document, and didn’t see anything here about who controls the $ and has legal responsibility for PSC.
The parliamentarian rejected Petition 2 (asking for a Special Meeting to vote on commissioning an independent investigations into the allegations against Mark Booker), because he said the Charter (and the bylaws) give the elders control over the $, and the members can’t force the elders to spend $.
I’ll let the lawyers figure out what PSC’s Charter & bylaws really do say & don’t say, but this seems a little weird to me. For instance, what’s the point in having Members vote on a budget, if the elders control the $?
PSC’s Charter & bylaws aside, these spiritual abuse allegations are never going to be resolved by a pro-Booker vote.
Not following bylaws could land them in a court battle. McLean Bible Church is going through such a mess.
Max, spot on again.
Excellent question.
He claimed he had certain degrees. One of them is being called into question. He refuses to show anyone his diplomas. Would you go to a doctor who wouldn’t show you where he received his training?
If you keep saying this, I will delete your comments. You are obviously a neophyte in the blogging world. I have not deleted one comment in this post.
Sadly, church divisions are common.
Stop it!!!! I. did not ADD in your comments. I approved them. Now, I am irritated. I am putting you into permanent moderation. This means that all of your comments from now on will need to be approved. And I go out each day. If you apologize and say that I didn’t moderate you in a fashion you approved of, I will take you out of moderation. ALL of your comments will be approved when I get around to it. I do not sit here breathlessly waiting for ANON to comment. Good night! Read up on blogging and moderation.
Probably comes from his original ordination and training experience. Intentional obscuring statements are an art form there.
dee,
Whew! After it’s all said and done, I sure hope PSC is not left with just a bunch of Anons in the pew. They would be a tougher bunch to herd than the vocal minority!
Max,
Exactly!
LOL!!
I think Big Cheeses often get in the habit of never saying what they really mean.
Linda,
I’ve only read this far in the comments, and I didn’t want to wait to reply to you….
Praying….
I’m not American, nor do I live in the US….even I know that New Mexico is a state. 🙂
🙂
Praying….
Eyewitness,
67% approval = a letter “D” grade. We deserve a shephard who scores an “A” rather than a “D” at Park Street Church.
This made me laugh. This is the upper class. IN the lower class, they learn to use Scripture to justify just about anything.
Two words. Poor governance. The pastor has too much power. These churches are not democratic and the congregation is cool with that. The focus is on the old testament where the pastor has a special place in the hierarchy.
The concept of the congregation having a voice is foreign.
In the Anglican church I grew up in, the elected board was responsible for hiring the pastor or calling them.
These pastors have too much power.
This church has chosen to keep the guy and the 30 odd percent that didn’t vote to keep him will bail. Plus however many of the walking dead that make up the members that didn’t come out to vote.
Anyway, hope that old building doesn’t need any repairs, there’s going to be a lot of people staying home and saving ten percent.
It’s a sad thing, but there are some great old church buildings all over America that ceased to be churches. One wonders if the congregation continued to split over this and that, until only a handful of the faithful were left and unable to keep the lights on. Some of those great pieces of architecture, former thriving churches, are now coffee shops, boutiques, flea markets, or something of the sort.
I was a “lay leader” in PSC but am no longer in the Boston area. The division in the church has existed for ~10 years and the “old guard” has resisted change repeatedly. The previous minister, Gordon Hugenberger, apparently left in part because church leadership was so resistant to the idea of trying to appeal to college students and young adults. Or so I’ve heard, I can’t confirm if this is true. They also had the opportunity to promote Walter Kim to senior minister but chose to look outside the church. Things would have turned out differently if they did.
Countless have walked through PSC and left burned after facing off against the immovable force of the status quo. Over the past years, I believe the church has lost many members who have grown weary to all the conflict, instability, and lack of support from church leadership. For all those who have left before, the exodus that will occur if Mark remains the leader of PSC will pale in comparison.
One of the most egregious aspects is how much Mark, the Elders, and others have LIED and misrepresented the truth. Kris Perkins didn’t decide to leave, he was fired. Michael departing was not like Paul and Barnabas parting ways, he was fired as well. The staff aren’t all eager to show Mark there support, there were five ministers (at least, likely more) who were brave enough to voice their concern and refute the picture the elders put forth in a recent video. THIS IS SIN! To diminish the severity of sin or to deny its existence is the same as loving sin.
Luckily, we have grace to cover our transgressions. However, it is clear that Mark shows an unrepentant spirit and, as far as I can tell, has not done enough to own up to his sin (not “mistakes”, sin!), an affliction that apparently has spread to many of the church leadership and body. Notice how the statements by Mark, his wife (you were spot on about this, it was cowardly to hide behind his wife and use her to garner sympathy), and some of the commenters don’t really specifically address the perceived problem. “This doesn’t reflect who Mark/PSC is” they will say. “Who are you to judge, you don’t even attend this church” they deflect. “We need to look forward and achieve unity,” while doing little to offer reconciliation, openness or healing to those who don’t see it the same way as they do.
I’m praying for you Mark Booker. I’m praying that you finally realize that you aren’t the man that can bring unity to this community. It’s so clear to the 173 who voted against you, the five ministers who spoke against you, the many who you have fired or pushed out, and to most who are observing this unfold from the outside. I’m so ashamed of how PSC has handled this and how this affects the witness of the Gospel to the city of Boston. There are many good people at this church, I’m saddened at how people seem to be living out of fear rather than living out of the confidence of God’s provision.
Let me get this straight – Dee is trying to prove that she didn’t delete comments… by threatening to delete comments?
dee,
True. There’s certainly less Scripture memorization among the upper class.
“The meeting itself was brutal: six long hours of debating, voting, discussion, and prayer and worship with no breaks. Parents bottle-fed babies; some teenagers sat through the meeting; some members held their heads in grief; and others shouted comments out of order”
Everyone in the PSC community was spiritually abused by the the leaders of the church.To live through that hell. So park streeters how does it feel to be spiritually abused by the leadership of the church? and how much sleep did you get Sunday Night? I was not there.
You (Anon) should seriously consider what prudence and discretion mean with regard to commenting on a blog that does not belong to you.
Dee – I apologize for not understanding how the comment process worked. Blessings.
Max,
In many cases, the old church buildings are no longer functional due to demographic and technological change. My family attended a Congregational church in Newport, Rhode Island, in the mid-1970s. It met in a (then) modern frame building outside the city. The congregation also owned a historic, stone church on the main street in Newport. They would open it once in a while for a wedding or other special occasion, but it wasn’t usable for every Sunday because it had no parking, and it cost a fortune to warm it up in the winter.
All over the U.S., there are church buildings that once served a local, pedestrian population rather than people with cars. There are churches built by ethnic communities – Serbian Orthodox, Polish Catholics – who were once concentrated in city enclaves but are now prosperous, dispersed, and English-speaking.
Jesus had a few things to say about leadership lording it over in a church. In contrast, Dee has guidelines for her blog. Back to what Jesus said about church leaders, from Matt. 20:
“But Jesus summoned them and said,
‘You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them,
and the great ones make their authority over them felt.
But it shall not be so among you.
Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant;
whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave.
Just so, the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve
and to give his life as a ransom for many.'”
Dee’s guidelines serve people as TWW exposes church leaders, “the great ones,” that lord it over church people.
Remember to count the 20 abstentions that are not affirming (add to 350 affirm, 173 do not affirm). A 67 might be interpreted as a D+, giving him perhaps some false optimism. The 64 that Mark Booker got is a straight D.
It is from these verses that we get the meretricious concept of “servant leader,” which is not what Jesus said. He just said “servant”; he just said “slave.”
I think the better way to understand it is that Jesus was saying, “You want to be great? That’s the wrong goal. Be a servant. You want to be first? You shouldn’t want to be first: you need to be a slave.”
Anon,
I’ll remove you from moderation.
You don’t get this straight and do not understand the word MODERATION. In the blogging world, your comment will be approved after I see the comment, so long as it isn’t foul. The word DELETE means to trash the comment by removing it from being allowed.
GBTC-you are right! I am not worthy…
I think a fair number of people here know very little about how this works. My “Guy Behind the Curtain” says I shouldn’t discuss moderation since this is my blog, and I can do whatever I wish regarding MODERATION or DELETION.
I keep trying to help people understand and still get comments that prove the individual didn’t take the time to understand the process.
Good night! You live in Boston. The last time I checked, it was an education hub. Educate yourself before making comments that do not show you at your best.
Worth repeating! The authority and influence of Jesus are waning in the American church. Mostly overlords in control now and Jesus still shouts “But it shall not be among you!”
Jim,
A thought re: the comment examination process.
I have followed ‘blogs that post all comments without examination (typically a labor- and cost-saving measure rather than a principle of free speech), and others that have varying degrees of examination. IMO, the “anything goes” ‘blogs tended to have comment threads that devolved into ill-temper and name-calling, and worse. I think there’s a kind of Gresham’s Law at work — bad commentary drives out good. Good ‘blogs tend to attract readers in part for the commentary, and dysfunctional comment threads can impair the purpose of the ‘blog by making it less attractive to readers.
The comments approval process is IMO a good thing. There are plenty of dissenting views expressed here; I’m often ‘off the reservation’ myself in terms of what (I think) consensus views are among the commentariat. I spite of the diversity of views expressed, things rarely devolve into ill temper, which I think is a good thing.
A good thing to remember is that commenting on someone else’s ‘blog is a privilege, not a right. My interpretation of Dee’s objection is that untrue charges, based on misunderstanding of the site policies, were being leveled. I think her response was appropriate. Thankfully, the misunderstanding was cleared up and peace seems to be restored.
This is indeed a big deal. I would also be very interested in seeing these transcripts.
PSC elders, pro-Booker & current PSC leaders’ loyalists are claiming that Balboni’s allegations of spiritual abuse were dismissed, because they were deemed “unsubstantiated.”
And now you have PSC elder who testified on Sunday to the fact that there were complaints from 3-4 other ministers that should have been investigated.
So “unsubstantiated” just means “not properly investigated.”
Add to this those who have already voted with their feet, like me. That lowers Mark Booker’s grade to an F.
Mark Booker is a FAILURE as a pastor. If he has the heart of a pastor, he would realize that he is a failure as the Senior Minister of Park Street Church, that he is woefully ill-equipped for this position. He would realize that it is in the best interest of Park Street Church that he resign, that he return to the ANCA and become a rector of a much smaller church.
Mark Booker has demonstrated that he does not have the caring, loving heart of a pastor.
Mark Booker has not been forthcoming when being forthcoming is required.
Hi Anon, I am not anonymous.
My name is Elizabeth Klein. I got a bachelor’s degree in flute performance from the Curtis Institute of Music in 1994. In 2017, I got a master’s degree in spiritual formation from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. I was a member of Park Street Church for 20 years, 1997-2017. My last name was Ostling back then.
See? This shouldn’t be so hard for Booker to do.
I think it’s unhinged for a senior minister to send out a letter to the whole congregation about how exasperated & threatened he is by the questions being raised about his academic credentials.
If Booker really did earn 2 master’s degrees at Oxford U., then why should he feel threatened? He could just give permission for Oxford U. to verify which degrees he really earned. Case closed!
Anyway, I left PSC because leadership was unhinged, even back in 2017. It’s far worse now.
The conflicts at PSC will not be resolved by Sunday’s vote. Problems don’t magically disappear when you refuse to deal with them (or insist on dealing with them in your own way – like bringing in VOCA).
That’s the view, from my own experience at PSC, from all I’ve learned from abuse advocates over the years (you could pretty much write the PSC playbook by how leaders are dealing with this) – and from my little internet bubble.
Well said.
I do not think Rev Dr Balboni is unhinged. My husband has liked his sermons so much he has submitted his name to be a speaker at a gathering of Christian healthcare professionals next year.
Instead, I believe the word for what he said at the meeting is “uncomfortable.” Using Scripture, he explained his perspective on what happened. When people use Scripture in a convicting manner, people get squirmy. “How can this be true? “This is PSC. We know what we’re doing and get Scripture just about better than anyone.”
There are many places where you will find an “internet bubble.” This is not one of those, and my work over 15 years demonstrates my insights as to what is going on in churches. This may be hard to take, but I have seen this sort of thing at churches over and over and over again. It is so common. Yet, it is hard for someone from PSC to understand.
It is PSC that is in a bubble. I believe the church got more than it bargained for when Pastor Booker arrived. I believe that he has not been trained in any reliable fashion, given his penchant for miffing off members, here and in other churches, which he usually follows by firings.
How can people still visit and nod along in a church in which it is acceptable to conceal academic credentials and things like the constitution of the church? I have traveled and lived in many places in the US. I have NEVER seen that nonsense. PSC seems to have dreamed up some “rules” that make this acceptable.
You may say you disagree with me, but it is next to impossible to say that I live in an internet “bubble.”
I feel sorry for the members of PSC. It has fallen in a way that I could never have imagined. I predict some tough days ahead for the church, which makes me sad. PSC has gone from being uncommon to terribly common. It is now one more tedious church where people are getting hurt, and elders and pastors play “admirals in a rowboat” quite well, in my opinion.
I want to see how many people have left since Pastor Booker arrived. All churches have lost members due to Covid. Also, Boston is not the South. Churchgoing outside of the RCC is slower, and even there, it is slowing down. I grew up in Salem in a family that did not attend church, and neither did my friends.
In my opinion, PSC is struggling to be a light on a hill in a culture that is not terribly interested. I would think that instead of firing good and decent pastors and staff, Pastor Booker should think about how to attract people. Perhaps God put those staff members there for His purposes.
It was a real potboiler. The leaders outdid themselves. I would put PSC up against any SBC church congregational meeting, and that is saying a lot for those of you who have never been to the South.
“Admirals in a rowboat”
What an accurate picture. Breaks my heart that it so often describes the church in America. I’m secretly thrilled that it’s used by a Daughter of Stan!
I have a question: How do you, Dee and the other commenters, define ‘spiritual abuse’?
As someone outside the religious bubble, I have no idea what this is and would really like to know.
I totally agree with all of the above.
I am so glad I got to read Balboni’s speech here. It was remarkably powerful, full of grace, truth and love – and the holy boldness of the Spirit.
So, a current PSC regime loyalist said the following to me a couple days ago on Twitter:
“Mark has gotten very hard pushback internally. Even those who are his allies offer direct and sometimes harsh feedback to him personally.”
This only raises more questions.
Why does Booker need “harsh feedback?” This only seems to confirm that his behavior is problematic, as alleged by Michael Balboni, Tim Leary & the other 4 ministers who spoke out, and elder Leslie Liu, who said in CT that there were complaints about Booker by 3-4 other ministers that should have been investigated.
Also, “allies?” A minister has allies and enemies?
That’s not what Ephesians 6 teaches. Or what Balboni taught by example on Sunday. Our enemy is not flesh & blood.
Besides which, if Booker really has inflated his resume on 2 points, and spiritually abused multiple ministers & staff members, then exposing this would be the most loving thing for his soul. God’s kindness leads to repentance.
“Don’t you remember on earth – there were things too hot to touch with your finger but you could drink them all right? Shame is like that. If you will accept it – if you will drink the cup to the bottom – you will find it very nourishing: but try to do anything else with it and it scalds.”
– C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce
This is true. Having spoken to a number of elders and ministers, here is what I know: the elder board is not a safe place to bring ‘complaints’. Those on the board in support of Mark, led by the Moderator Jason Abraham, have responded to all concerns by ignoring, dismissing, justifying, diverting, or gaslighting. The number of those who have expressed serious concerns or ‘complaints’ to members of the board includes the five ministers who signed the letter and at least 1-2 more. This number does not include Michael Balboni. These complaints have either been expressed directly to Jason and Mark, or relayed to them by more open members of the board, so there is no excuse of ‘not knowing’. Those on the board who are aware of these concerns are silenced under the board’s ’one voice’ policy, which gives context to Leslie Liu’s courage in breaking through the silence. “Unsubstantiated” indeed means “not properly investigated.”
Another question: why is a senior minister who finds it so hard to listen to his elders (such that he needs “harsh feedback”), and whose behavior was deeply problematic to at least 3-4 ministers, so indispensable to a church and so worthy of unswerving loyalty?
It’s Jesus’ church, not Mark Booker’s church.
Hi Dee
First let me start by saying how much I admire your work. About 5 years ago you posted a link to a blog I wrote back in the 2000s but later shut it down (a friend resurrected it and asked you to publicize it. Although I was not involved in contacting you about this I appreciate your willingness to do this.
I started reading your blog after this event (round 2017 I think). I consider myself somewhat of an expert or at the very least a survivor of an abusive spiritual cult with abusive leadership (which is what my shuttered blog explored). I manage to this move past this experience of my youth with my faith intact.
Today We attend PSC Boston (but are not members) BUT We COULD have attended the meeting in person… but chose not to. So it is not true the meeting was closed or called in haste.
We have personal experience in being counseled by Dr.Balboni and he is a very loving kind person who treated us with dignity and respect even though we were not members. He is a gracious person who embodies the gifts of wisdom and healing. It is clear he working in his calling as a Pastor. And I have NO doubt he a sincere follower of the Lord Jesus Christ
I also want to comment on Pastor Mark Booker and my thoughts when he was brought in as Senior Pastor.
These were my thoughts when I heard about Mark being called (given his CV) and afterwards:
1)He was from an Anglican background (with a hierarchical structure). Having been on the personnel committee of an SB church in the past I wondered how he would handle a “congregational style church” with all the challenges this brings a Senior Pastor.
2)I worried about his age/experience given the size and complexity of running a somewhat large congregational church whose membership has been declining for sometime. That is a fact. The church faced serious issues it could not arrest that decline.
Mark came from a 300+ member church with a structure above it- and sized (and having been a member in a SB Church this size) where the senior Pastor might have 4-5 direct reports but pretty much has to make many decisions himself.
Given 1)above there would I suspected (when I read his CV) he might be even more inclined to make decisions without regards to the multi varied inputs of a CC church and I assure you these can be very irritating to deal with (I write this as a formed SBC Deacon and head of the personnel committee).
Given what I suspect was Mark’s charge by the BOE to “turn it around” (probably not in that language) it would not be surprising that he made many mistakes both large and small given 1) and 2).
Like the old SNL skit I feel like I am reporting from 50 yards away but here goes:
A)PSC is NOT an abusive church. I have been in one and this is NOT one. Despite the high emotions of some members and those expressed by your readers. This is NOT a Mark Driscoll situation and NOT a “take over” as I understand that term.
B)Mark Booker was probably too immature (I don’t mean that in a pejorative sense)but rather that he should have had more experience in a smaller Congregational church at the very least before taking on PSC. BTW I am very close friends with a senior pastor of a large Congregational Church and he told me “PSC is going to have a very Hard time recruiting a Senior Pastor (this around 2017-18) because it is well known the BOE and the membership don’t want to make the changes required for it to grow and prosper.” (this is not an exact quote but very close to what he told me).
C)Mark Booker is an EVANGELIST if there has every been one. He is a talented Evangelist and I say this gifted (by God)for this.
D)No doubt Mark wronged some of the staff (given 1 & 2) above and given his (what I see as) “get it done” personality.
D)Mark Booker SHOULD have been counseled at the onset by an Elder or a retired Pastor with experience in handling a Congregational run church. This is no easy task (I have two close friends who are SBC pastors- and let me tell you they do NOT have an easy time with those issues- even though they have been in their churches 10+ years and are much loved). This is a skill that for many Pastors must be learned.
E)Mark in his sermons (which you may not be aware of or failed to note) starting in DEC 2023 or early has actually said “I am a sinner and have sinned”. So I think your post could be a bit misleading (with this omission probably not intentional on your part) but none the less a mistake if I may so.
F)Mark has been consistent that he made many mistakes AND sins and that he is “sorry for them” and he has vowed to change.This has been done in at least two sermons (DEC and JAN) maybe more. What else could we ask from him short of resigning? (although his resignation seems to be your aim if I may be so bold to state something explicitly which I believe you have done implicitly).
I Say this in all gentleness Dee but when you are a hammer(and you are a very good one at exposing truly abusive leaders and churches and I thank you for that)then EVERYTHING is a nail. But this is NOT a nail.
My hope (I hope NOT a forlorn one) is that Mark would contact Michael to make PRIVATE reconciliation with him. There apologize, ask forgiveness and then publicly announce this (with Michael’s blessing)… then welcome Michael back restoring him to his position at Park Street (this would encompass all aspects of repentecne). This is what I would counsel Mark to do.
This is what I would counsel Michael to do as well (make himself available and if Mark took these steps then accept them as Christ and Paul commanded us to do).
I know many of your subscribers will call me silly and naive and they may have the right of it. Perhaps I am.
BUT I am reminded me of this:
“But Paul disagreed strongly, since John Mark had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in their work. Their disagreement was so sharp that they separated. Barnabas took John Mark with him and sailed for Cyprus”
and then this:
“Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry.”
I end with this:
“Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another; love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous; not returning evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary blessing, knowing that you were called to this, that you may inherit a blessing.”
Thank you Dee so much for your work and thank you for your consideration in posting this. Your good work is much appreciated.
With all loving Kindness
Your brother in Christ
H
A Former Member of PSC,
Leave it to Booker and his supporters to spin a “D” as WINNING.
A Former Member of PSC,
This time for Booker to graciousely step aside for the good of His Kingdom.
Cynthia W.,
servant leader….
how sick i am of christian culture exploiting a concept as a gimmick to get men and women to do things according to a predetermined outcome.
(to get men to come to church so the ones who already come will have pals and want to keep coming)
(to get women to be submissive and unassertative for men’s convenience and to accomodate their ego so the men will want to keep coming)
it’s exploiting human beings, really. manipulating their fears, insecurities, hopes and dreams.
Anon,
“…unhinged…”
++++++++++
you’re revealing yourself as being swayed by PR.
you’re parroting words used by people wearing the PR hat when they’re trying to help their client get what they want by turning others against their client’s opponent.
I just want to offer a bit of different perspective on a few items:
1) A lot of folks are assuming there was triumph after the meeting on the Booker side. I was there, and spoke to Booker afterward; all I saw was a sad, broken, weary man, who seemed to be wrestling with that would be best for the church going forward. It’s easy to make assumptions through the internet about a man you’ve not seen, but I don’t think it’s helpful. I can’t prove he’s not just an incredible actor, but there was no triumph there.
2) I’m troubled by the continued charge that Booker is being dishonest re his CV. Oxford bachelor’s degrees (like Cambridge and Dublin) become “MA” after a few years, as even Dee has pointed out on this blog—apparently a tradition that started in the middle ages, before America was a concept, let alone the American university system. This is the correct way to describe them; it’s not in any way deceptive. If he had attended some sort of diploma mill that was just handing out degrees, that would be one thing — but Oxford is probably the most prestigious university on the planet; based on his scholarships & first-class designations, he seems to have been a stellar academician. I’m personally overeducated, with two masters’ & a doctorate from two different countries, and can personally attest that (a) there’s incredible variety in rigor from program to program & institution to institution, (b) different univiersities have different requirements & degree traditions, especially from one nation to another, and (c) I’m genuinely (please believe me — I’m doing my best not to let my personal bias influence this) much more impressed by two years of theology-focused undergraduate and the thesis-based master’s at the world’s best university than I would be by an M.Div. at a generic seminary.
If your argument is “fine, but that’s not the right training for a minister,” or “it’s not really equivalent to an M.Div. like the board says” — I think this is where Dee is, but clearly many commentators here are not — great, that’s a good question for a seminary professor to answer, let’s have that conversation — but that’s VERY different than alleging deceit.
3) I see a lot of folk saying “he lost a third of the congregation, he should resign.” I disagree — PSC spent something like five years and two senior minister searches trying to find someone that everyone would like — I think the church’s disunity started before Mark arrived, not because of it, and a 90%-support candidate just doesn’t exist without the church doing some more healing.
But if you DO believe the logic that a minister who can’t unite more than two thirds of the congregation should resign — please apply the same logic to Balboni, who probably has LESS than a third of the congregation’s support at this point. If you’re encouraging Booker to resign for the sake of unity, please encourage Balboni to stop trying to come back for the same reasons.
4) Broadly, I see a lot of non-minister-related conflicts (politics, high- vs. low- church, hiearchy vs. consensus, right vs. left, Meyers-Brigg Feeling vs. Thinking [I can’t think of a better way to phrase it, though I don’t think Meyers-Brigg is necessarily the most valid system]) being mapped onto this situation. This is probably inevitable. But if we all take a step back, I think it’s clear there’s a big diversity in our church, and we need to do more talking across bubbles, rather than just within them.
As a 70-year Southern Baptist (I’m done with them now), I sat through several business meetings replete with weeping and gnashing of teeth. It was quite the show a few times! During one particularly contentious meeting, a woman from the church’s ruling family stood at the microphone and ranted and raved for several minutes. Following the meeting, I walked to the parking lot with an old saint. As he was getting in his car, he looked at me and said “That’s exactly why you don’t give the devil a mic.” Yep, Southern Baptists are famous for arguing about everything from the color of the carpet to the color of the preacher! But they usually get along OK with each other during the monthly fellowship dinner … fried chicken and pecan pie have a way of healing wounds.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/scot-mcknight/2020/december/what-is-spiritual-abuse-working-definition.html
elastigirl,
Sometimes it’s used in a gendered way. I more even see a more general usage, “What kind of leader? ‘Servant leader’.” It’s even used in business. I think it’s getting Jesus’s message wrong. “Servant” means “servant,” not “well-intentioned boss.”
Max,
Thanks Max.
Cynthia W.,
yeah… but such a fixation on ‘leaders leading with leadership as they lead’ in christian culture.
to me, it’s the stuff of comedy.
really, leaders make room for others to lead.
required: the buck stops with the leader (responsibility).
not required: the spotlight (power, celebrity,…)
i’d wager responsibility and power are not the same thing.
just found this:
“While Power is the ability to make things happen, Responsibility is driven by attempting to answer the question: ―In whose interest is the Power being used?”
Ganym,
Thank you for the additional information. If only some more of the dissenting elders would speak up, that would be an enormous help in shedding light on the corruption of church leadership. Not that I expect that to happen, but if 5 ministers could put their jobs on the line by speaking out against Mark, I would think some of the elders could follow their example.
True!
Max,
Thank you Max for the link to Spiritual Abuse definition. I think it is fair to say that we collectively experienced that this Sunday at the PSC Annual Meeting.
elastigirl,
ok, so, Spiderman. “with great power comes great responsibility”
so, i guess in order to answer the question “In whose interest is the Power being used?”
one must have power to see that leaders eat last. the needs, hopes, dreams of others come first.
leadership is the antithesis of self-enrichment.
Elizabeth Klein,
I just might have found the “Charter” referenced by the Parliamentarian when denying the Second Petition. It seems to be the “Acts of Incorporation” of PSC, enacted by the Massachusetts General Court in 1916:
https://archives.lib.state.ma.us/server/api/core/bitstreams/449422d4-0a65-47bc-b238-948f26a2978e/content
I’ll try not to get too into the weeds here, but this document is what merged the existing “Park Street Congregational Society” (pew owners who held church property corporately) with “Park Street Church” (the unincorporated body of congregants admitted to church membership). For reasons related to funky church/state history in Massachusetts, these were often two separate entities in Congregationalist churches. This Act consolidated the two, and set out the responsibilities of the church trustees (presumably now the Elders) to manage church property, subject to congregation approval for sale and mortgaging of the church building.
But I still do not think this is the exact document the Parliamentarian is referring to. Several of his citations to the “Charter” don’t match up, particularly his section numbers and using the title “Elder” where the Act references “Trustees.” My guess is that the document has been amended since 1916, which is almost inevitable given the passage of time, but I cannot locate the amended document anywhere.
To summarize, after an inordinate amount of research and guesswork on my part, I may have been able to turn up an over 100 year-old document that is the ancestor of what the Parliamentarian calls the “Charter.” The fact that it is not easily accessible (as publicly registered corporation documents should be) and is withheld from church members on request, and yet is still being used to justify Elder power over the church, is yet another sign that the congregation no longer holds authority at PSC.
NOTE: The bold font in the above quoted text was added by me.
IN RE YOUR INCOMPLETE/INACCURATE REPRESENTATION of EVENTS:
Michael Balboni wrote his 17 page letter to the Park Street Church Board of Elders in July of 2023 [https://thewartburgwatch.com/tww2/wp-content/MB_Letter-to-Elders_07152023.pdf].
The letter was dated/submitted a few days prior to his termination.
At the time of writing, Balboni could not cite the 7-6 vote which ended his employment, because it had not yet taken place.
On Sunday, February 25, 2024, at the Park Street Church Annual Meeting, Balboni was permitted to make remarks only after the vote to retain Mark Booker had taken place.
If a person is prevented from speaking prior to a vote, you cannot then accuse them of “switching tactics,” in their post-vote remarks. Well, wait, I guess you *can* — in that you did — but any such allegation is based upon fancy, not fact — sand not rock.
To the extent that we choose to discuss the disorder at Park Street, we must do so in a way that is intellectually honest.
IN RE YOUR FRAMING of BALBONI as “UNHINGED”:
This subject of this conversation is serious!
It includes allegations of creeping authoritarianism as an end-run around congregational polity, breaches of pastoral confidentiality, misrepresentation and other dishonesty, manipulation, mismanagement, mistreatment of staff and congregants, and more.
Mark Booker and Michael Balboni are both ministers of the Gospel, children of the King, and people for whom Christ died. Additionally, Balboni is — at the very least — not the only present or former Park Streeter who has called into question the integrity of Booker’s behavior as pastor.
A full 35.55% of those who cast a vote on Sunday chose not to affirm Booker’s leadership (173 against him + 20 abstentions = 193, that 193 divided by 543, i.e. total votes cast, and it works out to be 35.55 percent). Then of course there are the hundreds of voting members who couldn’t be bothered to show up for a vote on something as critical as the fate of their lead pastor.
Are they all unhinged too? Of course not. They see something you don’t see. You see something they don’t see. The job before us is to seek the truth with eyes wide open.
Balboni’s statements on the Park Street disorder have been, at least, well-reasoned. That is, even people who disagree with his point of view ought to be able to see that he crafted both his July 2023 letter and his February 25, 2024 spoken remarks with thought, love, and respect.
Everyone you disagree with is not unhinged, just like everyone who sees things differently from you is not trapped in some bubble.
In thinking and speaking of Balboni in such a manner, you might think you are defending Park Street Church. You are not. After all, Balboni has been a congregant at Park Street for nearly 25 years. If I understand correctly, he also served as a minister at PSC for several years prior to Booker’s arrival. He is someone who is invested in Park Street Church, and Park Street Church should also feel some investment in him, not only as a former minister, but as a member.
You are doing PSC a disservice, by dismissing the allegations Balboni levied. After all, you have not done one iota of work to debunk them. Rather, you have simply lobbied an ad hominem attack on the levier, in order to disparage him.
The only “side” any of us should be on is that of Jesus Christ and him crucified. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, right? To be on the side of Jesus is to be on the side of truth.
Dismissing as “unhinged,” a person who has made careful criticisms of a church he has long loved puts a roadblock between yourself and whatever the truth of the problem and its solution might be.
You may not ultimately conclude that Balboni’s perspective (of facts which, it seems even Booker himself does not dispute) is a correct one, but (and of particular import if you are a Park Street member), the way toward truth will not involve belittling a brother for whom Christ died.
The very subject matter of the disorder at Park Street is a tragedy. As Christians, to the extent that we engage in the discussion of it, we need to do so in a way that honors Christ, and a way that recognizes that even if there is/are some ultimate villain/s in this situation, Jesus died for him, her, or them, too.
I know I’ve gone on far too long, so I’ll stop here. I only bothered to lay out everything I did, for the sake of others who might come across this conversation after the fact. For your sake, when you engage in conversations like this in the future, I hope you press pause on the impulse to take swipes at the people you disagree with, and instead engage in a thoughtful way.
I wish you peace.
If that is the case, why doesn’t he get it over with. Come to a meeting with his diploma/credentials and just get it over with? That is where I think most people sit. I don’t really care about Oxford “best on the planet, etc.”If the masters was obtained by paying $20, as is stated by even the Oxford students, then state it and get it over with.
He won’t do it.That is thee bottom line. It his obvious that he doesn’t want to do it and PSC leadership is backing him on this. There is obviously a problem and most honest people would clear this up immediately.
Seeking Truth,
Good research. The church must share these documents and should make it easy for anyone, member or not, to access the info.
Maybe a chicken dinner for the membership is in order.
That is the best suggestion that I have heard. Well said.
As for being a hammer, I think this might be necessary in order speak for those who are not on the same page. The leaders need to do this with the membership hence my suggestion for the service of lament.
You will to convince me that this is not a takeover. Goodness, I never said it resembled anything like a Driscoll situation. Today, the SBC is well known for quietly moving into church situation to change the polity. Look at the number of new churches in New England. Then look behind the curtain and see how they are SBC at the heart of it.
By takeover, I mean a change in polity or leaning. I think it is possible that Booker’s experience in the (new) Anglican thing. The initial church with which he was involved is under fire for the abuse of the pastor. It is worth thinking about that as well as what happened subsequently at COTC. It is possible that there is a push to a top down elder run church which is no different than the SBC and no different than many Anglican churches.
I have no trouble with top down leadership. After all I am now LCMS. However, I do not expect that sort go governance at PSC not should anyone else. I do think Booker was influenced by his time in that denomination.
In the end, I am very upset on behalf of the people with whom I have spoken. They needed a place where their voice can be heard.
Thanks for telling me about your blog. I’m glad I could point it out. I wish I could remember it.
Towards reconciliation. I wonder if the leaders will listen to your suggestion…
dee,
Thank you for the welcome. Long time listener/first time caller, that is, I have been stopping in at TWW for a long time. I’m not exactly how long, but TWW first came to my attention via Michael Spencer’s Internet Monk (from where I believe I recognize Headless Unicorn Guy’s handle), and Michael will have been gone for 14 years (!) this April.
I am not a regular, and as such, I never felt the urge to comment, until news of the disorder at Park Street Church came to my attention. (It has me missing Michael’s voice more than usual.)
What brought me around this time, was Googling Dane Ortlund (someone gave my mother his Gentle and Lowly book). After learning about Emily Hyland’s case at CT, I decided to see if you’d covered it (which — of course you had), which led me to your home page and the Park Street posts.
Thank you for all you do for the Church.
Alice Reads Here,
“I’m not exactly how long” should read, “I’m not exactly sure how long.” Please forgive the error.
I suspect you have an exaggerated sense of how much of a concern this is within the PSC body — I don’t think the key figures in the conflict (e.g., Balboni, Leary) share your concerns re the academic record, so ‘sharing the diploma’ is not high on Mark’s list of priorities right now; he doesn’t view this as getting anything ‘over with.’
It’s also a very odd ask — I’ve never in my life been asked by anyone to share my diploma for any job, nor heard of anyone asking anyone else; has this been commonplace in your experience? Credential verification has always consisted of contacting the degree-granting institution (usually via a background check firm); it sounds like the elders went above and beyond, even speaking to his academic advisor, so I’m not sure why this is a concern. If this troubles you as a journalist / blogger, why not call Oxford?
I’m also not sure I follow the significance of the $20; presumably this is an administrative fee for Oxford to update their records from BA to MA? It doesn’t seem germane to the question of whether he did the coursework. If this has been the tradition since the middle-ages — which I don’t think you deny — I’m not sure what the concern would be, beyond “I’m worried some Americans not familiar with Oxford tradition could misinterpret Mark’s CV,” which I don’t think was the case when the elders interviewed him.
You might think I’m harping on this point, but I’ve talked to other members of PSC who seem to believe Mark is straightforwardly lying about his degrees, or faking them, presumably stemming from a misundertanding of your blog posts here. They point to this as clear evidence of a dishonest character, which couldn’t be farther from the truth: he’s just correctly writing his CV, and this extra muddying of the waters surely distracts from the claims Balboni et al. are trying to make.
I’m sure you can also hear how your requests here almost precisely echo the ‘birther’ phenomenon, in which more radical elements of the GOP contended Obama was lying about his place of birth, landing on “an honest candidate would just show us his long-form birth certificate, the fact that he won’t do it means he’s hiding something.” I suspect most of the anti-Booker camp would never associate with the birther movement; I’m not sure I understand why this parallel phenomenon has taken place here.
Thank you for this. Every PSC member should have easy access to this document (and especially the one with the most recent amendments). It’s utterly ridiculous that it was so hard for you to find.
Also, I wouldn’t be surprised if another lawyer could find a different interpretation of the Charter.
Mark Booker responded to this idea in the annual meeting. Here is the transcript.
“I’m X. I’m a member. I have a question for Mark. So in your desire to change and grow, have you considered the possibility of asking Michael Balboni back and do your growing together? Because I mean, while they [VOCA] may see a few things by interviewing the staff and pastors, but they have not been among us. On the other hand, Michael as well as the five ministers see issues that are concerning. I think in that sense, perhaps the change and growth, perhaps God can use Michael and the other ministers to work together, for the benefits of everyone.
Mark Booker response:
The short answer is I have not invited or considered bringing Michael back on staff. Michael’s in the room here now and my last time to exchange with Michael was to say that we are brothers in Christ, and I still hope this true, but my commitment to Michael is to walk forward toward love and reconciliation forgiveness when the time is right. And I’ve worked hard in my own heart in that interim time to release this sense of anything that I have against him or to hold burdens over him to the Lord and pray for him.
I expect he’s praying for me as well. So I expect that to be a process that continues and I very much could see growth coming out of that in my life and in Michael’s. In terms of the other five staff that you’ve mentioned, I’ve been in conversation with three of those five since that letter was sent at a pretty deep level; and certainly would expect to happen as a part of that process of growing and learning and changing. Thanks.”
Alice Reads Here,
Oh no. I botched a tag and messed up all the formatting. I’m so sorry. I’ll try again. Dee’s comments should be in blockquote format. My own should not.
__________
I’m not sure which side of the aisle you think I’m on, so I’ll state it clearly.
In response to what I have read, from you, from your commenters, and from CT, I am of the opinion that Park Street is in trouble. As you wrote in the original post in this thread, I think they need a “third-party, independent investigation” — “performed by a competent organization that is versed in spiritual abuse as well and is trauma-informed.”
I’ve only known of the situation since this past weekend, but my gut says that Mark Booker should leave (regardless of the vote going in his “favor” I think his presence will be too disruptive), but that’s unlikely. Who would hire him right now?
.
I don’t understand what you mean by you have “a visor of Michael’s appeal,” so I’m skipping that part for the rest.
In reference to you citing my use of “thoughtful”: I found Michael Balboni’s 17-page letter and his remarks at the 2/25 meeting thoughtful — i.e. I thought he put a lot of thought and care into formulating and presenting his position. Do you feel otherwise?
I don’t believe I remarked on any of the larger factions being “thoughtful” or not.
I do think that if/when Anon disagrees with someone here, he can/should do it in a more constructive and ethical way than saying things like you’re all in a bubble and the guy I don’t support is unhinged. I was encouraging him to be more thoughtful in his discourse.
I don’t think I said anything about Booker being broken. However, I did not defend him, either. This has been a very active thread, so I am wondering if you conflated my comments with someone else’s. Or, perhaps I said something in some way that was less than clear, and I have mistakenly led you to believe I think something that I don’t.
I agree with all that.
I hope I fixed my HTML error. Sorry for the mess in the last attempt.
Sounds like, “I’ll handle this myself, thanks.”
Alice Reads Here,
I am running a fever and have a bad cold. I apologize for any confusion. I will try to figure out what I said. Now rule: Never blog with moe than one degree elevation of temperature.
Ummm, I think you might be mistaken about who is concerned about the degrees, really mistaken, but that’s all I will say.
Good night! It This would take me about 5 minutes to share my academic background with you. My husband had copies of his diplomas at the house so I could share them in less than 10 minutes. This takes about the time it takes to get a cup of coffee. Now I know there is a problem.
Maybe it means PSC didn’t get an MDiv equivalent as was conveyed to the congregation.
I sure had it asked of me. You can be sure my husband had it asked of him. You said you wanted in MDiv so it would be advisable to check if that occurred. I am beginning to think it didn’t.
ROFL. Great deflect and attempt at gaslighting. “See, Dee is like a birther.” There are many folks you could try that on. It doesn’t work here although I am impressed at how far you would go over this diploma thing. Mega awkward.
A PSC Member,
Your comment is worthy of tis own post.
A PSC Member,
It seems like you are not really considering the argument being put forth: if his background is in question and people doubt how his experience was represented to the church, the easiest way to resolve this would to be forthcoming and share specific details regarding his education. Sure there may be misunderstandings of the nature of Oxford degrees and unfounded suspicions. Why not provide the information that could actually benefit himself and his reputation? What is being communicated, in my opinion, is that you aren’t allowed to ask questions and you have to take Mark, the elders and others at their words and trust them absolutely. This is not the way to regain trust. If your characterization of Mark is correct, and he should be upset that a third of his church does not believe in his leadership, that he should be able to understand the need for transparency to achieve the unity they so desire. Your comparison to the birther controversy is a straw man. Ignoring your disregard for the racist context of that compared to what is happening in PSC, Mark’s credentials would not be so concerning had there not been other questions about his leadership. Dee has repeatedly communicated this point: transparency could quell these accusations. Ask yourself, what reason would there be to NOT share this information at this point? If the CV is valid, then Mark is at least to proud to properly address this question? Maybe he does actually have something to hide. I will continue to wonder that until he can prove otherwise.
When PSC leaders go off the rails:
Tonight I was called a birther for asking for Booker’s credentials. It doesn’t quite meet “Daughter of Stan” levels which at least was funny. These people are hunting for bear when it comes to protecting Booker’s credentials.
Alice Reads Here,
Good grief! I see what happened. I was not responded to your comment but to another reader whose comments were included in your comment. I didn’t pay attention to the name on the reply and it should veneer have been put under your name.
I know this doesn’t make much sense. But, I have never had this happen before. I am going to bed. Never, ever comment with a fever, my new rule.
I have deleted my original comment and will rewrite it under the correct name in the AM.
I’m sorry.
Referencing the CV as reproduced in the prior PSC post, I think that unsympathetic or even neutral interpreters might raise an eyebrow at the implication (to readers not familiar with how the BA/MA “works” at Oxford) that Rev Booker was awarded MA in 2003 at the end of his 2nd year at Oxford. Assuming that the “upgrade” of BA to MA was sought at the earliest ordinary opportunity, the “upgrade” would have taken place, I think, in 2010. IMO it would have been better (more accurate, or at the very least less conducive to misunderstanding) to describe the 2003 degree award as “BA” with a note that it was subsequently “upgraded” to MA, and the date of the upgrade.
Why not frankly state this now and remove all doubt? I don’t know. It may be tempting to assume a bad motive, but it might simply be “embarrassment.”
(Aside; I’m quite prepared to believe that the BA is as difficult to earn from Oxford as the MA is at many US universities, or perhaps even more difficult, so I’m not disrespecting the letters. I was told, back in the ’80s when studying at an Evangelical religious graduate school, that typical US seminary courses of study leading to the M.Div were basically equivalent to the B.Div.)
We don’t know the reason(s) for the silence, but it seems to me unwise to not plainly clarify the matter. The question having been raised, it is IMO not a good “look” to steadfastly ignore it.
Good Lord, we are not talking about a Presidential candidate here, folks just want to know if their Pastor has been honest with them! It’s tough these days to find someone to run for POTUS who doesn’t have some sort of shame or dark secret in their background, but we should expect more out of servants of God.
For goodness sake, Mr. Booker, just go through your office files or run home and get your diploma! Pride says “I don’t have to” … Humility says “Sure, give me a minute and I’ll go get ’em”
Dear Dee, many of your blog posts raise my temperature much more than that!
(Praying that you get to feeling better soon)
You’re correct, I hadn’t considered the racial aspect of the comparison. I shouldn’t have brought in political anaologies, which bring all sorts of unneeded baggage.
That’s why you see so many non-PSC members rallying to your side on this blog. Many who comment here have been abused in church, they know the pain, they see the red flags … so they inform and warn.
Now that you mention it, yeah, that’s a good way to look at it.
Strong, alpha-males in pulpits all over our great Nation.
Many of them with Moses and Paul complexes, and very much into control.
I don’t have an Oxbridge degree; however, my father’s family is steeped in Cambridge. How Booker described one of his degrees was not correct. His status changed from a BA(oxon.) to MA(oxon.); however, his subject and his class (theology and first) apply only to the BA. He should not have put the words “Masters of Arts in theology (first class)” on his CV. However there is plenty of bad advice out there on this matter, and, I’m willing to accept that he followed it unwittingly. I’m a bit more concerned that he hasn’t admitted it was a mistake; on the other hand he has other problems right now. Note I don’t think he is intentionally lying about his degrees (if for nothing else, if lying why not lie about having a degree that actually is an MDiv equivalent).
The work getting the BA(first) and MSt would have been hard, and, he probably has more New and Old Testament theology than most MDiv holders. He also seems to have less formal training than MDiv holders should have such as knowledge of different church polities or actual pastoral care. Some of this can be learned on the job (and in the old days was); however, it may explain some of the issues at PSC especially since he seems to have gone into a church which already had deep divisions and with a very different polity than he is use to.
Admitting mistakes or potential embarrassments is often difficult. Setting up a good structure so one can learn about small issues before they become big issues and where one gets honest feedback early [probably when just floating ideas] from a diverse group of people and be willing to heed it would be essential.
What’s the “one voice” policy? Is that just tradition, or a new agreement among current elders? It’s not in the bylaws, is it?
Thank you so much for explaining. I have trouble proofing my own work, and I often revise while writing, so I was afraid I left a “not” in (or something similar) that resulted in my comment saying something opposite of what I meant.
I hope you feel better soon. I don’t typically run much of a fever, and I too can be thrown for a loop my an increase of a degree.
Alice Reads Here,
Good grief indeed (regarding my own comment). I don’t know how that stray “Watcher” got stuck after your name. I should have been in bed an hour ago.
I believe the word is FUEHRERPRINZIP.
Though I remember those Birther billboards on Route 15 between Gettysburg & Harrisburg sponsored by the CHRISTIAN organization World Net Daily, so there is some overlap.
If Charlie Sheen (and seven grams of blow) could do it…
A PSC Member,
I am battling a cold and am not at the top of my game. However, I needed to respond to the “birther” comment. Not only is Pastor Booker seemingly unable to handle the job put before him, but the leaders behind him demonstrate an amateurish approach to “cleaning up the mess.” How you used “birther” in this context shows the underlying problems at PSC.
Playing the birther game with me illustrates the spiritually abusive nature of those in power. You (and I believe that you are involved in church leadership in some capacity) were willing to use a racist trope to attempt to shut me up about the flimsy excuses that are being made about Pastor Booker’s credentials. Racism in any form is despicable, and pretending this is just a political game run by secular groups shows how far the church has fallen.
I believe more than ever that leaders are employing spiritually and emotionally abusive tactics, and it cuts me to my very soul. I loved PSC. Anyone who knows me well is aware of it. But that PSC is gone. You did it. You changed a beautiful church into the typical ho-hum evangelical church that lurches from problem to problem.
I predict tough days for the church. You need help, but you won’t seek the help you need because it will be too convicting.
I am making your comment known. #ThisIsParkStreetChurch
Like I said before, charges of ‘racism’ are the new ‘witchcraft’ accusations these days.
You (generic you) can get in a heap-o-trouble with the ‘woke’ inquisition.
I agree with you that hearing different perspectives is helpful.
But you truly blew your ability to do that with the “birther” comment. You at least acknowledged that you shouldn’t have done it. The core of the birther movement was xenophobia and racism. I would hope that as a Christian, you would be able to actually apologize for that to Dee, the person you maligned.
“We are United behind The Visionary”?
The Fuehrer decrees that Two Plus Two Equals Five?
Andrew Tates minus the big cigars, dozen Lamborghinis, and stable of cam girls.
Muff Potter,
hmmmm…. in considering what ‘racist/racism’ means, would you agree that racism happens through unawareness/ignorance?
Hi Dee, I hope this is not the extent of your reporting process, but to be clear, I’m not, nor have I ever been, any part of PSC leadership in any form, or held any position of power within the church. Nor am I related (by blood, marriage, or anything else) to any current or former leader. I’m just a regular member, which I’m sure will come as a relief.
Absolutely — I apologize to Dee and all here if anyone understood my comment to imply Dee was somehow racist or xenophobic, neither of which I believe to be the case. I was trying to point to the “person X refsues to release document Y, thus they must have something to hide.” Of course the birther movement was rife with racists, which have no relevance here; my mistake.
Dee,
“I believe more than ever that leaders are employing spiritually and emotionally abusive tactics,”
+++++++++++++++++++++
in my observation, most are simply parroting what they hear and have been schooled on in the christian leadership industry.
it’s been sold to them as ‘biblical’, ‘godly’, ‘leadership’, ‘conservative’, ‘manly’.
all very powerful marketing tools to persuade most christians.
that these things are manipulative, deceptive, half-true if not wholesale untrue, self-serving, destructive to others,
and essentially regressed base cave-man behavior slicked up in dockers/tight jeans/careful styling intended to look like they don’t care gesturing behind a podium is lost on most.
as i see it.
You might be advised to read previous posts and comments. Dee was contacted by members of PSC. How do you know they were not concerned about the credentials as part of the reason they contacted her? So you presume a lot here. Maybe ask.
You asked, “Why not ask Oxford?” That has been explained in the comments sections, with a link I believe. Their policy is not to release the info without permission from the former student.
Some perspective that you may not be aware of: Are you familiar with the Ravi Zacharias scandal? A man whom much of the evangelical Christian world looked up to and yet the horrific details that emerged about his sexual exploitation of women. (His wife and daughters don’t believe it, but the evidence that emerged from investigations and witness testimony convinced many others. But do you know what the first sign of a problem was? His CV on which he inflated his experience at Oxford. So that is why people in the abuse prevention community see a red flag if there is the appearance that credentials have been prettied up.
It appears that some at PSC are very concerned with specific credentials. And it may well be that it is hard to translate credentials from a European school to US ears. But the Bible also says, “Avoid even the appearance of evil.” When there is an appearance of a cover-up, it is going to cause mistrust. Rule of human nature. It is the responsibility of the leaders to bend over backwards to be transparent. ie be hunble. Explain, even if it’s complicated.
But the Credentials are not the only thing being withheld. What is private about a church charter? Do you have access to it? Why can’t any member , or the general public for that matter, see the charter? That was reportedly what the Parlimentarian referrred to in denying the petitioners’ requests, but they report that they were not allowed to see the charter. Could you find out about that? Let us know. That would be valuable information.
That is most likely true in this instance. The pastor was schooled at an Anglican church in which that pastor is accused of abuse.
https://churchleaders.com/news/421580-anglicans-say-leaders-botched-response-to-allegations-against-dc-priest.html
This stuff is insidious.
Every Wartburger who has been through this recognizes that all the red flags are there. This is an authoritarian culture familiar to those who have been spiritually/emotionally abused by church leaders. Controlling a congregation through manipulation, intimidation, and domination is not only wrong, but it demonstrates a spiritual immaturity among those who have been chosen to lead.
That’s why Scripture warns the church “Do not hurry to lay hands on anyone ordaining and approving someone for ministry or an office in the church, or in reinstating expelled offenders, and thereby share in the sins of others” (1 Timothy 5:22). There are too many churches which have simply tapped the wrong folks to fill the offices of pastor and elder who are not spiritually equipped and qualified to hold those sacred roles.
A PSC Member,
I appreciate your apology
Headless Unicorn Guy,
yeah, that’s what i always say.
‘My, what big FUEHRERPRINZIP, you have.’
‘Would you like some ketchup with your FUEHRERPRINZIP?’
Thank you for acknowledging the misstep in words and in the use of a politically charged analogy–I do understand your logic and believe that you had no ill meaning. Let me address some of the issues you raise. First, you may want to ask others how important this credentialing issue is to Balboni, Leary, etc. From what I have gathered, it is quite important, but maybe not for the reasons you assume.
There is a fundamental question about Mark Booker’s honesty–the way he dissembles, gives partial truths, and misleads. There are multiple examples of this, and this is one of them. The way he portrayed himself as the ‘planter’ of Church of the Cross is another–the truth is that he came into Ben Rey’s thriving church, engineered Ben’s firing within a year of his arrival, then scrubbed the CoTC website and portrayed himself as the ‘church planter’.
As far as his academic credentials, we know now that a Master of Arts in Theology from Oxford does not exist. Instead of coming clean with his detractors, he has instead claimed to be ‘exasperated’ and has used vague language to indicate the ‘support’ of his academic advisor and the Selection Committee head. This is an easy issue to understand and to resolve. But revealing his BA Theology, and then trying to justify his previous behavior around this, may lead him down a road of honesty he does not want to go down.
Nope. I am not a reporter. I am an advocate just like you are. I care about those who have been abused in any fashion, and much to my surprise, I have a place to discuss my POV.
I am glad you are not a leader “in any form.” Or so you say. Unlike me, you are anonymous, and I protect your right to be anonymous. Many blogs require transparency in this area. I want people to talk so my readers and I can learn. That also means that I do not know if I can believe you.
The leadership is fortunate to have you as a spokesperson for their POV. I am so sad to see PSC turn into this mess. There is a reason the membership and contributions have declined. Is it just because it’s “Boston, COVID, or general spiritual decline,” or is it something else?
PSC has a problem. The SBC has targeted Boston and the surrounding area to plant churches. They are the covert SBC churches that hide their affiliation in order not to upset folks who have heard of the sex abuse scandal. They have lots of money (well, for now, but the lawsuits are lingering in the background. )They are good at what they do. On the surface, they know how to attract folks.
For example, the doltish move to cancel the 4 PM service was unwise, and it’s a darn good thing it is back. If PSC goes the complete “traditional” route, it will suffer. Even my Lutheran church, far more traditional than PSC, has a Saturday evening service that has a contemporary vibe.
PSC needs some help, and it should be acquired ASAP. First, it needs to mend fences, and it would be easy to do so if the leaders would allow an outside group to point out the problems. Some groups will not only show the fault lines but also give some advice.
Secondly, leaders need to be humble and bite their tongues. That 6-hour fiasco could have been handled well by conflict-informed individuals who have people skills. Good night! I hope there has been some Monday morning lamenting going on. If not, PSC is genuinely lost.
Finally, uncomfortable compromises will need to be made. The Dr. Balboni firing was downright stupid and his 17 page memo was a problem. Leaders need to get along with those who provide a different POV that will lead to a more inclusive and thoughtful PSC. Do not jump on the word inclusive. You should know what I mean.
Some churches in Boston have watched the problems at PSC for years. I have spoken with a few. They are praying for you. I think that they have something to offer you. Maybe PSC should ask for some advice.
Humility is needed, and uncomfortable compromises need to be made. If not, PSC will continue to decline. Sadly, the broader Christian community is now aware of the problems. They cannot be hidden any longer. Repairing the image of PSC will take time, but it needs to be done.
However uncomfortable, transparency, accountability, and willingness to include various POVs are needed more than pointing fingers at those watching.
Instead of looking at those watching and advocating as problems, PSC should view them as God-inspired. Scripture is replete with men and women who spoke out and pointed fingers at God’s people. Listen and think. Could it be that they are speaking the truth? Listen, don’t use silly arguments that are seen through immediately.
Putting on a Reformed-oriented thinking cap, perhaps one could encourage PSC leaders to regard these voices as, from the point of view of the Deity, God-decreed. They’re there for a Purpose, and the purpose is redemptive.
Let’s be careful tossing around the racism accusation and the “birther” movement in a certain election. Yes, the person who raised that issue likely did it for both racist and personal aggrandizement reasons.
That doesn’t mean everyone who had questions was a racist. Our family, especially when you extend it out to cousins etc, is pretty much a duke’s mixture of everything. AND there are and were some strong Obama supporters who also questioned why it took so long to produce the birth certificate.
I am currently experiencing what appears to be racism based on a dmv employee seeing the word “Mexico” on my NEW Mexico birth certificate and treating me like an illegal alien. But I did show what birth certificate I have, did reach out to the state that issued it, and am waiting to receive the specific type of copy the state I now reside in demands. It will take a while to accomplish this. But back in the day if there was that simple an explanation Obama could have explained that to the press while awaiting that new copy. There was no need for it to drag on so long.
Which raised non race based questions even among many of his supporters and many people of color. He could have been a blue eyed blonde from Georgia but once the issue was raised, fairly or not, the simple way to end it was to produce the birth certificate. And if the numbering was off due to it being a copy, it would simple enough to get Hawaii to address that.
The point was, if he was not born a citizen of the United States he could not be president. Even if sworn in, it would not have been a legit presidency.
Which brings us right back to the Oxford degrees. All that has to happen is to produce them. Adults can understand the difference between American and Oxford standards. Just produce the paperwork.
yeah, as they used to say in those old Wendy’s commercials: “Where’s the beef?!”
Maybe Pastor Booker should consult with Gordon Hugenberger about how a congregational
church should be run?
I think that’s a question with no simple, easy-peasy-bada-bing-bada-boom answer.
If madame dee would consider doing a TWW piece on racism in the ‘church’, yeah, we could go places with it.
I have a feeling he might be willing to intercede, depending on whether things are still fixable. The problem is on the other side, who might not think that they need help, which would be a bad idea considering how messed up their leadership has taken them.
There’s no ‘church’ but many churches. I don’t think one blog post could cover all bases but I bet the comments section would light up!
If I ever considered returning to Christianity, I wouldn’t go within 100 feet of this church.
I wish *The Leadership* would listen to outside voices. They don’t even listen to the ones within. The ‘one voice’ policy, to answer an earlier question, is not in the bylaws, nor is it a tradition. It is a new rule imposed upon the BoE, presumably by Mark Booker, Jason Abraham, and their allies. Essentially, it means that if the board votes on a decision to say, find Michael Balboni’s allegations “unsubstantiated”, then the position is: “The Board Has Spoken”. There is no nuance, and no voicing of opposing opinions is allowed. When Balboni objected to their finding, he was labeled as ‘rebellious’ for not accepting the ‘conclusion’ of this ‘anointed’ board. This, of course, also applies to the 7-6 decision to fire Balboni, where they brought in the Treasurer for the decisive vote.
dee,
You are 100% right Dee. A lot of people on the leadership side don’t think that they did anything wrong, so there is no need to repent and change.
linda,
We not really supposed to talk politics here. I’ll just note facts.
In June 2008, then Candidate Obama released the birth certificate form standard for Hawaii (which had a prohibition against releasing long form certs). When that wasn’t enough for the birther conspiracy theorists, Hawaii’s DPH director confirmed the document’s validity. Eventually, after birthers kept reviving the topic, Obama asked the state for an exception, so he could get the long form and release it.
Check out the timeline: https://www.politifact.com/article/2011/apr/27/obama-birth-certificate-timeline/
As far as I know, to date, Mark Booker has released nothing official from Oxford confirming his education; the Board of Elders has supposedly received confirmation of some sort from Oxford, but they have not released that to the congregation (i.e. the highest human authority over a church in congregational polity).
The situations aren’t comparable, since President Obama released the form Hawaii considered official, back at the beginning of all of it. It was just that the birthers wanted to undermine his candidacy by exploiting the latent racism in our population, so they moved the goal posts.
Whoa…. WUT???!!!???? This is for reals???
Elizabeth Klein,
One also has to question if the treasurer was brought in for the 4pm vote…
I can understand the treasurer being present and voting on financial matters, but isn’t it inappropriate for him to vote on other matters? Especially to be used as a tiebreaker? He essentially can overrule 6 dissenting elders.
What the heck kind of church governance is this, where the treasurer has that level of power?!!
“Repent? Repent of what?!”
Authoritarians have it all figured out. They are perfect. No need to repent and change.
When you’re a proud member of the Inner Ring, the only voice you pay attention is that which echoes off the walls of the innermost sanctum where other voices are excluded.
You are correct—this isn’t comparable. The claim was done to discredit me for asking a tricky question. I can imagine the discussion surrounding that one. “Hey, I’ve got an idea; let’s call her a birther.”
On top of that, this is not Booker’s priority at the moment. What? He doesn’t have five minutes to take a pic of his credentials.
These attempts at obfuscation are rather silly but also concerning. If this argument is ridiculous, one can imagine what goes on behind closed doors. This may be an example of how they treat those with differing viewpoints. I am worried for the health of the church.
PS -No fever today. I hope this commentmakes sense.
Why “repent” and “change” when you are already Perfect in Every Way and Can Do No Wrong?
“God is so lucky to have ME…”
FEATURE, NOT BUG.
Alice Reads Here,
I still remember that “WHERE’S THE REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE?” billboard on Route 15 somewhere around York Springs (between Gettysburg & Harrisburg) in the mid-2010s.
Down in the lower right corner in small print (had to pull over and stop to read that) was the initials “WND” – World Net Daily. CHRISTIAN(TM).
Which tag line got copped for political commercials in the next election cycle.
“Racism/Racist” has become a snarl buzzword, yet another meaningless trigger for a Two Minutes Hate reflex.
Headless Unicorn Guy,
no disagreement. all the more reason to consider what it means. applying it too broadly and too narrowly erodes an understanding of the heinous reality of it.
Watcher on the wall,
I think the whole congregation voted on that, tho.
I plan on going to the Special Meeting on April 7, finally granted to the petitioners.
It’s their 4th attempt since October to try to address PSC’s problems using internal church channels & bylaws. (One wonders if the 1st CT article put pressure on PSC leaders to grant this meeting to the petitioners.)
This Special Meeting will reopen the charges about Mark Booker that Michael Balboni made.
Based on the accounts I’ve heard about the Annual Meeting, and recent communications to the congregation by the Moderator, however, I don’t at all trust the Moderator to be at all even-handed in allowing the petitioners to fully air their concerns.
I hope and pray that I’m wrong. Time will tell.
Headless Unicorn Guy,
While what you write might sound “exagerated/sensational/etc”, it is, bsically, correct… Such a contrast to how Christ behaved, and the verse I keep citing about how Paul says we should “servants”, even unto death..
I wonder whether they would allow someone more neutral to moderate, unless that is against the bylaws. Maybe a pastor from another church or a professor from Gordon-Conwell? Someone who is familiar with Roberts Rules of Order and who has a steady presence.
In my experience, there’s ignorant and malicious racism. Ignorant is the people who ask if those are my kids when I’m at the mall, the malicious are those who imply my wife is a mail order bride or she should go home because she’s taking a Canadian job (she’s been a Canadian citizen for 23 years).
Totally agree that that would be the wise course of action here.
However, I highly doubt that the current Moderator would do that. As a clear pro-Bookerite, it would mean ceding his influence & role in putting his thumb on the scale as to what procedures are followed, who gets to speak, etc.
Besides which, a reread of the Open Letter to the PSC community (which Dee posted a few articles ago) reads like it was crafted by lawyers who are afraid of liability.
I think the automatic consultation of attorneys by churches is often the cause of trouble. An attorney’s mission and overriding concern is to keep the church out of legal trouble. Even if the attorney is a Christian, it might even be malpractice to counsel confession of sin if there is a chance it could be used in court as an admission of liability.
On the other hand, seeking counsel from a seasoned Christian from outside the church who does not have an attorney’s duty might yield better advice for the health of the church. I think a posture of confessing sin, admitting sin and mistakes fully (not an admission of the the bare minimum), and actively making restitution is less likely to lead to huge blow ups like this. And for anyone who cares at all about the unity of the church, this is a tragedy.
People tend to be very forgiving when people admit mistakes, even in the secular world. (Back in the day when a scandal could actually deprive a politician of their job, the ones who admitted wrongdoing and sounded contrite often made it through with their job intact.)
But anything that resembles a cover-up is going to prolong the conflict.
Imagine a scenario where, say, just within the past 10 years, almost every friendly, familiar face in Park Street leadership is removed, one by one, year by year, never to be seen climbing those spiral stairs with you again: would it still feel like Park Street Church?
You’re absolutely right. And once lawyers are ultimately running the church, the Holy Spirit has left the building. Fear about preserving the church’s assets stands in the way of truth-telling, confession and repentance (in other words, basic godliness).
Park Street Church, congratulations. You’re looking more and more like the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Absolutely. Boz Tchividjian, the former Executive Director of GRACE (Godly Response to Abuse in Christian Environment https://www.netgrace.org/), has said as much. And he’s a lawyer.
The only reasons why people sue churches is because churches cover up things like abuse and sex crimes. Many survivors say that the response of the church was worse than the abuse itself. So a lawsuit is the only way to “say” that the church got things wrong, and to alert the public that this church is not safe.
Whereas, if a church handles the abuse responsibly and compassionately to begin with (or, at the least, fully admits & confesses that they handled things abominably, and covered up and even enabled abuse), then there’s no reason for victims
Yep. Park Street Church is kidding themselves, if they think that the 2/3rds vote affirming Mark Booker’s ministry is a path to move on. It’s not (and the VOCA team wasn’t, either).
You need to resolve the abuse allegations FIRST. Honestly, it’s not even fair to Mark Booker to let them fester. His ministry will always be under a cloud until PSC clears this up.
Call in a team like GRACE to do an independent investigation. They really know what they’re doing. https://www.netgrace.org/independent-investigations
And note what GRACE says on their FAQs page:
“Utilizing a traumainformed approach to evaluating misconduct does not mean that as investigators we automatically believe we will find misconduct in every situation. Rather, evaluating reports of misconduct through a trauma-informed lens means that investigators are trained to recognize, evaluate, and respond to the issues in question in a manner which is thorough, fair, and consistent with best practices,
regardless of who the reported victim or the suspect may be.”
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b0a335c45776ee022efd309/t/5eceb883fd0c5a2cca1b5d56/1590605956410/Investigations+FAQs+%281%29.pdf
… then there’s no reason for victims to sue.
Also, just a reminder here. MICHAEL BALBONI IS NOT GOING TO SUE PARK STREET CHURCH.
That is so sad…and no it wouldn’t.
Now I’m sure you’re the Headless Unicorn Guy I remember from iMonk! You wouldn’t remember me. I mostly lurked.
(Ah WND – a hair on a wart on a chancre on a mole on the unwashed hind end of Christian(TM) enragement engagement.)
I think the biggest issue for me is that I’m having a hard time inviting nonbelievers to PSC. Someone mentioned that Mark’s sermon is shallow and I totally agree. However, at the same time he likes to use big words that nonbelievers or English as second language people have a hard time to understand. There is not a lot of life transmission in his sermons or something that make you feel related to, and many of his points that you can find in a commentary or a study Bible. It’s hard to find a community or someone that you can introduce your nonbeliever friends to besides PSIF. I don’t think the rest of the church even know what PSIF is or care about its existence. The ministers that we know and know us are all gone….that’s my biggest pain. I’m so afraid that the other ministers who are willing to invest their time to know us are gone someday as well. Mark said that he will be a shepherd to people who pro and oppose him, but I wonder how. They like to promise big things but I don’t see action plans. The leadership keeps saying that there is a pain in our church, but I don’t think they know why people feel hurt.
He would be extremely unlikely to win barring a very well-written contract with the church in regards to his job. The US courts do not like to interfere with churches or equivalent in regards to hiring and firing ministers (or even non-ministerial employees).
I don’t know about that. I’m not a lawyer.
It’s true that U.S. courts generally shrink from ruling on church matters.
But sometimes they do, as in the case of Emily Hyland.
An IL court ruled that there was “substantial evidence” that Hyland was fired as retaliation for making a formal complaint about the senior minister.
https://katelynbeaty.substack.com/p/emily-hyland-firing-dane-ortlund-gentle-lowly
Anyway, a number of PSC leaders are lawyers.
And based on some of their own words in the Open Letter, they are using liability as an excuse not to be transparent to the congregation about decisions (such as the decision not to fire Balboni).
In any case, Balboni just wants PSC to tell the truth.
This is a great point.
It appears unlikely that the elders brought in the Treasurer to vote on Balboni.
This is what I’ve heard:
There were 11 elders because one elder resigned.
The Senior Minister is a de facto elder and gets one vote. The Moderator is a de facto elder and gets one vote.
So 11 elders + Booker + the Moderator = 13 votes.
This is still totally a power play though, for all the reasons that Balboni mentioned in his speech at the Annual Meeting.
Balboni:
“When I learned how the process that received my allegations against Mark was handled in such a way that I came away from that process believing that it was a predetermined outcome—and then that it was brought to the board of elders with very little time to process everything, all of whom were forbidden to speak to me in any way; and when there were no other witnesses who were interviewed—that is a predetermined outcome in my mind—which is why it has felt like a power play.”
At least five to six minister’s have said that they were spiritually abused by the sr pastor. First. To be far to all parties an independent investigation to the charges is needed before psc can move forward. Validate what these ministers have been through and not try to push it under the rug. If Mark has not done anything wrong then he should want to clear his name.
Exactly!
Mark Booker is being accused of spiritual abuse. His behavior has become more dictatorial as time has passed. His behavior is not consistent with what comes out of his mouth.
It is imperative that Park Street Church REQUIRE that Mark Booker submit to a thorough, third party, suitability evaluation, performed by a team of experts, including a clinical psychologist, a social worker, an experienced pastor. The Board of Elders MUST be honest about what has happened, about Mark Booker’s dictatorial approach as a leader, that many people have accused him of spiritual abuse. It’s important that Mandy and his children be interviewed, because behavior can provide clues int Mark’s behavior. (This is especially true if Mandy is enabling Mark, is serving as aa Narcissistic source of supply. Given Mark’s dictatorial treatment of staff, it’s important to see if the children show signs of abuse, especially psychological abuse.) The clinical psychologist must administer a battery of scientifically validated tests, with the focus on whether Mark Booker is appropriately emotionally mature, has an appropriate level of self-awareness and on Narcissism. Should the clinical psychologist raise serious concerns regarding lack of self-awareness, narcissism, Narcissistic Personality Disorder or other defects in personality that render him Biblically unfit to serve, the Elders MUST ‘fence the church’ and put Mark Booker on terminal leave.
The ANCA now requires that candidates for ordination undergo such an evaluation. When Mark Booker was ordained, the ANCA was new and the initial requirements for ordination were shockingly low. I doubt if the ANCA required Mark Booker to undergo a multi-day mental health evaluation.
40 years ago PSC was a huge part of my young adult identity development and what is going on there now pains me a great deal. As a college student I was part of Seekers, the large college group that met at 5:31 (they liked odd times because they thought it helped people remember) on Sunday Evenings in the old Sunday School Room. I belonged to a weekly Bible study that met on my campus. These happened on campuses all over the Boston area. While Seekers was helpful to me I found some of their expectations controlling and left the group after about a year. But PSC had left an impact on me that would rise a few years later when I returned to the Boston area for seminary. My program required field education in a local church and PSC was looking for youth ministry interns-so I began working with the youth ministry and stayed for the next 2 plus years.
I was supervised by the Minister of Education who let me follow him around and be involved in other educational ministries besides youth ministry. For much of my time there I lived at the Wilson House in Cambridge. I was full time paid staff (not very much, but enough to get me through) during the summers. During those days I got to know other members of the staff a bit. Each day the staff took a “coffee break” together(staff was much smaller in those days). They seemed to enjoy being together-I remember one particularly raucous Christmas party.
While I was not involved in the inner workings of the church and staff I did pick up on some of the “quirkiness” of the place which may still be instilled in the church’s DNA. For example, there was a group called the “grad group”. One might think this was made up of current graduate students, but no- the members were people in their 50’s plus who were once grad students in Boston. Ministries were responsible for raising their own budgets with the Missions budget being pre-eminent. The last Sunday of the 10 day Missions Conference was known as “Money Sunday” as the pledges were collected during & after the worship service. The pastoral staff would do things like sing for the congregation if a certain amount of money was raised on the spot. Money counters sat down front during the service announcing the value of the pledges and cash that came in. The Minister of Education hated raising his budget and the day the money was raised certainly didn’t have the hoopla of Missions Sunday.
I left PSC after I graduated but continued to have contact with the Minister of Education who eventually became the Church Administrator and then left to take another church. But over the years I’ve continued to have serendipitous PSC encounters. The Senior Minister who replaced Dr. Toms later served a church whose pastoral church I was on. I was on another pastoral staff with a former Minister of Education of PSC ( not the one who hired me as an intern) and the PSC pastor who started the 4 PM service became the Senior Minister of a church where I had been on the pastoral staff. I did know him from his PSC days.
So my PSC roots run deep and I am deeply troubled by what I am hearing.
I stand corrected. The above was just speculation by someone with PSC ties.
I received email confirmation this morning that the Treasurer did indeed participate in the 7-6 vote to fire Michael Balboni. Mark Booker abstained.
janiceg,
EXACTLY.
A big caution here: not all investigative orgs are created equal. The goal in MinistrySafe’s investigations, for example, is to keep “the ministry safe” (not survivors).
Meaning, protecting the institution from liability.
Churches pit lawyers against survivors all the time. This does not lead to truth and reconciliation.
An outside, objective, investigative team, such as GRACE (https://www.netgrace.org/independent-investigations) ought to be the people who determine whether or not spiritual abuse has been committed by Mark Booker & PSC leaders.
Honestly, to let this question fester isn’t doing Mark Booker any favors.
Note what GRACE says on their FAQs page:
“Utilizing a trauma-informed approach to evaluating misconduct does not mean that as investigators we automatically believe we will find misconduct in every situation. Rather, evaluating reports of misconduct through a trauma-informed lens means that investigators are trained to recognize, evaluate, and respond to the issues in question in a manner which is thorough, fair, and consistent with best practices,
regardless of who the reported victim or the suspect may be.”
Also note on GRACE’s FAQs page that they do investigate spiritual abuse: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b0a335c45776ee022efd309/t/5eceb883fd0c5a2cca1b5d56/1590605956410/Investigations+FAQs+%281%29.pdf
FWIW, I myself have only had one personal experience with Mark Booker, which was positive. About a decade ago, he did a beautiful job ministering to a friend of mine with an aggressive, terminal cancer. I believe that he faithfully ministered to that friend’s grief-stricken family as well.
Doesn’t matter. You still have spiritual abuse allegations investigated.
“Mark Booker is a talented evangelist, the best ever, under so much pressure to get such-and-such done by the elders, is torn by so many factions in the church, is God’s gift to PSC, loves the Lord, is the greatest guy ever, needs time to adjust from ACNA to CCCC polity…” Etc.
Still doesn’t matter. You still have to have spiritual abuse allegations investigated.
Also, FWIW, I am a 20-year, former member of PSC. I left, partly because of concerns about how abuse is handled at PSC.
Does PSC even have reasonably strict, abuse prevention & response policies in place that they are prepared to enforce equally when they receive abuse allegations, no matter who the accused or the accusers happen to be? I highly doubt it.
I am so terribly sorry for the spiritual abuse and cult-like behavior that you endured at your former church.
But not all spiritual abuse is as obvious as Mark Driscoll. (For instance, I can’t see Mark Booker yelling, “HOW DARE YOU!!!!!” anytime soon.)
Abuse can be committed with someone who has an externally gentle demeanor, a sterling reputation, and a lot of gifts to offer a church.
Again, all the more reason for an org like GRACE to investigate.
Here is how Scot McKnight (drawing on the work of Lisa Oakley and Justin Humphrey) defines spiritual abuse:
“Spiritual abuse is a form of emotional and psychological abuse.
It is characterized by a systematic pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour in a religious context.
Spiritual abuse can have a deeply damaging impact on those who experience it.
This abuse may include: manipulation and exploitation, enforced accountability, censorship of decision making, requirements for secrecy and silence, coercion to conform, [inability to ask questions], control through the use of sacred texts or teaching, requirement of obedience to the abuser, the suggestion that the abuser has a ‘divine’ position, isolation as a means of punishment, and superiority and elitism.”
I was in my workshop a few days ago working on a project. I misplaced a few nails and looked everywhere for them, only to finally locate them. It turns out that they were on the bench right in front of me and I simply had not seen them.
100% and succinctly said. You should tweet that!
Mark Driscoll was very public with his emotional and spiritual abuse. Many are not.
Few abusers abuse everyone or they would lose the support they need to stay in power. Many abusers are extremely skilled at grooming and in-group. That group sees the shepherd costume. Then when a victim says, “But he’s a wolf! He bit me!’ the inner ring can say truthfully, “He’s never treated me like that!’
It may well be that there are alternate explanations for why Mark Booker acted the way he did. Whatever his intentions, one needs to look at the impact of his behavior. And if there is a pattern of domineering, “lording it over” behavior, that is a disqualification according to the NT.
What Balboni described in his letter fits the definitions most experts use for spiritual abuse. Just because other people have not seen it, doesn’t mean it’s not happening. The key is whether Balboni is telling the truth or if his perceptions are really “off” for whatever reason. Is he the only one who felt that way? It appears that 5 other staff could not affirm Mark’s leadership and it would take a lot of courage not to sign the affirmation after another staff person had just been fired. In other words, there is a lot of smoke.
Whether there is a “fire” of spiritual abuse can only be determined with a 3rd party assessment by an organization with a multi-disciplinary team who are qualified to make the assessment. It did not appear to me from their website that VOCA staff had the necessary range of education and experience to make that determination. They all called themselves “business coaches.” Only the founder listed what he termed “training” in theology and counseling. “Training” could mean a seminar or two.
And a 1 person majority to oust a long time pastor is a recipe for division. They should have worked until they had more consensus.
Evidently, 67% of voting PSC members didn’t see it. That’s the case with most church leadership spiritual abuse … it’s targeted. To everyone else, they come across as charming and loving … a split personality (aka Jekyll and Hyde).
100% to all of this.
IMO, CCCC policy itself is being abused, but that’s only because there’s a larger pattern of alleged spiritual abuse, which implicates the elders as well as the senior minister.
And if 2/3rds of the congregation can’t or won’t see it, then no more accurately & fairly followed CCCC polity rules will help.
Psychological Invisibility.
What you’re looking for is right in front of you, but your eyes just skip over it; it doesn’t register in your brain.
My college roomie once demonstrated it on me. Very weird phenomenon.
It’s one of the best indicators of the Sociopath.
In the words of the Rabbi from Tarsus, they appear as Angels of Light.
Sort of like missing wolves in shepherd’s clothing … denial.
Just like the Moneychangers in the Temple!
Or Gene Scott and “Git On Those Telephones!”
A few resources for Park Street Church from a concerned friend of the community…
I spent years very involved in the Café community (young adults ministry) and often attended the 11 am and 4 pm services during that time. I took the membership class but waited to join… and then didn’t end up joining for a variety of reasons, mostly related to a the lingering effects of the controlling church I joined during college in Illinois. Most of my involvement in churches since hasn’t required membership… so I have been an active non-member in church communities since college… which was a while ago now! Time flies by!
++++++++++++++++++++
(1) I was at the 2024 Annual Meeting at Park Street Church… it’s difficult to describe how shocked and disappointed I was with the Moderator, Jason Abraham, for refusing to allow for paper ballots when several standing votes were too close call a clear majority. This kind of voting manipulation is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated. I’m additionally concerned that no other church leaders stepped in to stop Jason’s voting manipulation… when someone is acting unethically in an attempt to benefit you, you should be appalled and try to stop them. The silence was a form of approval from Mark Booker and others eager to support his popularity vote and the slate of candidates vetted by his loyal nominating committee.
In order to maintain the “equal weights and measures” that are honoring to God and honoring to people made in His image, it is absolutely clear that Park Street Church needs a digital voting system for such large meetings. Many towns now use them and they are available to rent or buy from several companies. I have reached out to a few companies for quotes and, if I hear back, I will give the quotes to the pastors and elders… as well as members who can help lobby for “equal weights and measures” at the Special Meeting on April 7th.
https://www.google.com/search?q=digital+voting+for+town+hall+meetings&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-gb&client=safari
++++++++++++++++++++
(2) Robert’s Rules of Order has a provision for removing the chair during a meeting for that meeting. If needed, a member can move to replace the meeting chair with another individual. If Moderator Jason Abraham again calls unclear standing votes to manipulate the outcomes to what he and Mark Booker want, he should be removed as chair of the meeting immediately. Again, “equal weights and measures” are not a suggestion, but rather the way we show honor, respect, and trust in God.
https://jurassicparliament.com/roberts-rules-removing-chair/c
++++++++++++++++++++
(3) Church members have the legal right to view the charter of their church. Any attempt to keep it hidden or a failure to make it widely accessible to members is counterproductive and concerning at best. There was recently (a few weeks ago) a spot on the Park Street Church website that was for the charter, but that page didn’t have it attached. Now that section of the website seems to have been removed.
https://www.churchlawandtax.com/stay-legal/governance/do-members-have-a-right-to-inspect-church-records/
++++++++++++++++++++
(4) Some of Park Street Church’s incorporating documents are available online with the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
Park Street Church’s 1916 incorporation (which can be requested from the Secretary’s office) are linked below. The Articles of Amendment in September 1983 are linked on the website, but don’t have a static URL of their own.
https://corp.sec.state.ma.us/CorpWeb/CorpSearch/CorpSummary.aspx?sysvalue=nvsBb_KPmi0InF58Zq88WUwyhSHN3DARmW2EPp_LOaA-
Not sure what this was from May 2008 to June 2012:
https://corp.sec.state.ma.us/CorpWeb/CorpSearch/CorpSummary.aspx?sysvalue=YOCWl5zNcjXH4zdqmLzNsemd5C2jE8NtgGLYFFGGCbY-
++++++++++++++++++++
[5] In closing, things are not healthy at Park Street Church. Not only is an independent investigation needed by a qualified and proven organization who can detect, diagnose, and even advise prescriptions and treatment plans for spiritual abuse… the definitions and characteristics of spirituality healthy communities should become the goals around which the community is organized. Our good God wants us to live in peace, in Shalom, with Him and with all those He created in His image… for our good and theirs. This accurate diagnosis is essential for healing to begin and for for Shalom to reign in the community of Park Street Church.
++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you to all of you who are showing your love for those at Park Street Church by writing and responding here!
Thank you to the hosts who have provided this space for resources and for dialogue on these important topics!
May God’s kingdom of Shalom come, and may God’s perfect will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven… and may we keep our eternal home in mind and act in light of that eternity!
Any truth to the rumor that the five ministers who stated by email that they could not support Mark’s ministry are in the processing of being fired? (I heard this at many of the events I attended this past week. Elders past and present my source) My heart breaks for these ministers who are accountable to GOD for their actions. The higher ups (who I have no respect for after this nightmare) have failed to protect the ministers from the rampented spiritual abuse. Now the abuse has spread to all corners of the church. The congregational meeting is a perfect example of voices being shut down – a sign of abuse (luna letters). What kind of a church does not listen to a majority of its pastors saying there is something is not right. Now that the congregation has experienced that hellish congregational meeting. Be warned park streeters – you and your family members are next!!!
Friend of PSC,
As a former, 20-year Park Streeter, thank you for these resources!! They are all desperately needed here.
An independent investigation into spiritual abuse allegations is the top priority here. To be done by an org that really knows what they’re doing (like GRACE – I keep mentioning them because I simply don’t know any other Christian org that is nearly as qualified to investigate abuse allegations).
I totally agree that the upcoming Special Meeting on April 7 must be mediated by a different Moderator other than Jason Abraham. I wasn’t at the Annual Meeting on Feb 25, but based on all the eyewitness accounts I’ve seen here on TWW, the whole meeting was rigged.
That wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest, based on the email Abraham sent out to PSC members just before the Annual Meeting. The whole email was, poor Mark, and look what that awfully divisive group is doing to him & his family. (DARVO 101: Never mind that maybe Mark’s own behavior was unacceptable, and hurt so we hurt his church & therefore his family?)
Anyway, the Moderator’s email didn’t even attempt to be even-handed. So no surprise that it appears he didn’t handle the meeting in an even-handed way, either.
I just wish that the pro-Booker PSC leaders would be able to take a step back, and have the bare minimum amount of charity and understanding here, to be even able to admit to themselves & others just how much the PSC petitioners love Park Street Church. And how much the Balbonis love PSC And how much the 5 PSC ministers speaking out love PSC.
Since they refuse to see this, I just wonder. To what degree are they even doing ministry??
It is astounding that not one elder of Park Street Church has made an effort to talk any of the Park Street Five. These are their front line, most effective and respected senior staff members. Clearly none of them are interested in hearing what these associate pastors have to say. I have never seen such administrative, ecclesiastical and leadership incompetence. Shame on each one of these cowards who are pompously hiding their heads in the religious sand. You are a disgrace to every doctrine of reconciliation
. I have never seen such administrative, ecclesiastical and leadership incompetence. Shame on each one of these cowards who are pompously hiding their heads in the religious sand. You are a disgrace to every doctrine of reconciliation. Yes I agree. Not one elder!!!
Friend of PSC,
Dear PSCF (PSC Friend), and all bloggers who expressed goodwill and/or offered advice to PSC, and Dee who allowed us to exchange ideas on TWW—:
Praise be to the Lord who inspired your info, comments and advice.
* I joined PSC under Dr. Paul Toms’ leadership. All our annual meetings have been blessed with love, joy and hope in unity, until Feb 25, 2024— when I did not attend for fear of unbearable stress. Neither do I plan to attend the next meeting in April.
* Your constructive suggestions are deeply appreciated: a digital voting system, lobbying for “equal weights and measures”, application of ‘Robert’s Rules of Order’ and disclosure of the PSC charter for review by congregants.
* We must be aware: the approval and execution of all these issues are 100% controlled by the Senior Minister and the Moderator. So, we need Action Heros to convey the requests to the PSC admin. effectively. The Ministers Five are already at risk for losing their livelihood even if they keep silent. The petitioners have lovingly and kindly spent many hours writing multiple versions and collecting letters from grieving members, plus asking experienced members to be candidates on the ballot—to volunteer again to serve as elders— all efforts were crushed against an iron curtain. Whereas Paster Michael emphasized this truth: spiritual conflict should be judged by our Lord, not by human law.
* In US we still get tickets for parking in no-parking zones, absentee voting due to disability or travel is legit, hit-and-run is a crime, and employers cannot fire an employee secretly without proving his/her fault.
* But sadly nowadays shoplifting is not a crime, employees who chase shoplifters can be fired, (Dee edited: I am sorry but we try to stay away from all political commentary, especially now. I have deleted this part of the comment but wanted to post the rest of it because it is important.)
* Numerous churches have been sued rightfully or wrongfully– ask Dee!
What shall we do, and how can we support the faithful staff and congregants at PSC ?
I am a retired MD. As med students we were encouraged to learn everything, to become GPs (general practitioners) rather than specialists. BECAUSE: The internist knows everything but does nothing. The surgeon knows nothing but does everything. The psychiatrist knows nothing and does nothing. The pathologist knows everything, but it is too late.
My daily prayer is:
Lord, help me live this day so that if I found it were my last, I would have lived it no differently; allow me to finish your assignment on earth before it is too late.
Therefore, PSCF et al— please continue to pray for us; and please share with us whatever the Holy Spirit may reveal to you concerning PSC, for His glory.
Prayerfully
Not An Action Hero
Now select elders are meeting in a small groups of those who signed the petition. If the leadership did not care about Michael, The Park Street Five, The luna’s repeated letters that the elders have never responded to. Now they want to talk?
I also tried to email all the elders individually. On the website when you try to do that all is get is a BIG flat white screen.
PSC elders are primarily driven by image management, $$$$ and fear of liability.
If I were a PSC petitioner, I wouldn’t trust them.
The elder’s only concern is to preserve their power and the pastor they have supported regardless of his dishonesty, incompetence, poor leadership, and lack of qualification. What organization would ignore the concerns of their best employees to protect a CEO who has so utterly failed? What kind of board of directors would threaten the careers of their most experienced and best qualified employees in order to keep a CEO who has proven that he has been promoted way beyond his competence, through no fault of his own.
I hope it’s not true. But can it be that the elders are ignoring the Park Street Five because all 12 of them are superstitious? From day one all opposition to the current regime has been called Satanic. We’ve heard from the pulpit, from meeting chairs, and in person that the elders are actually fighting against the spiritual wickedness in high places that are making those rebels behave this way. There is no doubt that these five Spirit-filled, wisdom-filled, and Scripture-filled pastors prayed faithfully and thought hard about these issues. And I believe in Satan and demons. But to make such an accusation is absurd and borders on superstition. Who is the real “accuser of the brothers and sisters” anyway? Come on Jason, have a little spiritual bravery! Even God talked to Satan. I think it will be safe for you to be in a room with them. I’m sure the Paulist Center next door has holy water. Maybe that will give you some courage.
Folks, this is what spiritual abuse in action looks like.
janiceg,
Hello to all PSC friends and to Dee
Update w/ Good News. Yesterday the PSC Board of Elders approved the appointment of a Vicinage Council by the Conservative Congregational Christian Conference (of which PSC is a longterm member) to conduct an independent assessment of staff conflicts at PSC. Praise be to God for this admin. decision. Thank you all for your prayers, and please continue to pray for reconciliation, healing and renewal.
what ever the findings are . There is no appealing the decision. Independent is the best way to go. Staff conflicts as you call them are not what has happened with the ministers in question. They according to Michael they have been spiritually abused. which is totally differenct then “staff conflicts”.
The purpose of the Vicinage Council is to recommend to the local church whether to proceed with a candidate’s ordination. It may offer other recommendations regarding the candidate also, such as further study in specific areas.
Dee, The Boston Globe published an article today on the continuing disorder at Park Street Church, which you probably already know about, as report Danny McDonald quoted you, but I figured I’d leave a link in the comments here: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/03/19/metro/park-street-church-leadership-crisis/
The relevant section is right near the end and reads:
Pardon my pessimism, but I’m thinking that the charm and manipulation of the facts by the parties in question will successfully dupe another investigative team. The only difference is that they won’t be bribed with $100,000 to find in PSCs favor. Even if they come to the most obvious conclusion, the Vicinage Council has no real authority. The only way they could have any influence is to make their full report and recommendations available to the entire church…like good Congregationalists. Given the pattern of behavior by the elders, I’m guessing they won’t agree to proceed unless they are guaranteed a high degree of confidentiality and a simple summation. This way, as they have in the past, they can spin the findings to suit their own self-preservation agenda.
Ganym,
Where did you get the transcript of Michael’s speech during the meeting? Thank you for it.
What makes you say that Michael came across as “unhinged”? Are there particular phrases he used; was there a tone of voice; etc? I was not physically present at the meeting, so I have no raw data. Raw data appreciated. Thank you!
Michael nor the five ministers who could not support Mark are not unhinged. They must have had similar experiences. Sad that the current leadership fails to do an independent review.
Anon,
I am no longer a Congregationalist. I have a question. If 33 or thereabouts percent are against the situation, does this mean you win? I am thinking a lot about Jesus these days of Lent and how He viewed each of us. In a straight democracy, you would be correct. But is 67% in favor of a win in Congregationalism? Did Jesus lead a church centered around a straight democracy? Does the majority ever acquiesce to the significant minority? Jesus sure saw things differently than many of us do, didn’t He?
I think the current situation was predetermined and the leaders are surprised that by the pushback they are getting. MarK Booker appears over his head and he will need the leaders to surround him and make up for his shotrcomings…if they can. I think the leadership demonstrates their inability to handle the job they have set before them.
I have seen this happen in church after church. I am truly startled that PSC handled things so poorly. It looks like things have changed quite a bit since my time there. I feel so sorry for all the folks caught in the crossfire.
For the 33%, since the 67% won’t listen or treat you poorly, you have more power than you might imagine. If you are not treated well or if people like anon call you unhinged, it might be time to vote with your feet and your money. I don’t say this lightly. I have had to do the same thing. Few churches can function with a sudden decrease of 1/3 in terms of membership or money, particularly if the 33% consist of many of the faithful who supported the church.
I will write about PSC tomorrow. I will also keep the comment section open in that last post indefinitely so folks can communicate with one another. I am so sorry for all you are going through.
These statements are not made by those who truly follow Jesus. For these folks, it is winning the game which is important. They would do better in politics or on Wall Street. His church is far more loving than some of His professed followers. Shame on them.
Alice Reads Here,
Thank you for adding this here. I saw that. I said far more than that but will discuss this tomorrow.
dee,
This “us vs. them” atmosphere began 10 years ago with a moderator who treated the elder meetings as his personal courtroom. He cut off conversation and argued (vs. debated) with the members to push his agenda through. Those who had different opinions were too timid or frustrated to tell the truth. The more authority he gave himself, the more the pastors were deliberately excluded from decision-making. The board meetings functioned less and less like a team of brothers and sisters in Christ, and more and more as rivals and competitors. Today we all see the long-term result. Jason is the first moderator to display this authoritarianism in a public setting.
dee,
It’s interesting that no qualifying percentage was given in advance for the senior minister’s affirmation vote.
If every 1 in 3 congregants doesn’t affirm your calling to that church, is your calling there truly affirmed?
If someone doesn’t care so long as he wins, then he doesn’t care. Winning is the goal, and Satan is probably behind those people who didn’t vote for him.
I have a prediction based on 15 years of writing about this stuff; I believe within the next few years, there will be a reckoning. Oddly, it usually seems like the 1/3 people are proven correct. I have seen this in my own life. The pastors who said they “knew nothing” are no longer in pastoral ministry. It took about 14 years to discover this.
I have been thinking a lot about this recently due to some Lent reading. I have observed that Jesus is humble, quiet spoken and hardly authoritarian in His manner. Yet, He holds the greatest position of authority in the universe.
IMO churches beging to have serious conflict as soon as the pastor and leaders become authoritarian. Over time, members will walk. However, there is a saying amongst the authortarian folks one finds in groups like The Gospel Coalition or 9Marx (misspelled on purpose) that if you church shrinks to 5 people, at least those five follow you.
It took my husband and I a long time to find a church with humble leadership.In fact, it took us 21/2 years to join the church because we wanted to make sure we were judging the ethos correctly.
I am so sorry taht you have had to go through this. I undrstand a bit what the feels like. If you stay, you will have to play by the tules of the game. so you don’t get hurt.
UPDATE REGARDING THE NEXT PSC POST!
I will post on Friday. I have found that the timing is quite helpful, just prior to church, etc. I apologize for switching the days.
I share your pessimism about the Vicinage Council’s investigation.
PSC leaders desperately need to immediately hold a Town Hall meeting with an open Q & A to honestly answer tough questions from congregants about how the investigation will actually operate. But I highly doubt that they will.
Questions, such as:
Who will be on the Vicinage Council, and how will Council members be chosen? (In fact, why was Rev. Dr. Ronald E. Hamilton chosen to chair the Council, other than the fact that he’s a CCCC Conference Minister and loves missions?)
Will Vicinage Council members be trauma-informed, and have the appropriate expertise in applying the Bible to abuse situations? Will they know how the Bible is commonly wielded like a weapon against congregants and ministers who don’t take the party line in abusive churches?
Who will determine what gets written in the final investigative report, and who reads it?
Also, the fact that the accused and the accusers (alleged abusers and victims) will be questioned the same way does not bode well for this investigation.
In the words of Moderator Jason Abraham:
“In addition to assessing the charges made against the Senior Minister, the Vicinage Council… will also provide its determination as to whether the conduct of the Senior Minister, former Associate Minister, and other ministers has been appropriate and aligned with Biblical standards for their calling to pastoral ministry.”
So the Vicinage Council is going to take traumatized ministers – one who’s already been fired, and 5 others who are currently under a gag order & have already been interrogated by VOCA consultants – and instead of having compassion on them and earning their trust so they can safely share their stories, is going to treat them like suspects here?
Moreover, this seems tailor-made to open the door to fire any ministers who wouldn’t go along with the party line. “We’re going to investigate you, too.” Nice.
I get that investigators have to be objective for the final report to be at all credible. But either Jason Abraham or the Ronald E. Hamilton really don’t see how traumatized the alleged spiritual abuse victims are here, or they don’t care. That’s not how you interview alleged abuse victims.
Also, I imagine that the Vicinage Council will be immensely tempted to just rubber stamp whatever PSC leaders have already decided (with the help of the approx 2/3rds pro-Booker vote). However independent they say this investigation is.
100%. And the fact that this investigation is already being treated as both-sideism, typical staff conflicts does not bode well.
Unfortunately, it’s a pretty thin article. A story is only as good as its sources, and there are too many people couldn’t speak on the record here, either because of trauma, or a gag order, or both.
The best part of this article is that it includes links to TWW and Michael’s 17-page memo, for anyone who cares to look further.
dee,
The PSC Bylaws require 3/4 of the members present at a special meeting to vote “yes” to elect a senior minister. The February vote falls short of the 3/4 election threshold for Mark Booker. I’m not sure how Booker believes that he is affirmed by the membership.
Will the Park Street Five be fired? They have a combined 70 years of faithful service, 70 years of outstanding performance reports, and 70 years of valuable experience for Christ. Mark has three years of controversy. Are the elders and personnel committees so full of hubris that they believe that they can dismiss 80% of their front-line pastors and then manage the catastrophic results? They will create five huge gaps in PSC’s primary ministries. No one will be overseeing missions, both college ministries, international ministries, or young adults. How many people will remain in a church that does such an irrational and arrogant act for no biblical reason?
Is this what the early Church was like?
For example, Ignatius of Antioch 107 AD:
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/seven-epistles-of-st-ignatius-of-antioch-20957
My friend,
Booker believes it because the leadership tells him it. He’s well controlled by. the elders, etc., without whom none of this would have ever happened. This appears to be a church takeover, IMO. I’ve documented this sort of thing from church all over the US, UK, and Australia. It happened in a church we joined and left quite quickly, seeing what was coming down the pike. If you are interested, here is a link to those posts.
https://thewartburgwatch.com/?s=Chapel+Hill+Bible+Church&x=16&y=10
Of course, it was. As Luther would say, we are all both saints and sinners. However, that does not mean that all churches are equally contentious. The LCMS church we have belonged to for several years is not fraught with fights. That is due to remarkably humble pastors who don’t play the game that they are changing the world. They work at changing a few things. It is the most peaceful church I’ve ever had the privilege to attend now that PSC is out of the running. I am so sorry for all church members.
Elizabeth Klein,
I genuinely don’t think the story did any favors for Mark Booker. His latest missive seems to indicate that he is not pleased. I will wear a big hat and sunglasses the next time I visit!
HAHAHAHA!!!! Good call.
There’s just so much more to the story… Judging by the comments, to your average Bostonian reader, it looks like just a typical church conflict between 2 pastors.
I certainly hope and pray not. That would be a disaster. Not only woefully unjust, but also unworkable. Who would then do the ministry work of those 5? Who on earth would want to be hired for a ministry position at PSC, under the current circumstances?
Elizabeth Klein,
It shows where their priorities lie…..maintaining power is more important than doing ministry well. Keeping their authority and control over the Kingdom of God even though it will significantly diminish the effectiveness of the Kingdom of God. All to defend a dishonest, unqualified, unethical, manipulative, ineffective mediocre Anglican preacher. In what universe does that make sense? Only in power politics.