Who's really the sociopath here?

An article by reporter Jeff Brumley appeared on the front page of the Florida Times-Union this morning, April 9, 2009. It can be read in it's entirety here. Several pages of reader comments follow. I have reprinted the article here in black with my comments interspersed in blue.

Unmasked blogger blames First Baptist, Sheriff's Office

A subpoena is used to obtain critic's identity from Google

By JEFF BRUMLEY

jeff.brumley@jacksonville.com

(904) 359-4310


A blogger critical of First Baptist Church Pastor Mac Brunson wants to know why his Web site was investigated by a police detective who is also a member of the minister's security detail.

* Can you say "conflict of interest"?

Thomas A. Rich also wants the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office to explain what suspected crimes led Detective Robert Hinson to open the probe into his once-anonymous Web site.

* I would like to know that, too, since the URL for this blog was on one of those subpoenas!

Rich also wants to know why Hinson revealed his name to the church despite finding no wrongdoing. Hinson obtained a subpoena from the State Attorney's Office requiring Google Inc. to reveal the author of the blog.

* Actually, it resulted in Google providing an IP address and the e-mail address the blog was registered under. Then Comcast was subpoenaed to find out the identity of the Watchdog. I'm pretty sure the same information was obtained for this blog and Tiffany Croft's blog. Whether our respective ISPs were subpoenaed is unknown.

Rich's unmasking led to an eventual trespass warning banning the longtime member and his wife from First Baptist, despite the fact that Brunson and a top church administrator conceded the blog never threatened violence.

* So why the trespass orders??? Could it be to intimidate the Watchdog?

Rich said he mailed a complaint against Hinson to the Sheriff's Office on Tuesday. It had not been received as of Wednesday afternoon.

* It will be interesting to see their response, if any.

The intelligence detective opened the criminal investigation Sept. 29 into the identity and "possible criminal overtones" of the blog, fbcjaxwatchdog.blogspot.com.

* And approximately 18 days after subpoenaing Google for FBC Jax Watchdog's records, they subpoenaed Google for records for Tiffany Croft (who has always blogged using her real name), the NBBCOF, and an e-mail address for SLyons45. The latter two were on the same subpoena which indicates to me for some reason there might have been some connection between the two in their minds.

My only connection to Watchdog is that he contacted me when he started his blog in 2007, and we've corresponded since. I have stored some of his documents on my server. Bellevue Baptist is similar to FBC Jax in that both had new pastors come in and basically immediately begin to hijack the churches. It's not about music or the color of the carpet as many would have you think. It's about openness, transparency, truthfulness, and integrity, all characteristics that seem to be sorely lacking in both Mac Brunson and Steve Gaines.

The Sheriff's Office and church officials defended the complaint and investigation into Rich's blog, which Hinson concluded Nov. 13.

* How can you defend the indefensible? Can you say "corruption"?

Undersheriff Frank Mackesy said Hinson's role posed no conflict of interest because his duties include handling possible threats against the city's large religious institutions.

* Can you say "crock"?

Rich said he was never contacted by Hinson. He learned of the investigation well after the church notified him Nov. 28 he had been identified as the blog's author.

* I learned that Google was subpoenaed for my information (namely the "owner" of the NBBCOF blog) when Watchdog contacted me on March 25th.

Two additional bloggers investigated by Hinson said they were also not contacted. They learned of the probe in middle or late March. Their blogs do not focus on First Baptist.

* No, I was never contacted, nor did this blog ever focus on FBC Jax. There have been two articles (until now) out of the 165+ articles published in the last 2 1/2 years that had anything to do with FBC Jax, and those simply rehashed things from the FBC Jax Watchdog blog.

Mackesy said the three bloggers didn't need to be contacted because Hinson uncovered nothing criminal. "The detective hasn't done anything wrong," he said.

* I was never contacted by JSO. However, I would just like to know what "crime" I was accused of for them to have reason to subpoena my personal information in the first place. I have never set foot inside the state of Florida, much less inside FBC Jax, the address given on the complaint as the location of said "suspected criminal activity."

It was also proper for Hinson to provide First Baptist's leadership with Rich's identity despite finding no criminal evidence, Mackesy said, so it could take whatever internal action it felt necessary for its own safety.

"I'd be disappointed in the detective if [he] didn't do it," he said.

* Okay, so let me get this straight. The JSO finds NO evidence of any criminal activity, but yet they thought it was appropriate to reveal Watchdog's personal information to FBC Jax's "leadership" so they could take whatever action necessary for their "safety." What "internal action" did they think was deemed necessary at that point? Trespass orders against the man and his wife? Why not go all the way and issue three little trespass orders against their children? Why did the announcement and reading of the infamous "whereas" resolution which FBC Jax proudly displays on their website (or here should it mysteriously disappear) never mention Thomas Rich's name? Were they concerned they might have targeted the wrong person? Did they have enough brain cells still working to realize that Thomas Rich could sue the pants off them?

The Rev. John Blount, executive pastor of administration, said he contacted Hinson directly regarding increased "vitriol" on the blog about the same time mail was stolen from the Brunson home and someone was surreptitiously photographing Brunson's wife. Also, someone had contacted vendors lined up for the church's annual pastors' conference and made critical remarks about Brunson to them, Blount said.

* Last I heard, "vitriol" (an exaggeration at best) on a blog isn't "criminal." As for mail being stolen "from the Brunson home," a Google maps search of the Brunsons' address shows there are no curbside mailboxes. Rather, there is a cluster of mailboxes at the end of the street which I would guess probably includes the Brunsons' mailbox. It's impossible to tell from the low-resolution street view photo, but often in communities with these types of mailboxes, they will be numbered say, 1 through 40 rather than with the owners' names or addresses. It would be interesting to know if that's the case in the Brunsons' neighborhood. If it is, how would anyone but the USPS and perhaps some of their neighbors know which box is theirs?

"We became concerned enough to ask law enforcement, 'Is there the ability to find out where this is coming from?'" Blount said. Police reports were not filed about the mail and photos, Blount said. The Sept. 29 police report launching the investigation quotes Blount telling police only about "an ongoing Internet incident that has possible criminal overtones."

* As I have stated, I've never set foot in the state of Florida, much less Jacksonville. How (or much more importantly, why) would I ever be suspected of any of these activities? What "internet incident" involving me (or Watchdog or Tiffany Croft) has "possible criminal overtones"?

At no time was the blogger accused of being behind the other incidents, Blount said.

* Oh, really? According to Watchdog's multiple sources, at the February 23rd deacons' meeting John Blount told the deacons that Thomas Rich was the person suspected of stealing the Brunsons' mail and stalking Deb Brunson.

Rich said he never stole mail, photographed Brunson's wife or contacted vendors. Rich said he wonders if those issues were raised simply to obtain a subpoena to uncover the identity of a blogger critical of Brunson.

* Ya think? I believe Mr. Rich when he says he did not contact any of the vendors. But I learned just this morning that at least one person did. Someone I know personally states that s/he sent e-mail messages to at least some of the sponsors and featured exhibitors listed on the Pastors' Conference website. This person merely suggested they go to the FBC Jax Watchdog site, read it for themselves, and make up their own minds. I can't think this person was the only one who did so. According to my source, four sponsors/exhibitors did drop out, including the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. Whether this particular person's message had anything to do with their decisions is unknown, but if four silver, gold, or platinum sponsors dropped out, that represented a nice chunk of change.

That was not the case, Blount said. In an age of church shootings and other violence, he said, they simply wanted to determine if any of the events were related.

* I thought Mr. Blount just said "at no time was the blogger accused of being behind the other incidents."

Then why did they target him, his wife, Tiffany Croft, and me?

Brunson said police have interviewed him about the photos and stolen mail. He refused to elaborate.

* I bet. No doubt "police" = Robert Hinson. Why, if any man who's worth his salt even suspected someone was stalking his wife, would he not file a police report? If someone is stealing your mail, get a mailbox with a lock on it. And as someone in the comment stream observed, stealing mail is a federal offense, not something the local police would investigate. The USPS has its own investigators for that sort of thing.

Rich said he launched his blog in August 2007 — more than a year after Brunson became the pastor — because he was alarmed by what he described as Brunson's "abusive preaching," especially during fund-raising campaigns.

* Funny how "beauty shop gossip" could be deemed important enough to need to "shut 'em down." Could it be that the reason giving is down is because of the economy and people leaving the church because of Mac? Nahhh... it couldn't be!

The blog has included criticisms of Brunson's $300,000 salary, his plan to open a church school, his construction of a "lavish" office suite, accepting a $307,000 land gift from church members for his home and putting his wife on the payroll.

* He put his 22-year-old son on the payroll, too. I don't think he even has a title, nor is anyone really sure what his job entails.

Brunson declined to discuss his home and salary but maintained he is one of the lowest-paid mega-church pastors in the Southern Baptist Convention. He said people are welcome to criticize his preaching style and ministry goals, including the school, but usually do so openly, not anonymously.

* I suppose that depends on how one defines "mega-church," but I doubt Mac has any idea how his salary compares to those of other "mega-church" pastors. After all, this information is a highly guarded secret in most of these organizations, known only to a handful of rich, powerful men. Do these guys sit around at their conferences and the convention or when they preach at each others' churches (for big $$$ while being paid by their own churches -- i.e. double dipping) and compare their salaries and perks?

In a December 7, 2008 interview Brunson claims "he doesn't make anywhere near the $300,000 annual salary the blogger claims." The key word there is "salary." Does anyone believe that with his salary plus his housing (tax exempt, BTW) and car and other "allowances" and perks that Mac Brunson makes nowhere near $300,000? Of course, as Watchdog observed, maybe his salary isn't "anywhere near $300,000." Remember "nowhere near" could cover amounts much greater than $300,000 as well. Kind of like Bill Clinton arguing what the meaning of the word "is" is. Factor in Honey's salary (what does she do again?), and then Trey's, plus book sales and speaking fees, and I would conservatively guess the Brunson Gang is making close to seven figures in salaries, allowances, and perks.

Rich's letter from the church cited his anonymity and sharp criticism as "a violation of Scripture" and church bylaws. He said the trespass warning came after he refused to appear before a discipline committee without a representative.

* Errr... so anonymity and criticism are "a violation of Scripture"? Can anyone point me to that particular passage of Scripture?

But Brunson said Rich's persistent criticism over nearly two years indicates the writer has an "obsessive compulsive problem" and is "not very stable at all," Brunson said.

"What you're dealing with is a sociopath," Brunson said.

* I think this statement speaks much more about Brunson's own mental state than that of the Watchdog.

"The imbalance is him refusing to address the concerns of his congregation," Rich said of Brunson's comments. Rich said his blog gets about 1,000 hits a day and that he regularly hears from people who agree with his criticisms but are afraid to come forward.

* I've heard the same from Bellevue members (mostly former members). It's all about money and power, and if they even perceive a threat to either, they will try to destroy you.

"He's been trying to convince his administration that I am some kind of a nut," he said. "I am not a nut... and the things I have raised on the blog are valid concerns."

* Seriously, they are valid concerns, and if Mac Brunson had been halfway open and honest in the beginning, there would have been no blog, and Mac wouldn't have made an idiot out of himself on the front page of the Florida Times-Union today.

Blount said he had no idea why Hinson looked into two other blogs, tiffanycroft.blogspot.com and newbbcopenforum.blogspot.com.

* Was Hinson acting on his own, or was someone pulling his strings? Ask yourself, who at FBC Jax would most like to see Tiffany Croft's blog and the NBBCOF shut down? It makes no sense unless someone was simply on a phishing expedition to reveal the identity of Watchdog and me. As for Tiffany Croft, what possible motive could there be except to intimidate her? She's always blogged using her real name! While she doesn't seem to have been particularly critical of Brunson, she has been critical of FBC Jax and Jerry Vines for allowing Darrell Gilyard to preach at FBC Jax and for Vines preaching at Gilyard's church after Gilyard's long, sordid past became public knowledge. She has also been critical of Paige Patterson for covering for Gilyard, and we know Brunson and Patterson are buddies. Mac Brunson reportedly approached Ms. Croft's father, who is a member of FBC Jax, and pressured him to get her to take down her blog. It's my understanding Brunson now contends he's "not familiar" with Ms. Croft's blog.

Mackesy would say only that Hinson was obligated to look at those blogs if he felt it could help the initial investigation.

* Which brings us back to the question of why Tiffany or I would be included in the investigation at all.

Jacksonville resident Tiffany Croft said the aim of her blog is to be an online source of information about the accusations against the Rev. Darrell Gilyard, the former Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church pastor accused of sexual misconduct. Gilyard regularly preached at First Baptist in the early 1990s.

* Which is likely why she was targeted. Criticism of Jerry Vines and FBC Jax. Brunson and Vines were witnessed high-fiving each other over the "evils" of anonymous e-mails. No doubt neither of them wanted any attention over their direct or indirect association with Darrell Gilyard.

Croft said she also plans to file a complaint against Hinson demanding to know why her blog — which has never been anonymous — was the target of a subpoena to Google.

The Times-Union doesn't know the identity of the third blogger, critical of Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis.

* I'm not convinced FBC Jax does either.

The subpoena requests that Hinson submitted to the State Attorney's Office may have listed the criminal activity the detective wanted to investigate, but those documents were destroyed after 90 days, according to the policy at the time, said Assistant State Attorney Stephen Siegel, who signed the subpoena. The actual subpoenas do not cite a reason for the request.

Rich said he will hire an attorney if necessary to get more information from the church and Sheriff's Office and to clear his name.

* Those fellas at FBC Jax may have opened a big can of worms with this one. "It's hardball," Rich said of the church's tactics in uncovering his identity. "It's hardball religion, is what it is."

* That's exactly what it is. Mac & Co. have stepped in it big time. As Rush Limbaugh says, "You put a bag of excrement in front of Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid, and they're gonna step in it." Seems like there are some guys in Jacksonville who need to be checking the bottoms of their shoes right now, too.

I've said all along that Bellevue is about a year ahead of FBC Jax in this whole process. Our "grievances" were similar in the beginning. I can't speak for Watchdog's motives, but the NBBCOF was started simply to give people a place to discuss the issues. I think we've both long since realized that nothing we say is going to change the outcome, but we may open a few eyes along the way. The best I think we can both hope for at this point is simply to keep shining the light on these charlatans and at least keep them a little more accountable. I believe interest in the Watchdog's blog would have faded, just as it has begun to fade in the NBBCOF if Mac and John Blount hadn't opened this can of worms by involving the JSO. That was really a stupid move IMO.

Watchdog asked me a long time ago if I had space to store a few audio files for him. Since I had plenty of space, I agreed to upload whatever he needed. Other than the similarity of our respective experiences, I really have no interest in FBC Jax or Mac Brunson, but I have watched with interest and in full support the efforts of the Watchdog.

The only reason I can think of that anyone at FBC Jax would go after my personal information is that the name of the site where I store files is newbbc.accura.net. Most of the files on that site are public. Therefore, from the names alone, one could reach the logical conclusion that the NBBCOF blog and the newbbc.accura.net site are somehow related. I'm thinking when they noticed some of Watchdog's files were stored on my server, perhaps they thought we were connected, perhaps even that the same person hosted both blogs.

If you look at the subpoenas, they first went after Watchdog's information. Then about 18 days later they went after SLyons45, the NBBCOF, and Tiffany Croft's information. The SLyons45 address was apparently the one Watchdog used to register his blog. What also makes me think they somehow connected us was that the SLyons45 address and the NBBCOF appear on the same subpoena. The request for Tiffany Croft's information was on a separate subpoena.

There's another less likely reason I thought of for them going after my information. I don't know how close Steve Gaines and Mac Brunson are. I do know that two years ago Steve was slated to speak at the 2007 Pastors' Conference. This was right after the Paul Williams story came out. (For our new readers, PW was the staff minister at Bellevue who confessed to Steve Gaines that he'd molested his own son 17 years earlier, and Steve kept it a secret for six months until the truth leaked out. Steve said it was "under the blood" and that he didn't see any reason to report it to the authorities or to remove PW from the staff. You can read about it in the December 2006 and January 2007 archives on this blog.) Just before the conference, Steve Gaines' name was removed from the program. I never knew if he voluntarily withdrew (not Steve's style really) or if he was "asked" to withdraw. I always figured the latter since there was some objection by the people in Jacksonville (and Memphis) to having someone who'd just harbored a confessed pedophile for six months speak at their conference, but I don't know.

Therefore, I don't know if Steve and Mac are on good terms or not, but they both often complain that they're "victims" of "lies, slander, and gossip." All people are asking for is some measure of accountability and integrity, and all they're met with is brick walls and silence. Or in the case of Steve and Mac, sheep-beating sermons (especially when funds are needed) and tactics (at least in Mac's case) to "shut 'em down" at all costs. If Steve and Mac are on the same page, perhaps Mac was getting the information for Steve. (Steve's "go to" guy who does a lot of his dirty work is Administrative Pastor, David Coombs.) I would think, however, if Steve had wanted to find out who I am he could have done so a long time ago. I don't for one second think this blog is that big a "threat" to him.

It will be very interesting to see where all this goes from here.

First Coast News Coverage with video.

FOX 30 Coverage with video.

Church's use of power is troubling

If we truly love them, they will come?

RECENT ANNOUNCEMENT FROM the VUE's website...

THURSDAY!!!

MAKING AN IMPACT ON YOUR CAMPUS - meet at the VUE at 1:15 or at the BCM at 1:30.

Sometimes its (sic) easier to share what we believe with people in other cities and other countries, however God put you exactly where you are to share with those people around you. If we truly love people, God will change their hearts. We will meet up with students at the BCM and together go out onto campus and share with students. Let God change your life & increase your faith by joining with us!


Is this what they're teaching the youth at Bellevue now?

Out of the mouths of babes...

Someone sent me the following last night -- a recent post from "Solomon's" blog. You may recall "Solomon" was a frequent commenter on this blog until about a year ago when he began painting all who disagreed with him as racists (huh?) and accused me and others of lying and wishing him harm, even going so far as to say he wondered if some of us wouldn't like to see him and his family "hit by a bus." No one to my knowledge has ever wished any harm to "Sol" or his family, much less said anything remotely resembling that. I've honestly not paid any attention to anything he has written since then, but I have to admit this made me sit up and take notice.

Daddy, I want to hear about Jesus...

That link no longer works since the article has been deleted, but this was the full text:

That's what one of my daughters said to me after church. "Daddy, can we go to another church next week? I'm tired of hearing about money. I want to hear about Jesus."

Frankly, I've been wondering the same thing. I remember when Steve Gaines first came to Bellevue, he said that every January would be "stewardship month". I took that to mean that at the first of every year the sermons would be about faithfulness with one's time, talents, and giftedness. And yet here we are halfway through March, and all of the sermons have been about money, and how real Christians give at least 10% of their earnings to the church.

A lot of sermons (not just by Steve) have rubbed me the wrong way, but last Sunday's was the first time in my life I felt like getting up and walking out on one. The "lesson" began with images of Bernie Madoff on the imag screen, and a quick summary of his corruptions. A direct correlation was drawn between this corrupt financier and Christians who do not recognize tithing as a mandate for Christians (apparently, even those who give more than 10%). As I was wondering if the pastor truly meant that Christians who don't tithe deserved to spend their lives in jail, Steve quickly added that it was illegal to drive a stolen car, and many of the cars on the Bellevue lot were stolen since they had been bought with money that was stolen from God if their owners did not tithe.

My own views of tithing notwithstanding, is this really a proper way to treat the members of Bellevue? We've put up with an awful lot of unnecessary adversity over the last few years, so don't we deserve something better than to be equated with Bernie Madoff? Isn't the "per capita" giving higher than it's ever been? Aren't we supporting the ministries of the church like never before? Why in the world should we be subjected to a beatdown like that?

"No," I told my little girl. "Just because the pastor is in a slump we aren't going to abandon Bellevue. The church is bigger than one man, even the pastor. Even if he abandons the Bible from now on and lectures and derides us about giving money to Bellevue each and every week of the year instead of preaching the gospel, unless the Lord leads us elsewhere we will still attend this church. Sunday mornings aren't about us, and if it is our lot to share God's word with those who are also discouraged by hearing week after week about money instead of Jesus, then we should accept this role joyfully."

My little girl agreed with me. I wish I was as sure of my words as she was.

Well, I was with him... until the last paragraph. Here his child is crying out to go to a church where she can hear about Jesus, and daddy says, "No, dear. The pastor is just in a slump, and we are going to stay -- even if he abandons the Bible from now on and lectures and derides us about giving money to Bellevue each and every week of the year instead of preaching the gospel." Good grief, man! What's the matter with you? It seems as if you're so loyal to "Bellevue" (whatever that means in your mind) that you are letting your children suffer. You're letting loyalty to a man and an institution trump your command as the spiritual leader of your family to make sure your children are taught Scripture (which I've no doubt they are at home), not to force them to listen to their parents berated and belittled and beat over the head week after week with demands to "give."

You said you weren't as sure of your words to your daughter as she was. Good! You shouldn't be sure of your words in this case because you're misguided, and I sincerely hope this means you're being convicted. Your "role" when you experience this type of spiritual abuse in the church is not to "joyfully accept it." Your role is to warn others and get yourself and your family the heck out of there! I realize change is difficult, but believe me, there is life outside of and after Bellevue.

"Solomon" also wrote an interesting article about the now-defunct i2Memphis. (He has now deleted it. See here.)

He wrote, "My perspective [about i2Memphis] abruptly changed when my oldest daughter, recently turned 13, asked if she could go one night. I told her absolutely not, and asked why in the world she'd ever want to go to a meeting with college students and single adults. Her response was that lots of middle and high school students were going.

Errr... so you already knew about the drinking and sex in the restrooms, but it took your 13-year-old daughter asking to go to jolt you into reality?

He continues, "I was shocked, stunned, and I was scared to death. I couldn't believe that the church would actually allow children into an emotionally charged environment where they were possibly exposed to drinking and maybe even sex."

Why would a church create such an "emotionally charged" environment at all?

Then he asks, "Why on earth was this monster ever dreamed up in the first place?"

Good question. Why, indeed. An even better question might be, "Why would you allow your family to remain in an environment where such things would be allowed to happen in the first place?" Obviously the people who dream up these ridiculous programs are not the types of "spiritual leaders" I would want leading me or my children. Why would you stay in a church that could create that kind of environment and subject your children to it? After all, this isn't the only church event we've heard about where drinking was involved.

Not to dwell on "Solomon," but I can't help but be reminded of this exchange from a couple of years ago.

In a comment on this blog he wrote in response to seeing David Brown on the news discussing, not Bellevue, but the issue of the SBC's refusal to keep a database of convicted and credibly accused sexual predator "ministers."

Quotes from the above comment:

"For the record, I do not want Gaines to be pastor and I am not defending him. Frankly, as a father, such a crime [speaking of Paul Williams] is unimaginable and makes me sick to my stomach. Even though the minister came to him [Gaines] with his wife (the victim's own mother) and gave every appearance of peaceful resolution, it's beyond me how SG could even work alongside someone who'd do something like that, much less keep him on staff."

....

"I was at a circuit city, and the story came on the news about your [David Brown's] 'attack' on the SBC. My wife and daughter started crying to see our church on TV like that. My 10 year old asked if we'd have any more picnics there. My 9 year old asked who that awful man was who was mad at us (it was you). Is that what you want?"

I think people should have been a lot more concerned about Steve Gaines letting a confessed child molester/known sexual predator roam the halls of BBC for six months than the fact that David Brown was shedding light on the issue of sexual predators in the SBC and the leaders of the SBC (Steve Gaines included) turning a blind eye to it or having picnics at the church.

It's been interesting to me over the past three years what has been different people's "last straw." For some it was the way the pulpit committee "chose" Steve Gaines and basically shoved him down people's throats with no "trial period" or ever bringing in any other candidate. For some it was the reports of the new pastor's excessive salary and benefits. For some it was the fence-climbing "incident," the "information meeting" and SG's description of the "itty bitty fence," belittling his congregation at another church, the "communication committee" meetings, covering for Paul Williams for six months, SG's treatment of the victim, the 2007 "monkey business" meeting, the sheep-beating sermons, witnessing their 15-year-old daughter dragged out of a service, handcuffed, and cussed at by a church security guard, or yes, even the change in the music for some. It seems nearly everyone who left had a breaking point. A more recent group exited when they changed the church's mission statement. Amazing to me after everything else that would be the last straw for anyone, but to each his own.

"Solomon" seems like an intelligent man who cares deeply about his family and his church. I'm not trying to beat up on "Sol." He just made me think. The question I would pose to all of us is which is the most important? Hanging on to tradition and remaining "true" to an institution that will never be the same or getting off your blessed assurance and moving to a place where you and your family will be fed? If you can stay where you are and accomplish both, you are probably already in the right place. If not, it may be time to seek the Holy Spirit's guidance. Who knows? His guidance just may come through the voice of a little girl.

Become a megachurch pastor... see the world!

When someone asked Steve Gaines why he doesn't preach on Wednesday nights this was his response. I suppose his reasons fly out the door when he's busy preaching at other churches.

This was the answer the "Communication Committee" gave:

Why doesn't Dr. Gaines preach on Wednesday nights?

"Because our congregation is quite large, Dr. Gaines has chosen Wednesday nights to attend committee meetings, meet various church groups, and attend a variety of church events in order to meet as many people as possible. Dr. Gaines also encourages us to hold all committee meetings on Wednesdays and Sundays to allow members to spend more time during the week with their families. Does Dr. Gaines preach any other time besides Sunday? Yes. Currently, he preaches to men at Morning Manna, Thursdays at 6:30 a.m., and to 18-29-year-olds at i2 Memphis, Thursdays at 7:00 p.m."

Morning Manna meets maybe 4 months out of the year -- one morning a week. I2Memphis is defunct.

I remember the excuse reason given 2 1/2 years ago was that those speaking engagements were already scheduled before he came to Bellevue. Fair enough. (So I guess it was okay with the people of Gardendale that they were being taken advantage of, too.) Now here we are 2 1/2 years later. Are you telling me all these speaking engagements for 2009 were scheduled that long ago?

Speaking of "meeting as many people as possible," do they even have visitation at Bellevue? It's a serious question. After all the times I visited Bellevue and filled out visitor's cards, not once was I ever contacted by the church in any way. Not before joining and not after, not by a Sunday School teacher or deacon, not by phone call, letter, or e-mail. (Which I'm sure begs the question, "Why did you join?" Let's just say it wasn't because of the friendliness of the people. But this isn't about me.)

Oh, did everyone receive their automated phone message from "Brother Steve" last night reminding everyone to set their clocks forward? I listened to the whole thing and about dropped the phone laughing when Steve said, "Donna and I love you very much." I've spoken with Steve Gaines face to face. As someone else said about his experience, the whole time it's as if he's looking over your head to see if someone more important is waiting. That was certainly the impression I got, too, but I digress.

Now you can add a Wednesday night this month to the list. Steve Gaines will be preaching at Valley View Church in Louisville, KY, a church with the reputation of being one of the most seeker-sensitive PD churches in the area.

He didn't preach at Bellevue this morning. The pulpit was filled by Russell Moore of SBTS, and there's another speaker tonight. So once again, Steve's being paid to be... where? Preaching at another church while your church pays another preacher to preach at yours? Can you say "double dipping"?

On another cruise? This was a recent cruise on which Steve Gaines was a speaker.

On another tour? Here is but one example.

Or is he on another "mission trip"? A few weeks ago the whole Gaines family was touring the Holy Land. Before that the oldest Gaines daughter and husband Ryan Wingo were in Morocco. Are you telling me Bellevue pays a music assistant who's barely out of college enough to afford a trip like that? There was the much-publicized India trip in 2007, the one the Commercial Appeal covered with an 8-page spread complete with photos of the Bellevue women yucking it up in their Indian finery. Someone commented to me recently that if one is not wealthy but desires to travel, one should become a Baptist minister, marry a Baptist minister, be born to a Baptist minister, or be friends with a Baptist minister so they can travel the world.

Recently the Gaines family traveled to Honduras, reportedly just so that Steve could preside at the ordination ceremony of a pastor there. Did the church pay his way for this trip? Did they pay his family's way?

Have you ever noticed how these Baptist men and women are always beautiful, well-groomed, and clean, often dressed in native costumes, in the photos of them on their "mission trips"? Then ask yourself, was Lottie Moon or Mother Teresa clean and pretty in her photos? Was anyone even there to take photos? Or did these women stop long enough to be photographed? Most Baptists don't know what the heck a "mission trip" is. They often stay in 4-star hotels at night or at least "in high style" compared to the people they're "ministering" to. They eat food specially prepared for them. Why should churches foot the bill for preachers and their families and friends to see the world just because they call it a "mission trip"? What is wrong with this picture?

There are plenty of faithful, loving pastors who do not fleece their congregations. They are right there in the trenches, preaching, visiting, caring for their people week in and week out. I salute them. Then there are the others, the ones who seem to view the pastorate as little more than a chance to enrich themselves (speaking at each others' churches and at the seminaries for thousands of $$$, book deals, selling sermons, making thousands in profits from tours, etc.) and to benefit their families and friends. It's not a pretty sight.

This is the "Biblical Pattern" for Church Discipline?

Many of you have probably been following the events at FBC Jacksonville (FL) the past few months. While neither time nor space permits me to repeat the whole sordid story here, it's well-documented elsewhere.

Donald "Mac" Brunson has been their pastor for about three years, coming there from FBC Dallas where he'd just lead that church into an aggressive building program soon after which he went to Jax and left FBC Dallas millions of dollars in debt.

By most accounts, Dr. Brunson was welcomed with open arms at FBC Jax, but it didn't take long for the red flags to start flying. Here is a list of church members' concerns.

FBC Jax members, after being met by brick walls when they tried to approach the pastor with their questions (sound familiar?), started a blog to communicate their concerns. This is the second or third incarnation of their blog but by far the most long-lived and most read. Longtime members have been told, "If you don't like it, leave." (Hmmm... where have I heard that before?)

Mac Brunson has delivered a number of "sheep-beating" sermons that have rivaled some of Steve Gaines' beauties. In an audio interview last year he referred to bloggers as nothing more than "women gossiping in a beauty shop." (Note how these guys seem to think the ultimate insult they can hurl at someone is to compare him to a woman. Have you ever heard them compare people to "men gossiping in a barber shop"?) On the other hand, Mac has stated on other occasions that he doesn't read the blogs.

Apparently the FBC Jax Watchdog blog is being read by a lot of people and not just people from Jacksonville. It's attracting readers nationwide (and a few international). Attendance and giving are down at FBC Jax, much like at Bellevue. People are seeing the abuses of Mac Brunson, and many have left. Whether the blog has played much of a role in that is unknown, but Mac's not happy.

So... in an effort to intimidate the bloggers and other members, the leadership of the church somehow came to the dubious conclusion that a specific man owned and operated the blog, and they set their sights on him. According to an anonymous comment he posted on the Watchdog's blog, two men showed up at his door the day before Thanksgiving and presented him with a letter which listed his "transgressions" along with trespass warnings against the man and his wife. Her "transgression"? Apparently she committed the sin of "associating with" the accused blogger.

All the details can be read on the FBC Jax Watchdog blog in a series of articles beginning in early December 2008. The church's bylaws were covertly changed a year earlier to concentrate power in the hands of the pastor and trustees. A "discipline committee" appointed and controlled by the pastor was included.

The targeted man and his wife have since moved on to another church and want nothing more to do with FBC Jax, but did that stop Mac and his minions? After all, their stated purpose was to meet with the man and his wife for "reconciliation and restoration." If the couple has left the church, what's there to reconcile or restore?

Fast forward to Wednesday night, February 25th. FBC Jax was called into a business meeting, and a resolution was read to the few hundred people present. There was no discussion, and an immediate vote was called. Well, it wasn't really a vote per se as in "all in favor stand, now those opposed stand," but rather the moderator stated, "Ladies and gentlemen, you've heard the motion. Is there a second? {someone seconded the motion} I would appreciate it if you would approve this motion by standing. {pauses while most of congregation stands} Thank you very much. The motion carries. That will conclude our business meeting." Hello?!

Watch the video here.

There were clearly some people who remained seated. If they'd had a secret ballot I'm sure many more would have voted their consciences rather than going along with the crowd. You can bet the names of those courageous members who did remain seated were duly noted, and their invitations to meet with the "discipline committee" will likely be delivered to their doorsteps soon.

This whole fiasco raises a number of questions in my mind. I don't know Mr. Soud, chairman of the FBC Jax trustees, from Adam. Never heard of him until the recent chatter on the Watchdog's blog. He may very well be "well-respected" in the Jacksonville community, but I've come to realize that "well-respected" is often just a code word for "rich" -- regardless of how someone arrived. There are lots of "well-respected men in the community" at Bellevue who've exhibited similar behavior and worse. Bellevue was just a year or so ahead of Jacksonville in this process so we got to see it sooner. He did not appear to be comfortable up there and didn't impress me at all. It's been my observation that when these guys are, shall we say, "embellishing" something that they "uh" and "um" and "ah" and trip all over their tongues. You heard that with Mr. Soud in the video above. We've seen it with Steve Gaines and Paige Patterson. These guys are veteran public speakers, and when they're comfortable and being truthful they're smooth as silk, but when they're not they fall apart.

I know nothing of Mr. Soud's reputation as a judge, but if he will go along with this charade, if he will stand in the pulpit of a church and lie through his teeth, it makes me think there is more than meets the eye and that perhaps he could have sometimes been "influenced" in his role as a judge, too. Of course, that's just my impression.

The deacon chairman looked like a sad, beaten-down man who would rather not have been there, but by golly he's going to go along to keep his position and the "prestige" it carries with it. His humble demeanor while carrying out the "vote" only made him appear gutless. "I would appreciate it if you would approve this motion by standing. {pauses while most of congregation stands} Thank you very much. The motion carries." LOL! Hey, that's how they vote at Bellevue, too! No secret ballots, no call for "Nays," just "All in favor please stand. Thank you. The motion carries." Robert must be spinning in his grave. They know most of the sheeple aren't going to rock the boat though, and by having a standing vote, peer pressure alone and the desire not to stand out will bring people to their feet for anything. Every time they successfully ram through something like this they only become more emboldened.

What I cannot get over is Jim Whitmire's going along with all this. (You can see him clearly standing in the photo of the vote above. Dressed in brown, he's standing on the right side of the platform. That means he was voting for the resolution.) His story about the shepherd leaving the "ninety and nine" sheep and going after the one who was lost was quite ironic given the fact FBC Jax's shepherd and his shepherd boys had just figuratively shoved one of their sheep off the cliff. How can Jim stand at Mac Brunson's side, even call him the finest preacher he's ever heard (for a man who sat under Adrian Rogers for over 30 years, that's laughable), and go along with all this? Zipping up the bubble and insulating yourself doesn't cut it because by your silence and your remaining there and standing at Mac's side, you ARE tacitly going along with all of it. You would think after his deplorable treatment at the hands of Steve Gaines and Bellevue that Jim Whitmire, of all people, would see Mac Brunson for the abusive charlatan he is. Is an attractive salary and a bayfront condo really worth it?

Speaking of Mac, I noticed he was conspicuously absent from the meeting where the resolution was read. So typical. He lets other people do his dirty work.

Regardless of the fact that business meeting was a total sham, one thing I noticed was FBC Jax apparently still has monthly business meetings. Bellevue's bylaws (written in 1929, they're one page long and have never been changed) also call for monthly business meetings, but hey, bylaws schmylaws, we don't care! All they have now is an annual business meeting on a Sunday morning evening at the conclusion of a very long worship service. Last year over half the people walked out before it started. In 2007 they killed the mics and shut down the meeting when people were still lined up to speak. Last year only two people had the courage to ask questions, and both were quickly dismissed.

Something else that jumped out at me was that the trustees approved this thing on February 18th. According to the e-mails Watchdog posted on Monday, the accused man was still corresponding with John Blount (one of the FBC Jax staff ministers) two days after February 18th, trying to work out arrangements so he could speak to the deacons at their meeting on the 23rd and defend himself against what he claimed were false and baseless allegations. So it's obvious to me they'd already made up their minds and had no intention of meeting with him or letting him defend himself. This thing had been written, signed, sealed, and in the bag and was ready to be delivered to the deacons while Blount was still telling the man he could address the deacon body.

Oops! Busted!!! What a sham! These guys are like criminals. Sometimes they can be quite clever, but they're never very bright.

Also, why did they not mention the accused man's name? Fear of getting their collective pants sued off because they targeted the wrong person? If this weren't so pathetic it would almost be comical.

February 25, 2009 brought an absolutely disgusting display of deplorable (but not surprising) behavior by men who've lost their consciences. For anyone who attended Bellevue's 2007 "business meeting" this was déjà vu all over again. While I was watching it my first thought was I wouldn't want to be standing anywhere near Mr. Soud because there just might be a lightning bolt with his name on it. From the way his eyes were darting around while he was reading, I wondered if that thought hadn't crossed his mind as well.

Is this what is meant by the "biblical pattern of church discipline"? It's a pattern of something all right, but "biblical" it ain't!

Belt-tightening should start at the top!

Interesting article by Wade Burleson here.

Is this not the same phenomenon we've seen at Bellevue as well as in big business and government?

Dr. Loney asks, "Why justa week?"

Our esteemed resident physician, Dr. Bill Loney, asks an interesting question about all the to doin's goin' on this time of year. In a new article on his blog, he opines not only about the true "reason for the season" but asks why it should necessitate a whole commercialized "season" for us to do what we should already be doing all year. Good questions, Dr. Loney, very good questions.