A good story on why we must act on good evidence in trying to expose a corrupt church or ministry system:

http://www.beliefnet.com/blogs/crunchycon/2006/08/real-ole-anthony.html

The real Ole Anthony?

PP said some interesting things on his blog today and I think they deserve some examination and comment.

First, I have in the past said a lot of things here that I deeply regret and have apologized profusely for.

Those things reflected a anger and a mission that broadbrushed the entire Calvary Chapel organiezation.

That was wrong and and sinful and I hope that I have made that very clear over the last year. 

I can tell you that I have made many friends in CC over the last year, men who befriended me despite the controversy that surrounds me.

While we disagree on some doctrinal issues, we agree on Jesus and I love these men in the Lord. 

While I still get angry at some situations, lets clarify the goal.

The goal is reform in Calvary Chapel, not it's destruction. 

First, I would like to say that I have been reading PP blogging since last year.  I have seen some pretty horrible things said.  Nevertheless, I am thankful that he has apologized. 

However, his credibility because of what he said is hurt.  It isn't unreparable and the improvement that I have seen in the blog (less gossip, hateful things said, etc) has largely gone away. 

I agree we need reform.  However, I think that reform needs to come from within Calvary Chapel.  The thing is, there really isn't much of a move to reform CC within the movement.  Therefore, the only way people who seek reform are talking are in PP site.  I think that is sad.  The Calvary Chapel Membership Group has not been exactly what I hoped, but it is still going and needs others to help it get going and to have a good focus.  What I mean by good focus is something that focuses on the root causes and seeks change in a loving manner.  Hostility is not going to work here people.  PP has been all about the hostility for the most part.  Has much changed?  None.  It has made people draw up their defenses, take sides, become hateful to other brothers and sisters, and treat others like they are non-believers.  Both sides have enough blame to go around on why this isn't being resolved in a better, biblical, and Godly manner. 

Who is best positioned to focus on helping reform CC?  Those people in it and those people who love CC before, now, and in the future and seek to be part of it.  However, we should be listening to those who have been hurt within the movement and those who are not part of CC, but are still family in Christ.  They can sometimes see things we who are in it cannot see. 

The question before the house has always been where to draw the line when "exposing" sin among leaders in the church.

What is "gossip", what is sinful speculation, and what is informing the people of God and searching for truth? 

These are difficult distinctions to draw, more so because I know that I am going to be held accountable to God for every word written.

There are those who believe that I should never call people by name, but should wait for God to expose and discipline errant pastors in His own time and way. 

I don't believe this is Biblical and we have quoted the verses many times that support our position.

God uses means to accomplish His purposes and we have become one of those means, however imperfectly or at times sinfully we have filled that role.

God didn't write in the skies over Albuquerque, "Skip railroaded Pete!".

You read it here and in the Journal and Christianity Today and on Bring Back Pete.

We will continue to shed light where there is darkness and deceit and where you have the right, the obligation to know and act on relevant information.

We will try to be more sensitive to the distinction between "gossip" and information.

Please understand that when I do "speculate" it is informed speculation based on primary research.

If CC wants us to cease this part of our work, all the have to do is give us truth and information on their own…

I think it is good that this is being addressed.  I understand that even reporters have their informants who go unnamed and editorials give comment to that information.  Nevertheless, we are not a Newspaper and as Christians we should strive for a higher standard of ethics and responsibility.  I appreciate PP striving for Truth.  In that process I hope that they will seek to quote sources.  I have yet to have many names of people who are concrete sources in all of this.  The best we have seen are those who have openly confronted Skip (Ackermen 6, etc) and the situation at CC Abq, but that has been nothing through PP or its sources and/or speculation.

p.s.  Can we really take people seriously in reforming CC when they are posting stuff like this on their blog?  It's like Luther trying to Reform the Catholic church by holding up the pictures of the Pope as Satan up.  Hmm, it isn't any wonder why people killed their brothers and sisters in the name of Christ.

pps.  CCMF has an interesting program on raising accountability issues within CC.

http://ccmembers.squarespace.com/six-months-intro/

I have not posted much on this site.  Which I apologize.  I have had a million things going on and unfortunately I have not been able to focus on the goings on with CC in general and CC Abq in particular. 

I heard about Skip's return to CC Abq, but I don't know the details.   I haven't heard the rumors (and I don't want to hear them) and I'm not exactly sure what all is going on.  I have kinda fell out of the loop.  Which is fine.  I have been busy with a new job, more involvement with other ministries, etc. 

Nevertheless, I do not want to leave this issue alone.  I think it is too important.  I think it is important for any ministry to be transparent and to be accountable to God, to the flock they minister to, and the church in general. 

I was reading through this website: www.ministrywatch.com  I think it has some interesting and important information.  In particular read this article: Guidelines to Transparency

Read the article and how would you rate your CC?  Should these be the things that a church should make available to those who ask it and to what degree?  I think it is a good guide and I think CC Abq has fallen short of it.  But how short?  And what is the evidence of it and how can it be improved?

Keep it in prayer and think about it.

p.s. I also want to add this interesting article to the mix that I think we need to read, think about, and pray about it.  These issues must be addressed and taken seriously.

Compensation for Christian Ministry Leaders.

It has been a long time since I last posted.  I have been pretty busy.  Lets Focus on the Good Things about CC:

Memorial Day service in Hagerman

HAGERMAN -- American Legion Lea Owsley Post and Auxiliary 31 will sponsor a Memorial Day service at 11 a.m. Monday at the Hagerman Cemetery.

The Rev. Dion Douville, pastor of Calvary Chapel, will be the speaker. A 21-gun salute, taps and music are included in the service.

Walkers focused on pro-life issues

I took umbrage at a statment made by PP 

Now I state:

and then this guy makes some straw man argument:

and here is my response below from the website:

No Puzzletop your deciphering of my "code" talk is wrong.  It is not code it is what it is. 

I never stated that Mike shut this blog down or not say anything at all.  I did not say it and I have never said it.  I have questioned the fruit of this blog and Mike has stated above that they are addressing that issue and I hope to see it better addressed.  I agree with his first point.  We should talk about it and the Body of Christ as a whole is more than welcome to talk about it.  As long as it is done in Biblical and logical manner.

You state I want to be in the dark and not know the "facts."  That is wrong wrong and um wrong.  I want facts, but the only way you can tell if something is a "fact" or  a lie is by EVIDENCE!!!!!!  

For example when apologists examine the claims made by Benny Hinn and uncover his corrupt actions they don't come out with statements made by "someone" or documents that no one can see.  They don't bash Benny Hinn with hyperbolic statements and thats how they show he is "wrong" and "corrupt."  NO!!!  You do so by the EVIDENCE.  And there is much of it and you can examine it and see if it corroborates the facts stated.

So Puzzletop are you ok with statements that could be lies, gossip, innuendo without evidence to show that those statements are "fact."  The PP's are more than welcome to qualify their statements.  I "think" this is what is going on or it is "possible" this or that is happening.  When you don't "qualify" a statement then it must be clear cut and the only way to show that is through evidence.  But to qualify a statement makes the statement "questionable" and it is only the current evidence that bears out its probability of being true.  I qualify a lot of my statements in my own blog. 

I want the truth as much as the next saint, but I am not willing to accept possible lies and gossip to confirm a deep suspicion and claim that as fact.  If these whistleblowers do not come out and make their statements in plain view (like Enron whistleblowers in court) how then can we examine their statements?  How can we accept their facts?

Just because we do not have the means does not mean that one can throw logic or Biblical principles out the door.  That is not how you make up the shortfall.  I can sympathize with the shortfall in lack of time, money, and etc to "truely" investigate this, but I have no sympathy for fallacious statements that boarder on sin and even cross that line at times.   
   

Finally, I agree with PP on this one:

For the most part I agree. (I wasn't able to get his whole statement in there).  We in CC should be questioning the set up of church government and ask questions.  More we should leadership to a high standard of accountability and transparency.  We should be acting on Christian Conviction and not only when it benefits us or our church.