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
August 18, 2019, 09:01:34 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Reckoning  (Read 71623 times)
omelianchuk
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 77



« Reply #280 on: April 09, 2018, 06:03:08 pm »

Thanks for the lengthy reply Darth (you too Rebel -- as far as I know Jeromy is acting on his own, so I'll let him answer if he feels the need to).

I take your point (Darth) about the how the BOT is arranged (see my edit above). I don't have any ideas how to improve it, and I think your suggestions are reasonable. The Willow Creek case is a sad one, and I see the parallels. The "asterisk" point you make is a good one, because if the arrangement is bad, it neither serves Mark nor the accusers well.

Taking a long view, I take some comfort -- mixed with holy fear -- in the words of Jesus: "There is nothing covered that won’t be uncovered, nothing hidden that won’t be made known" (Luke 12:2).

Peace.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2018, 06:07:26 pm by omelianchuk » Logged
LuisCamachoIII
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 17



« Reply #281 on: April 10, 2018, 05:55:23 am »

Hi everyone,

I'm not sure if you're all aware, but there are at least 2 non-Evergreen, non-Great Commission individuals that have been brought in to serve on the board in this case. That is what was stated at the EC Lakeville leaders meeting in March. I would assume that was done to help foster objectivity.
Logged
Barb
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65



« Reply #282 on: April 10, 2018, 07:39:10 am »

Luis, this is interesting. Suzanne and another individual met with Jim Bird and Lynn Newman last Thursday and specifically asked Lynn who was on the BOT. She stated that it was her and Jim and then 5 others (one from each location) and all had been appointed to the board prior to January.

When were you told this? Wouldn’t it have been beneficial to the “investigation “ to let the victims know this information if the desire was for the victims to come forward and cooperate with the “investigation “?

« Last Edit: April 10, 2018, 08:00:15 am by Barb » Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 743



« Reply #283 on: April 10, 2018, 07:48:44 am »

I agree with Barb. It sounds like a contradiction of what we've been told up till now.

Having two board members from outside GC/Evergreen sounds like a very positive step, but it would foster so much more trust in the investigative process if the names of the board were made public.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2018, 07:50:31 am by Huldah » Logged
LuisCamachoIII
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 17



« Reply #284 on: April 10, 2018, 09:14:17 am »

Hi Barb and Huldah,

We were told this in early March at our leaders meeting.

And I agree that what I heard contradicts what Suzanne has stated what Lynn told her.

It's possible Lynn doesn't have all the information, or something got lost in translation in their Thursday meeting with Suzanne, or Evergreen is lying to everyone, or Suzanne is lying to everyone, or both or either parties have miscommunicated something, or I misunderstood what was said at the leaders meeting, or I'm lying right now, or a bit of all of the above, or something else entirely. Take your pick Smiley.
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2356



« Reply #285 on: April 10, 2018, 09:23:31 am »

If ECC made public the names of all on their FINANCIAL BOT we would all know the answer to those questions.

As far as Lynn not having all the information, I’m pretty sure she would know who was on the BOT before and after Suzanne’s Tweet so would be aware of any that had been added.

Also, for all you ECC members, don’t you wonder who the people are who are on the FINANCIAL board and how they got there? And why they are embroiled in this mess? And what authority they have over elders?
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Scout
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73



« Reply #286 on: April 10, 2018, 09:30:55 am »

Hi Barb and Huldah,

We were told this in early March at our leaders meeting.

And I agree that what I heard contradicts what Suzanne has stated what Lynn told her.

It's possible Lynn doesn't have all the information, or something got lost in translation in their Thursday meeting with Suzanne, or Evergreen is lying to everyone, or Suzanne is lying to everyone, or both or either parties have miscommunicated something, or I misunderstood what was said at the leaders meeting, or I'm lying right now, or a bit of all of the above, or something else entirely. Take your pick Smiley.
LuisCamachoIII,

I wanted to audio recording the meeting that another person and I had with Lynn Newman and Jim Bird to ensure that either side could not deny, change or even as you stated have something get lost in translation.  Lynn did not want the meeting recorded, which of course is a person's prerogative and needs to be respected.  This being the case, the other person with me took notes during the  meeting.  We told Lynn and Jim at the end of the meeting that we would forward the notes to her.  Because we still have not received confirmation that they were received, a copy was sent by certified mail.  

Scout
Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 743



« Reply #287 on: April 10, 2018, 09:34:09 am »

Luis, I pick "None of the Above." If I were free to choose without limitations, I'd choose, "Just release their names."

I truly don't get the need for secrecy. Protecting the board from the influence of Suzanne's supporters is nonsense. It's not as if the board members are being sequestered in a guarded location somewhere, immune to any outside influence at all.
Logged
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1181



« Reply #288 on: April 10, 2018, 09:37:49 am »

I agree the secrecy makes no sense.  If people have a problem with someone harassing them in person or through the mail or whatever, they really need to take that up with the police. 

Why the differing messages? 


Understanding this situation means being informed by the lack of cohesive and clear leadership or accountability in this group.  When you understand that, you can understand a lot about their inaction and secrecy on abuse claims.


Logged

Glad to be free.
Scout
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73



« Reply #289 on: April 10, 2018, 09:42:24 am »

Luis, I pick "None of the Above." If I were free to choose without limitations, I'd choose, "Just release their names."

I truly don't get the need for secrecy. Protecting the board from the influence of Suzanne's supporters is nonsense. It's not as if the board members are being sequestered in a guarded location somewhere, immune to any outside influence at all.
Huldah,

It is interesting that you used the word "sequestered".  During the meeting that the other person and I had with Lynn Newman (Evergreen Church Director of Operations) and Jim Bird (Evergreen Church Director of Finance), Lynn said they are "trying to keep them like a sequestered jury".  I found it odd, as two of them were sitting in front of me, one of the victims.  

Scout
Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 743



« Reply #290 on: April 10, 2018, 09:50:06 am »

Scout, that is indeed interesting.

And unconvincing.

And infuriating.

"Sequestered like a jury," means no contact with the outside world. It doesn't mean, "having contact, albeit limited contact, with only one side in a dispute."
Logged
Barb
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65



« Reply #291 on: April 10, 2018, 10:19:58 am »

Luis, considering Lynn is a member ofthe BOT, I’m pretty sure she knows who’s on it. And I know that Suzanne asked follow up questions regarding the BOT to make sure that she understood what Lynn was saying.

I have no idea what’s going on with the discrepancies, but it is disturbing.
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2356



« Reply #292 on: April 10, 2018, 10:27:04 am »

About the basement.

Many years ago (like 6 years ago), I was talking with a friend who had been at ECC from the beginning. We were watching children in a nursery and had a lot of time to chat. She began telling me about the early days. She was still an ECC member. One of the things she mentioned was that many of the college women from the U of MN would babysit for free for the Darlings. She was a frequent babysitter.

It was a matter of fact conversation about the early days, but she said that the pattern was that when they came home, Kathy would go to bed and Mark and the babysitter would go down to the basement. Please understand, my friend was not claiming that anything had happened and she is not now claiming that she was a victim. She just mentioned that it was his habit to use this opportunity to "mentor" (not sure if she used that word, but the sense was he was mentoring or counseling the women) the various female college babysitters. She did not mention a fire.

When I read about the basement counseling in the Reckoning, I immediately thought about that conversation years ago before these allegations were made. I don't believe my friend was lying or making it up. None of this was on the radar at that time.

There needs to be a way for people to tell their stories and know they will be listened to. There are many questions here that need to be answered.

Clearly, if Mark did these things and the elders covered for him, something must be done.

Likewise, if Mark did not do these things, he must be vindicated.

The current way it is being handled will not bring truth to the light where it needs to be.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Badger
Private Forum Access
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129



« Reply #293 on: April 10, 2018, 10:35:00 am »

I agree with Barb. It sounds like a contradiction of what we've been told up till now.

Having two board members from outside GC/Evergreen sounds like a very positive step, but it would foster so much more trust in the investigative process if the names of the board were made public.

I would agree Huldah.

I personally feel it would be unwise to include John Piper or Dr. Leith Anderson as outside counsel on such a board.  I understand it is a hypothetical idea; however, I think the reasoning behind either man being less than an ideal outside option could be applied to other such candidates.

In the past, John Piper has promoted the idea of male headship in a marriage over the abuse of a wife.  In 2009, Piper noted that if a husband was "simply hurting [his wife]", then she should "endure verbal abuse for a season", and "endure perhaps being smacked one night", before seeking "help from the church" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OkUPc2NLrM.  Piper prioritizes the correct "sinless" response of the abused instead of first identifying and dealing with the horrific abuse perpetrated by the husband.  It took Piper 4 years to clarify that it was indeed scriptural for an abused wife to call the police on her abusive spouse.  When Piper notes how a wife should respond to her husband trying to get her to have group sex he plays a gentle feminine character with a smile as he demonstrates how the wife might disagree with her husband in such a situation.  I am not looking to argue complementarianism vs egalitarianism.  I think that Piper has given much leeway to men in authority while putting a great deal of onus on victims having the correct response.  I therefore don't feel it would be inappropriate for an individual like Piper to be included on a board that has to evaluate whether multiple men in authority took part in creating and maintaining a culture that is abusive towards women.

While social media, authors, and forums discuss the abusive nature that is perhaps pandemic to GCC churches, Mr. Hopler and the GCC board are able to point to individuals and institutions that bring credibility and normalcy to their group - http://gccweb.org/about/relationships-partnerships/  Leith Anderson is the first individual that GCCweb notes to bring outside validation to GCC.  I don't know Dr. Anderson personally.  I don't know if he is friends with any of the ECC pastors that are being investigated or national GCC Board members.  Reading his biography he seems like an outstanding individual; however, I think his connection to GCC, or GCC's wish to be associated with him, does not allow Dr. Anderson to be an outside party that is not associated with GCC or its leadership.
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2356



« Reply #294 on: April 10, 2018, 10:40:53 am »

Leith has been gone from Wooddale since 2011 and is the president of the NAE.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 743



« Reply #295 on: April 10, 2018, 11:23:23 am »

How did Piper and Anderson become part of the discussion? Sorry, but I missed something somewhere.
Logged
Rebel in a Good Way
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454



« Reply #296 on: April 10, 2018, 11:35:35 am »

Huldah, in reference to this suggestion.


I think your concern about privacy is not wrong, however, let me pose a solution to you that I think addresses your concerns and perhaps would have gotten much better victim engagement (would you agree that is also a good/of concern?).  Pick a trusted third-party, e.g., (just as an example) Leith Anderson (Woodale) or John Piper (Bethlehem) or Bob Bakke (Hillside Church), ECC writes them a check to cover the cost of the investigation and that person is given full discretionary power to select and pay for the investigator (it could even have been Joan, the attorney ECC picked), to decide what is shared/not publicly, to decide what recommendations are made to the Board (who does have to make any final decisions about ECC staff) and decide if those recommendations are shared publicly in whole-or-in part.



« Last Edit: April 10, 2018, 11:37:07 am by Rebel in a Good Way » Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 743



« Reply #297 on: April 10, 2018, 11:37:12 am »

OK, thanks, Rebel!
Logged
DarthVader
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 202



« Reply #298 on: April 10, 2018, 11:53:28 am »

It was just an idea and I agree the names I threw out were just thought-starters.  It's not going to happen, just an example of how ECC could have handled this in a way that might have been better than the current approach.  On a related note, I have confirmed with Lynn Newman that Luis is incorrect.  No outside, non-Evergreen, non-GCM members have been added to the Board.
Logged
LuisCamachoIII
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 17



« Reply #299 on: April 10, 2018, 11:56:33 am »

On a related note, I have confirmed with Lynn Newman that Luis is incorrect.  No outside, non-Evergreen, non-GCM members have been added to the Board.

Ah. Good to know. Perhaps I misheard at the meeting or perhaps adding outside members was the plan back in March and the plan changed. I'll be asking one of my pastors about that.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


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