Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
March 29, 2024, 04:43:12 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Judgement Day - ingoing thoughts as an ECC member trying to discern what to do  (Read 9468 times)
ShineTheLight
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 79



« on: May 31, 2018, 03:26:46 pm »

Joan Harris was targeting having her final report to the ECC BOT today. I have no insight if she will meet this goal or if the date will slip
As an ECC member, I’d like to share my thoughts going into potential ECC communications of their decisions (hopefully in the coming weeks) – I would welcome yours as well.

1. Because the BOT is very far from what I would consider to be an “independent judiciary” which, right alongside of “presumption of innocence” is one of the bedrocks of the justice system, I personally have a much higher bar for believing in an outcome which leads to no consequences for ECC staff as a result of these allegations.  I’m not at all saying that may not be the right answer, just that for me, ECC has to prove to me why that was the right answer if they expect my family's continued attendance, engagement and financial support.  I can honestly say had the BOT decided to appoint an independent panel to decide on actions resulting from Joan’s investigation (with no staff members or BOT members appointed by/with close ties to pastors) this would not be the case, rather, my skepticism is a consequence of the approach the BOT chose (as well as their anonymity).

2. I would encourage you to attend any public discussion sessions that are scheduled and, respectfully, ask hard questions. Asking questions of your church, even hard ones, in a public setting is not disloyal. If your church sees it as disloyal, you are in the wrong church.  If there is a broad release of material, there may be less need for hard questions, but I am not expecting that; – some thought starter questions I will likely have, unless answered in ECC communications:

a. Did Joan Harris conclude that any ECC staff member was less than truthful in what they shared during the investigation? If so who and was a consequence determined for being less than truthful?

b. Why would it ever be right to discourage a church member from confronting a pastor about any type of offensive behavior they may have experienced? Did Joan determine that happened in this case? If so, who did this?

c. Why ever would it be right to seek to specifically protect a single pastor from disparagement in a severance agreement funded by the church or a church-related entity? Did Joan determine that happen in this case, or ever? If I did happen, why?

d. Why would it ever be right to have pastors sign an NDA in relation to any complaint by a member? Did Joan determine that this happened with any victim in this case?

e. How many women indicated to Joan Harris they had a negative experience with Mark Darling regarding sexual issues of some kind?

f. For each woman making an allegation – did Joan Harris conclude she was truthful or less than truthful

g. Did Mark Darling agree with the women’s description of what happened or did he dispute the account? – Did Joan Harris conclude he was truthful or less than truthful?

h. Was whatever behavior Joan concluded that occurred between Mark and the women who spoke with Joan consistent with appropriate behavior for a married ECC pastor?

i.  For any consequences that were imposed on any staff, how was this determined?  If other ministry leaders or lay leaders (e.g., small group leaders or worship leaders) engaged in similar behavior, should they expect similar consequences or lack thereof, based on the precedent being set by the BOT’s decision?

j. How was the decision made to keep the identity of the BOT secret from the congregation?  If it is not secret please share their names with this audience.

k. Did any BOT member have any conversations with pastors to get input or advice on how to respond to Joan's findings either prior to or after the findings were shared with the BOT?

L. Was the BOT unanimous in its decision? If not, what was the final vote on the approach that was taken (e.g., 6-1, 4-3)?

If you have other questions for ECC in anticipation of their decision and communications, feel free to add to the list..If you think these are unfair or don't think an ECC tithing, engaged member has a right to know the answers to some/all of these questions say why.  When there is a communication made by the BOT, I basically plan on checking off how many of the above questions are answered by the communication ECC puts out and how many are answered in any discussion sessions that are scheduled as a rough measure of transparency.  Note - no victim would be required to be named to fully answer any question above, only staff, if called for by the question. In theory, I would think ECC's BOT could respond to every question above without fear of any adverse consequence.
Logged
Janet Easson Martin
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1898



« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2018, 06:34:14 pm »

These are very good and very important questions, ShineTheLight.  I would be very surprised if a GCC church allowed for questions from the congregation.  GCx Church wide meetings according to many testimonies on this site seemed to be a Kangaroo Court rather than a Town Hall gathering.  By this I mean, those discussed are typically not invited or permitted to comment.  And questions from attendees are typically answered deceptively using some unfounded argument or they are authoritatively squelched. 

It will be interesting for those members observing to discern if they welcome questions and if the answers are forthright or crafty.
Logged

For grace is given not because we have done good works, but in order that we may be able to do them.        - Saint Augustine
LuisCamachoIII
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 17



« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2018, 08:04:49 pm »

I would be very surprised if a GCC church allowed for questions from the congregation.  GCx Church wide meetings according to many testimonies on this site seemed to be a Kangaroo Court rather than a Town Hall gathering.  By this I mean, those discussed are typically not invited or permitted to comment.  And questions from attendees are typically answered deceptively using some unfounded argument or they are authoritatively squelched. 

It will be interesting for those members observing to discern if they welcome questions and if the answers are forthright or crafty.


Hi Janet,

Having been a member of Evergreen Lakeville for just about 11 years, I must say that my experiences are the opposite of what you describe. My church allows and encourages questions from anyone and everyone in the congregation. My first few years were filled with questions; some of them were admittedly snarky, but I was never "not permitted" to comment. Nobody is "not permitted" to comment--I'm not even sure how my church would go about doing that? I've never felt like my questions were answered deceptively or squelched. My experience has always been one where questions are welcome. This situation with Mark Darling is no different.

To be honest, the thought of Eric, Rob, Mark, Mike, and Kitt (our pastors) running a Kangaroo court, or any court for that matter, and not permitting comments and answering deceptively or using their "authority" to squelch questions seems so far fetched to me that it makes me laugh. I'm very sorry if you had an experience different than mine. Perhaps it just aint the GC it used to be?*

Luis

*http://forum.gcmwarning.com/general-discussion/it-just-aint-the-gc-it-used-to-be/
Logged
OneOfMany
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 252



« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2018, 09:02:05 pm »

I would be very surprised if a GCC church allowed for questions from the congregation.  GCx Church wide meetings according to many testimonies on this site seemed to be a Kangaroo Court rather than a Town Hall gathering.  By this I mean, those discussed are typically not invited or permitted to comment.  And questions from attendees are typically answered deceptively using some unfounded argument or they are authoritatively squelched. 

It will be interesting for those members observing to discern if they welcome questions and if the answers are forthright or crafty.


Hi Janet,

Having been a member of Evergreen Lakeville for just about 11 years, I must say that my experiences are the opposite of what you describe. My church allows and encourages questions from anyone and everyone in the congregation. My first few years were filled with questions; some of them were admittedly snarky, but I was never "not permitted" to comment. Nobody is "not permitted" to comment--I'm not even sure how my church would go about doing that? I've never felt like my questions were answered deceptively or squelched. My experience has always been one where questions are welcome. This situation with Mark Darling is no different.

To be honest, the thought of Eric, Rob, Mark, Mike, and Kitt (our pastors) running a Kangaroo court, or any court for that matter, and not permitting comments and answering deceptively or using their "authority" to squelch questions seems so far fetched to me that it makes me laugh. I'm very sorry if you had an experience different than mine. Perhaps it just aint the GC it used to be?*

Luis

*http://forum.gcmwarning.com/general-discussion/it-just-aint-the-gc-it-used-to-be/

It all depends on what questions you are asking.
Logged
LuisCamachoIII
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 17



« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2018, 05:52:40 am »

It all depends on what questions you are asking.

Hmmmmm Smiley My guess is you're implying that there are certain questions that, even when asked in good faith, wouldn't be "permitted" by the Evergreen leaders. Can you give a recent example?
Logged
OneOfMany
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 252



« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2018, 06:15:31 am »

It all depends on what questions you are asking.

Hmmmmm Smiley My guess is you're implying that there are certain questions that, even when asked in good faith, wouldn't be "permitted" by the Evergreen leaders. Can you give a recent example?

Yes. Who are the members of the BOT. Who signed non-disclosures concerning women claiming abuse.
Logged
DarthVader
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 202



« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2018, 06:36:18 am »

They permitted the question, they just won't answer it  Wink....but lots of churches have secret boards that manage their finances right  Wink

Ok Luis - to OneofMany's point - your pastor Mark Bowen's name has come up in this investigation prominently..after ECC makes its decisions and communicates them, are you willing to bet we have clear answers to these specific questions about actions Mark Bowen did or did not take?

1) Was sexual misconduct crossed off (by Mark Bowen) a list of things Suzanne was allowed to confront Mark Darling about and if so, what possible justification for preventing an ECC member from confronting a pastor about sexual misconduct did Mark Bowen have?

2) Did Mark Bowen work to negotiate a severance agreement that specific protected Mark Darling, by name, from disparagement, if so, how was that a righteous decision.

3) Did Mark Bowen and other pastors sign an NDA related allegations made by "Loey"? If so, what was the justification for that?

4) Did Mark Bowen agree that Mark Darling would step away from being a pastor and attend counseling and if so, did Mark D. do so, and if Mark D. did not, why did not Mark Bowen as Chairman of the Board hold him accountable...

I'm willing to bet we don't get answers to any or most, but if you think otherwise, let's agree to revisit these questions on this board, one week after the ECC announcement, whenever it comes, you and I and review the answers to these questions (unless you think any are unfair)?
Logged
Shamednomore
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47



« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2018, 10:11:51 am »

Excellent questions to start with, DV!  Louis, if you get answers to those questions, I would love to know.
Logged
DarthVader
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 202



« Reply #8 on: June 04, 2018, 10:16:22 am »

Thanks ShamedNoMore..The sound you hear is the sound of non-response from the ECC defenders...Even though ECC could, after the investigation is complete and results shared, presumably answer every one of my questions about Mark Bowen's conduct and the earlier ones posted by STL without, in a single instance, violating the confidentiality of any victim, my guess is we won't get answers to most of these in what ECC shares or is willing to publicly answer in a Q&A format.

If you attend an ECC location and you believe our church has been handling this whole situation in a God-honoring way, I'd ask you to, after the results of the investigation have been shared and after any public discussion held (if there are any) review the questions posted earlier by STL and/or the specific questions about Mark Bowen's conduct (that was specifically for Luis) and either post an acknowledgement on this thread stating we didn't get those answers or share the answers you think we got..or just say why you don't think these questions are relevant in assessing how our church has handled this.
Logged
Mango
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 36



« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2018, 11:15:21 am »

If you attend an ECC location and you believe our church has been handling this whole situation in a God-honoring way, I'd ask you to...

"Our"  Cheesy
Logged
DarthVader
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 202



« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2018, 11:21:56 am »

If you attend an ECC location and you believe our church has been handling this whole situation in a God-honoring way, I'd ask you to...

"Our"  Cheesy
Huh I've attended an ECC location since 2003. Served and am serving in multiple ministry areas.  Tithed and more faithfully. I'm not sure if you're trying to imply I'm disloyal for being hard on the church I attend, but if you are, I'll accept that as your opinion.  Some would say it is the height of loyalty to hold institutions one is associated with to a high standards - but you only posted a smiley face so I may be reading to much into that  Wink
« Last Edit: June 04, 2018, 11:24:43 am by DarthVader » Logged
GodisFaithful
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 328



« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2018, 12:13:04 pm »

That "our" and smiley face say a lot about the group think that is expected by a lot of people and leaders at Evergreen. I would say to go ahead and read sarcasm into that one. In other words, it is not your church if you openly question/expect high standards of accountability.

It's kind of chilling, actually. It's a fake smile, don't you think?

DV, I admire you for asking hard questions expecting transparency. At Evergreen, that takes a lot of guts. Even though you have been outspoken, there are probably a lot of lurkers just like you that want integrity in the outcome of the investigation.
Logged
DarthVader
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 202



« Reply #12 on: June 04, 2018, 02:43:34 pm »

Thanks GodIsFaithful.  I think the perspective of "if my (adult) daughter ever found it necessary to report sexual misconduct in a church setting  - is this what I'd want her to experience?", is a useful one, that we should all be asking of our church (any church) going through something like this.  Where my church meets this standard, they deserve praise (putting Mark on leave, hiring Joan), where they don't (keeping our BOT secret, not ensuring there are no conflicts of interest on the BOT), they deserve critique (which I've given to my pastor) and the jury is still out (literally) on what ECC is willing to share in the way of findings from the investigation and what they are willing to do with those findings in the way of discipline, if called for and changes to policy, structure, etc. to make sure this is handled better in the future.

It makes me sad when I see comments from the MD defenders who have a hard time acknowledging that there are real people (5 at last count) on the other side of this.  Everyone of them is someone's daughter & how ECC has handled and continues to handle this will speak very loudly to the world, louder than any sermon series or set of good deeds in the local community.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1