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
May 21, 2022, 05:26:58 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: McCotter Poison  (Read 53703 times)
Miss Current
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



« Reply #20 on: March 16, 2007, 07:54:39 pm »

I occasionally have current contact with Jim McCotter - yes in 2006! I would like to hear more from people who knew him or of him from decades ago. The good, the bad and the ugly. I also can share with you from current day. But I will stay aminous and not disclose my name. I am willing to share on the group and offline if confidentallty is kept. -Miss Current-
Logged

Miss Current
Genevieve
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



« Reply #21 on: March 16, 2007, 07:54:50 pm »

Wow! Thanks for posting. Do you think he has any current plans to rejoin GC?
Logged
Anonymous50
Guest

« Reply #22 on: March 16, 2007, 07:55:02 pm »

I also have had current “indirect” contact with Jim McCotter via two separate avenues. I have asked the question of both avenues of people whether they picked up that Jim and family were intending to return to GC. The answer from both sets of people, one of whom is a relative of the McCotter family, is “I don’t think so.”
Logged
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« Reply #23 on: March 16, 2007, 07:55:13 pm »

I would like to know why Jim would not return to GC, the movement he founded and obviously believed in. Not necessarily as a leader, just an attender. If there were no “alternative motives” for him leaving, why would he find an entirely new church organization to serve in?
Logged
Anonymous50
Guest

« Reply #24 on: March 16, 2007, 07:55:26 pm »

I also know that he visited a Denver-area church (non-GC) just a couple of weeks ago, and he has attended various churches (non-GC) since leaving GC.
Logged
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« Reply #25 on: March 16, 2007, 07:55:41 pm »

Which could suggest he’s either (a) not entirely welcome back as a full-time attender at GC because of the bad publicity associated with his name, or it suggests (b) he does not think GC is the best organization he could be attending.

Either way, isn’t that kind of strange for the founder of the movement?
Logged
Anonymous50
Guest

« Reply #26 on: March 16, 2007, 07:55:53 pm »

I don’t have reason to think that there are hard feelings either way.
Logged
Genevieve
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



« Reply #27 on: March 16, 2007, 07:56:05 pm »

I totally agree that it’s odd that he doens’t even attend a GC church.

Perhaps he knows that if he attends he’ll be forced back into leadership he doesn’t want (or can’t have?) anymore? Very weird, though.
Logged
sistanchrist
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47



« Reply #28 on: March 16, 2007, 07:56:16 pm »

yet he is supportive of his kids attending GC churches as two of them do.
Logged
Miss Current
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



« Reply #29 on: March 16, 2007, 07:56:27 pm »

To Genevieve - From what I know I don’t think any changes are forthcoming in the future relating to the question you ask on post #53.

To Anonymous50 - How can I make contact with you?
Logged

Miss Current
Miss Current
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



« Reply #30 on: March 16, 2007, 07:57:18 pm »

Sam, or anyone else who knows, what has Jim McCotter done for the Kingdom of God since leaving years ago?

I’m not trying to be critical, just want to know.

Below is a comment by Sam on Nov 22, 2006 in another category or thread or whatever it may be called.
__________________________
Clone, I know I’m not Larry but I would like to jump in here for a moment. Larry would not know first hand on your question with McCotter. I was in the meetings where we discussed Jim with Jim.
I attribute his departure to two things:
1. Boredom with same old thing. That’s easy for guys in ministry and who are pioneer types. Non-pioneer typs cannot understand that because they are wired to be more “minders” and “grinders” or (farmer types as opposed to hunters).
2. Jim felt that reaching the world was not limited to only creating church infrastrutures. I agree to this day. That is why he went into secular media, which I applaud. Someone’s got to do it.
I think, Jim maxed out to his gifts and his maturity. It was time, looking back, for him to move on. Keep in mind also, that Jim was groomed by his father to take over family businesses or start them. Jim is a starter… not a maintainer.
There is no mystery to Jim’s departure. No conspiracy theories. Many leave formal ministry every day to go into secular work. Hershel Martindale’s son, Tim, left the pastorate to go back to school and he became a medical doctor. Hurray for him. He felt that was the Lord. I spoke to him as he was in the process. He was a pastor… been there, done that!
I can say also, been a pastor and church planter for 25 years, done that and got the T-shirt. God has me doing greater things for my life at this point. All that was preparatory for the next phase.
__________________________
Logged

Miss Current
exshep
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 260



WWW
« Reply #31 on: March 16, 2007, 07:57:51 pm »

“What they won’t mention is the error statement, rampant excommunications, unbiblical teachings, authoritarian practices of the early movement, etc. You know, the stuff people actually might be concerned about. The past is painted over as some sort of golden age.”

ok- so what church does mention this stuff about themselves?

I’m not concerned about GCM’s past any more than I am concerned about the crusades or the reformation etc.


If the issues were totally an issue of the past, I could wholeheartedly agree with you. I had a good relationship with a Salvation Army major and his staff. He openly admitted that the Salvation Army had some virulent beginnings. I am sure I would be on unsound footing if I criticized the Salvation Army merely on the basis of its founder over a 150 years ago.

I can immediate refer to First United Methodist Church, Dallas, Texas as one church who immediately came in clean on the heels of a crisis. You can read Church at the Crossroads for the complete story. The senior pastor, in the mid Nineties, attempted to murder his wife. It turned in an OJ Simpson fiasco. The church and the denomination immediately took action. The pastor resigned without incident. Crisis teams were brought in. Counseling was made available for anyone who needed it—no questions asked. Prayer teams are support groups were established. Members were allowed a safe place to vent, grieve, and process their feelings. John Fielder, in the New Members class openly discusses the incident. He is also upfront on how the church has set up safeguards to avoid fraud or any pastoral impropriety. The point was there was no attempt to cover up. Ten years later the church stepped into action when the Dallas News did a tenth anniversary article on the murder and where the pastor is living today. The article stirred up a lot of anger and sadness. I was never a member during those years, so I could listen empathetically and detached. I never heard, “you should not feel that way”. As Fiedler summarizes, “We dealt with it”.

If GC had thoroughly cleaned house and came clean about their past, there would not be a blog. I can cite a present day example of false witness and cover-up. I visited what may be argued one of the “mother churches” of GC. I had a conversation with a prominent leader who I am quite fond of. What did not ring true was he denied there being a church at my alma mater. Even the exact words of “I do not remember a church at _______” did not ring true. The college paper had announcements and advertisements of the church’s activities. The leader was in an East Coast church that was routinely sending out speakers and evangelistic teams. There is a sizeable binder on the group in the University archives. The leader came out to preach him. That conversation was this past fall, thus throwing doubts on the validity of the Crusades/Reformation thesis.

I also emailed the same leader asking for prayers that I am another member could reconcile. The leader responded saying that he did not remember the person. On first reading, I could buy that. Admittedly he was in hurry when he emailed. Personally my powers of discernment sensed he was on the defensive. I never brought up the issue with him, but I did have to wonder. The member was the secretary for the Midwest State campus fellowship, so she would have had frequent meeting with the leader when he and the evangelistic team came into town. The leader later came on staff at the church my friend was a member in another city. The member also has a distinctive name which would be hard to forget. I can accept not remembering a “Sue Smith”; forgetting an “Anastasia Higginbotham” would be a bit of a stretch.

The “us versus them” mentality does creep up today. Other bloggers have offered convincing citations. I can offer one personal piece of evidence for consideration. Even though I joined a GC church and made overtures to reconcile with Tammy B, I still get no response. I did get a third hand comment that the church I attend is not a GC church and I should be fearful of my salvation. [I guess I am little confused. I remember finding out about the church I attend via the GCAC website. The listing is still there today– but then I am a sinner, what do I know]

It occurred to me that I can mention the Walker Railey incident at First United Methodist but have to resort to pseudonyms and fictitious locations regarding past and present GC churches does speak to the lack of willingness on GC’s part to coming clean on their past and present.
Logged

Had friend in Columbus church 80's and 90s. Member left in 1993  Involved GC in Texas  2005-2007.  Empathy to both  with  positive and negative aspects.
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« Reply #32 on: March 16, 2007, 07:58:11 pm »

Another thing. GC issued a statement of error in 1991, but I am pretty convinced that this was an attempt to ward off bad publicity rather than an honest desire to change. The timing is just too strange (the very month Churches That Abuse was written, being thrown off of a Toronto campus a few years earlier) and the modern day response/followup shows a lack of sincerity. Furthermore, I have personally witnessed too many of those problems firsthand, before even reading the statement, as have others. When I didfinally read it, almost all of the items in it rang true with the exception of 1 or 2. This is no coincidence. If an organization is truly reformed and sorry about its past, its current leaders should not be denying what happened. I tried to confront a pastor (who has worked in multiple GC churches) about the inaccuracy of his “church history” sermon. He admitted he didn’t know much about the church history other than what he preached, but said because he respected Jim McCotter and Hershell Martindate and knew their heart’s for God, he would not look at any negative information on them. It didn’t matter how well documented it was, he wasn’t interested, and this was a guy teaching others the “history of GC.”

A strange level of denial has happened in other incidents with other leaders, which points to a group who is not really sorry for their past, and a group that has little interest in attempting to keep themselves from falling back into their old ways. Another good piece of evidence is the people who were asked to leave or thrown out for bringing up church history and modern problems. An organization that cares about not repeating the past is not afraid to learn from it and admit it happened.
Logged
exshep
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 260



WWW
« Reply #33 on: March 16, 2007, 07:58:30 pm »

I remember I spoke with Tammy B in appreciation of the statement. Her response, “I cannot talk to you unless you repent and join GC. There is a church in the city you live in.” [Fortunately I did not drive in those days and the church was well beyond the reaches of the transit system.]
That never struck me as spiritual glasnost. Interestingly enough, she never sent the document, but her church sent on their letterhead in their envelope with a note attached, “Tammy B_____ wanted us to send this to you”. She essential washed her hands of the incident and refused to discuss the issue further.

It suddenly dawned on me that a national leader denied there was Tammy B at his church. I wish I never threw out the envelope and the post it note. Proof positive she was a member there. Do you think somebody is not being entirely upfront in 2006?
Logged

Had friend in Columbus church 80's and 90s. Member left in 1993  Involved GC in Texas  2005-2007.  Empathy to both  with  positive and negative aspects.
MamaD
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92



« Reply #34 on: March 16, 2007, 07:58:50 pm »

ok- so what church does mention this stuff about themselves?

I am currently attending a very large church (sanctuary seats 4000 or so).

Three weeks after they built this multi-million dollar building, one of the pastor’s had an affair with the church secretary.

He was removed by the board of elders immediately.

This had disastrous effects on the budget. Dozens were laid off. Hundresds left the church. They are still digging out financially.

But, my point is, we have been going there for over a year and at the Sunday morning services, at least 3 times, they have referred to the “major moral failure” on the part of the former pastor and what they are doing to minimize the potential for future failures of that nature.

So, yes, some churches confront sin openly and understand that some failures are such that they will forever be a part of a church’s history to be overcome.
Logged
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« Reply #35 on: March 16, 2007, 07:59:01 pm »

Do you think somebody is not being entirely upfront in 2006?

Yeah. The experiences I described happened in the last 1 or 2 years. I read the statement of church error in 2005, and found that it described much of what I was experiencing, and was shocked.
Logged
exshep
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 260



WWW
« Reply #36 on: March 16, 2007, 07:59:43 pm »

another thing. GC issued a statement of error in 1991, but I am pretty convinced that this was an attempt to ward off bad publicity rather than an honest desire to change. The timing is just too strange (the very month Churches That Abuse was written, being thrown off of a Toronto campus a few years earlier) and the modern day response/follow-up shows a lack of sincerity.

I am trying to remember where I was when it came out. It was the fall of 1991 when I was first aware of the issue. I was working in a department store at the time. I ordered Churches that Abuse by Enroth from the store. My first exposure to the 1991 Statement was an unsolicited letter from Tammy B’s church to my PO Box. I did remind me of Tammy pulling the “give it to the elders” routine. I did not recognize the church. It was not until I opened the letter with the Post-it note “Tammy B_______ wanted us to send this to you.”

For I have two impressions, one of some notable improvement, the other of damage control. I believe in my heart that there were some efforts at amends. I had a good friend who was a Methodist minister who had a brother in GC. After the 1991 statement, he and his brother were able to have candid conversations with each other, something which had not occurred previously. I have no problem with the sincerity, at least from the pastor of my church, “that we went the extra mile to try to make amends”. Former cult members have a sixth sense when it comes to “used car deals”. The meters never registered.

Former group members were understandably not impressed. When the only response from Tammy was “I cannot talk to you unless you repent [by joining Great Commission]”, it was back to the old prayer closet. So I can easily side with the thesis that the statement was an effort at window dressing.
Logged

Had friend in Columbus church 80's and 90s. Member left in 1993  Involved GC in Texas  2005-2007.  Empathy to both  with  positive and negative aspects.
Anonymous50
Guest

« Reply #37 on: March 16, 2007, 08:00:02 pm »

Miss Current -



I am not willing to reveal my identity, so I am unable to provide a way to contact me. Sorry.



I know that Jim is currently and regularly attending a Denver-area church that belongs to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church denomination.
Logged
Miss Current
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 39



« Reply #38 on: March 16, 2007, 08:00:15 pm »

Anonymous50:

You can email me privately at miss.current@gmail.com

I want to stay anonymous too.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2008, 09:59:06 am by puff of purple smoke » Logged

Miss Current
nateswinton
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 264



« Reply #39 on: March 16, 2007, 08:01:47 pm »

dangit. that email address doesn’t work… do you have another way to contact him, miss current?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


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