Why Leaders Are Responsible

[golden]

Marcia and all,
I have another thought on why leaders hesitate to meet one on one with those who disagree with them.  It may be because, one on one, they will actually find themselves agreeing with the dissenter, remembering that they are talking with someone, a fellow believer in Christ, who has served in the assembly with them for many years.  They might realize that the person is not an apostate, or a flake, or a railer, or "has issues", or whatever label leaders may apply in order to justify their ungracious treatment of them.
One on one, they might hear their conscience, or the still small voice of God Himself.
But leaders together may experience the years of programming that kicks in and says, "unity", "stand together", etc. It was taught and caught from the top down to behave in these loyal-to-the-system ways.
Many of us treated ones who left badly, because we thought there was never a 'good' reason to leave.  
And leaders led the way.
Becky

Well, I have an Idea..why not go talk to these leaders one on one..instead of moaning about it on this BB?  Why not confront them head on..give each of them a call today and set up a time to take your own advice?

[brian]

Well, I have an Idea..why not go talk to these leaders one on one..instead of moaning about it on this BB?  Why not confront them head on..give each of them a call today and set up a time to take your own advice?

did you even take the time to read the posts on the subject, the articles on ga.com, etc? those who have done exactly that have been put off, put down, and put aside. contributing these observations to the discussion is not moaning. this is another classic assembly 'catch 22' where the leaders refuse to meet with someone one-on-one and then the person who is not allowed to meet with them in that way is blamed for not meeting with them.

as a heads up, golden, if you keep coming back here, you are going to keep reading observations and analysis of the assembly, almost all done by people who have left it. if those kinds of posts bother you so much, why do you keep coming back? is taking potshots while hidden behind a fake name so satisfying?

brian

[vernecarty]

George went to Africa every year. He spent extended periods of time with Samuel Ochenjele. Samuel went to the workers seminar and to the fall seminar and spent extended periods of time with George here in America. Samuel also received money from George for travel, sustinence, school, hospital, etc. Things in Africa were named after George. Samuel’s son George (name maybe coincidence) attends college in America. I would expect that some of his expenses have been paid for through GG. My point is, every gathering that was associated with GG has been labelled as deceived and an evil entity. The leaders were corrupt, except the few mentioned ie Wayne M, Steve I, Mark C, and a few others. How is it that Samuel in such close association with George, much closer than most, has been exonerated as not being influenced by George and is therefore “pure” but every other leader, even if George never went there, is painted with the same brush George is painted with?

Jn 7:24 Do not judge according to appearance but judge with righteous judgment.

Bob no question that each person will have to answer to God for their part played in the assembly drama, and the enabling of a vile apostate like George Geftakys.  I am sure in retrospect there are some things that Samuel would have liked to have done differently. I do think you do have a point in saying that the men who were closest to George and saw first hand his godless behaviour all those years yet did nothing to take a stand against it bear by far the most repsonsibility. May God be merciful to those who have repented for their failure. When it comes to resposibility of the leadership, you are preaching to the choir my friend. Any apparent "pass" I am prepared to give to any of these men is based on my personal discussion with them regarding their view of what transpired. In view of the fact that I could have easily been in their position, some compassion for those who have repented is certainly in order don't you think?
Verne

[jackhutchinson]

It is apparent from the articles by Kirk Cesaretti and others that meetings between leaders and those who had complaints about the ministry were unfruitful (Kirk told me personally that he did have some one-on-one meetings with other leaders).  The problem (regardless of who was there) was that the leaders did not respond to those meetings by making any PUBLIC, OPEN stands against George or any of his leaders who mistreated God's people.  They did respond soon after Judy's and Rachel's accounts appeared PUBLICLY on the internet.

Remember how during seminars George would talk about what he described as 'hate mail'?  He would talk about how he would read the letters (addressed personally to him), weep, pray for the authors, then throw them into the garbage without responding?  He told us this to give us the false impression that he was so humble that he would not answer such 'false accusations'.  What were those letters about?  They were countless letters written by sincere bretheren who wanted to see problems corrected.  Since repentance was not in the equation in George's thinking, they might as well have been sucked into a black hole.

Here are links to articles that show the pattern of the leadership's refusal to make any PUBLIC stands against George or his system as a result of meeting with concerned bretheren:

Kirk Cesaretti, LB from SLO - http://www.geftakysassembly.com/kirkcesarretti.html

The abuses in the Midwest and Tuscola - http://geftakysassembly.com/midwestandtuscola.html

The Code of Silence, enabled continued corruption in leadership with no meaningful accountability - http://www.geftakysassembly.com/codeofsilence.htm

Jack

[vernecarty]

Matthew 18 stiill applies. I find it difficult to believe that there were no two or three leading brothers in all of the assemblies that had the cohones to sit down with George and recite the facts, followed by wider dissemination among all the assemblies. Look at what happened when Brent Tr0ckman did just that and he was not even in leadership at the time! These men empowered Goeorge and protracted his tenure by their cowardice and rank disobedience to the clear teaching of Scirpture. Case closed.
Verne

[brian]

My point is, every gathering that was associated with GG has been labelled as deceived and an evil entity. The leaders were corrupt, except the few mentioned ie Wayne M, Steve I, Mark C, and a few others. How is it that Samuel in such close association with George, much closer than most, has been exonerated as not being influenced by George and is therefore “pure” but every other leader, even if George never went there, is painted with the same brush George is painted with?

good question. i think it is likely related to the extraordinary humility and sincerity with which samuel has conducted himself throughout his life. i have never seen or heard of him exerting authority and control over anyone, or excluding anyone, but rather going where he is invited and preaching with sincerity. it was samual's character and reputation that george capitalized on in order to help validate his own percieved authority. i believe this is why george kept samuel so close to himself. i suspect that is also why george kept roger grant so close to himself.

in stark contrast, almost all of the leaders of local gatherings in north america have exerted excessive control over people's lives, far exceeding healthy levels of control. in many observed cases, leaders really did get corrupted and cross blatant lines of morality. the overwhelming vast majority of those who leave get a harsh taste of where their former leaders priorities really are. this leaves them with little doubt in condemning their former leaders. but even with all that, almost none of us here on the board think of all the gatherings that have disassociated with george as nests of evil. from my observation point, many of them seem very sincere but misguided, and certainly vulnerable to falling back into unhealthy and isolated, controlling ways. it is out of genuine concern for them (and because of what i clarify in my thinking in the process) that i keep re-explaining these same issues over and over on here. i think this is what motivates a lot of us, as would be clear to anyone who came on here without an agenda to make us look as bad as possible.

you have been strangely tight-lipped concerning your own observations of the assembly, bob, even for someone who is probably still in one. you must have observed at least some of the more blatant problems and behaviors we talk about on here. having seen them yourself, don't they concern you?

[jackhutchinson]

Bob,

I'm wondering if you have read the articles below.  They offer a perspective that the assembly leaders did not give.  If so, what do you think about them?

 http://www.geftakysassembly.com/kirkcesarretti.html

http://geftakysassembly.com/midwestandtuscola.html

http://www.geftakysassembly.com/codeofsilence.htm

Jack

[kwelsh]

You know it's a fine line between having judgement(the ability to discern between right and wrong)and passing judgement (passing condemnation on someone for their offences). We often see this line trampled on the bb; and what's the tough thing to deal with is that those willing to condemn past or present leading brothers have been guilty of the same offences themselves. But have acquitted themselves or are acquitted by other posters so they feel free to fire away at their enemies(or those who have legititamately offended them) . This is a shame because we have no right to either condemn others or acquit/justify ourselves.
That being said I must be quick to admit that in an equaly wrong way I've seen myself do this same thing.
Yes we should evaluate the sincerity of others and seek justice or what have you when necassary but were often very out of line considering the meekness we should have having once committed the same offenses.
On another note the gang bang method of cowing/controlling people can be substantiated by many and it's effect is profound.
I also at the age of fifteen found myself after having confided in Tim G. a sin I had commited  thinking he could help me.He told me to wait there a few minutes and the next thing I knew I was surrounded by Steve I.,Jim H.,Tom M., and who else I can't remember.The thing is these guys weren't all psycho contol freak monsters but the method they used/followed and the effects it brought were monstrous it stripped you of your dignity I barely knew any of those guys but Tim and had confided in him. I never agreed to gang bang counsel.as time went on you knew everyone knew everything about you and it was so effective in breaking you into a pulp of a human being. Well I could go on but theres others out there who had similar experieces maybe they can add/elaborate from here.
PS. Scott isn't it funny how bad they wanted us to feel for being normal teenagers.
You know our High School Outreach had a group of teenagers who really loved the Lord. The Assembly(not just George or any individual) stumbled every single one of them. How sad... we need to pray more and condemn less.
PPS I really hope this comes across in a spirit of reconciliation not with undercurrents of bitterness.  

[Scott McCumber]

PS. Scott isn't it funny how bad they wanted us to feel for being normal teenagers.

Hey, Kevin,

Wanna know what's really funny? My "gang bang" counselling at the hands of GG and company centered around . . . my crush on Melanie! Don't beat me up.

Scott

[Scott McCumber]

PS. Scott isn't it funny how bad they wanted us to feel for being normal teenagers.
You know our High School Outreach had a group of teenagers who really loved the Lord. The Assembly(not just George or any individual) stumbled every single one of them. How sad... we need to pray more and condemn less.

Kevin,

As those summer schools began I was very much wanting to serve the Lord. But it seemed like the more I "labored in prayer", "struggled to overcome", "reckoned myself dead" and "took the way of the cross" the more keenly I felt the contempt of Tim G, Steve I and company. {Side bar: Steve has made a personal and heartfelt apology to me. Accepted.}

It began to dawn on me that no matter what I did I was not going to be able to attain the shifting, secretive standard that would gain their approval. The approval of "godly" men being a reasonable goal for a 15 year old boy.

This treatment of the first generation of assembly children bore absolutely disastrous, well-documented results.

Unfortunately, Generation Deux is just as screwed up - they just don't know it yet.

Scott McCumber

[M2]

George went to Africa every year. He spent extended periods of time with Samuel Ochenjele. Samuel went to the workers seminar and to the fall seminar and spent extended periods of time with George here in America. Samuel also received money from George for travel, sustinence, school, hospital, etc. Things in Africa were named after George. Samuel’s son George (name maybe coincidence) attends college in America. I would expect that some of his expenses have been paid for through GG. My point is, every gathering that was associated with GG has been labelled as deceived and an evil entity. The leaders were corrupt, except the few mentioned ie Wayne M, Steve I, Mark C, and a few others. How is it that Samuel in such close association with George, much closer than most, has been exonerated as not being influenced by George and is therefore “pure” but every other leader, even if George never went there, is painted with the same brush George is painted with?
Jn 7:24 Do not judge according to appearance but judge with righteous judgment.

Bob,

Just to clarify:

I believe that every assembly on the continent was corrupted by GGs influence. The reason I hold this belief is that we all had the same 'problems' that were cult-like (please do not be offended by the 'c' word here, I do not know how else to label it). I know that every gathering has problems, but the problems we had in the assemblies, and even in the Ottawa assembly, were a symptom of a deeper issue. The symptoms indicate to me a 'false religious' system similar to that of the scribes and the Pharisees. Africa and China were definitely a lot more autonomous than Canada where we had our connections to Fullerton via Omaha.

I do not agree that the leaders are corrupt, but rather sincerely deceived in following the system even as I was and as many others were. However, I believe that those who do not honestly inquire now, and say the the web-site and BB is a tool of the enemy, are accountable for not using all the resources provided in order to know the truth of the matter. This is even more dangerous as it can lead to the 'system' being revived and a greater darkness.

All LBs have not been painted with the same brush GG is painted with. But leaders are definitely more accountable than the laity.

Lord bless,
Marcia

[M2]

Bob no question that each person will have to answer to God for their part played in the assembly drama

Thank-you Verne for your reply. My point all along has been each one will stand before God to give account. The depth of their involvement or knowledge of sin will be revealed then. I believe it prudent on the part of all believers at this juncture to be very careful about accusing ones of wrong doing simply because they were a leading brother in some obscure gathering. If God reveals something to an indivdual heart and they repent, praise God. The sincerity of that repentance is not for us to judge either. They may come on this bb to announce it. They may do it indivdually in their locale. God does not have a 4 step program for repentance. The bible simply says show fruits worthy of repentance. God will determine the value of that fruit. Observing a sinful behavior and proclaiming that behavior as wrong is a responsibility of every believer but more importantly the leaders. We do not however condemn individuals or judge their hearts or motives. God will take care of that.

In your opinion Bob, what are the fruits of repentance?

Marcia

[Rachel]

Leading brothers publicly took a place of authority, regard, and respect in the lives of those around them (the saints).  If a man in that kind of public position uses that position to abuse others or just stands by and supports a man who is abusing others, he should, when he sees what is by definition a public sin, repent openly and publicly.  There have been some in leadership who have done this.  I think Kirk C is a good example.  When he saw what he had been a party to, he was open in his repentance.  However, many of the leadership have not even so much as personally gone to those whose lives have been forever altered by their stand with an apology of any sort.  It is that sort of silence that would make one question their true repentance.

Personally, I know that my mother as well as myself went to the leadership for help on numerous occassions.  I myself, attempted to speak with the leadership regarding the sins being committed and was, at best, ignored, and in many instances shunned and slandered.  To this day, there have been a number of those in leadership who were directly involved in my family's situation that have never so much as said a word to me.  While at this point, I really don't need an apology from them in order to get on with my life, I have done that just fine.  I use my situation as an example of a system of handling blatant sin by public authorities and a pervading arrogance in the assembly leadership.  They have taken public places of authority, but when the corruption and sin is shown very few are willing to publicly admit they are wrong and repent publicly.

I stated my story publicly only after a long time of trying to deal with it privately.  I would be truly curious to see how many people never tried to deal with any of the offenses against them privately for an extended period of time before voiceing those offenses publicly.  

Bob, I would be curious to read what you would think the proper way of handling such public sins would be.

[vernecarty]

PS. Scott isn't it funny how bad they wanted us to feel for being normal teenagers.
You know our High School Outreach had a group of teenagers who really loved the Lord. The Assembly(not just George or any individual) stumbled every single one of them. How sad... we need to pray more and condemn less.

Kevin,

As those summer schools began I was very much wanting to serve the Lord. But it seemed like the more I "labored in prayer", "struggled to overcome", "reckoned myself dead" and "took the way of the cross" the more keenly I felt the contempt of Tim G, Steve I and company. {Side bar: Steve has made a personal and heartfelt apology to me. Accepted.}

It began to dawn on me that no matter what I did I was not going to be able to attain the shifting, secretive standard that would gain their approval. The approval of "godly" men being a reasonable goal for a 15 year old boy.

This treatment of the first generation of assembly children bore absolutely disastrous, well-documented results.

Unfortunately, Generation Deux is just as screwed up - they just don't know it yet.

Scott McCumber

But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 19:14  
Verne

Sometime soon I am going to walk away from all this, but you mark my words...there is going to be he--  to pay for all this....

[M2]

I watched a video taped message from Charles Stanley. The message was televized this past Sunday (19th). Stanley's message was on the topic of God is a God of Grace. One snippit from his message paraphrased by me:

The Lord Jesus came full of grace and truth. ... Let us draw near to the throne of grace...
The Lord Jesus rebuked the leaders (woe to you scribe and Pharisee..), but He showed grace to the sinner, the women at the well, the women caught in adultery, blind Bartimaeus, etc. etc. etc.

Interesting.

Marcia