Saturday, January 31, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
- I'm not sure I believe Jim's story - would love to hear Rainer's side of the story. Given our pastors' penchants for fibbing in the pulpit, I am very skeptical of Jim's recount of the facts in this case - and the rapid disappearance of this article from the FBC Jax websites makes me even more curious and skeptical.
- I'm no fan of the book "The Shack" and I wouldn't recommend it...but my gosh do we need Jimmy Smyrl telling Lifeway what books to sell? Mac himself admitted he read the book - Jim must have read parts of it to know he doesn't agree with it - but Mac has said from the pulpit that he worries immensely about the things we read and Jim obviously doesn't want us to read it. NEWSFLASH TO JIM: We're smart enough to determine what books to read. We can also read blogs, and we can read newspapers, and we can research your sermon stories to see if you're telling us the truth or "speaking ministerially".
- It is amazing that Jim outted Rainer publicly on the blog. I wonder if Jim tried to address this privately with Rainer out of the public eye. Why did Jim decide to go public with it on a blog and accuse Rainer of going back on his word? I thought those that oppose this blog at FBC Jax have said disputes or questions should be handled man-to-man? So why is Jimmy doing this publicly? Jim implies in his article that Lifeway is offering the book for financial gain, and that they are offering theologically incorrect books because it is profitable. Strong accusations there, Jim.
- This is just another example of Jim and Mac's overall disdain for the laity. First, Jim thinks he can snooker his listeners by reading selected words from a commercial, and that no one will bother checking his facts to find out he is being deceitful. Now, Jim says:
"Lifeway actually believes Baptist readers can filter through the bad theology and not allow the gross misrepresentation of God to influence their thinking. The problem with that logic is the assumption that Baptists or believers in general have been taught to read critically. "
Uh, yes, Jim, we don't need you to be the sole arbiter of what religious books we do and don't read. My God, does Jim mean we need to have college credit in "Critical Thinking" to be able to discern fact from fiction, truth from error? Mac and Jim don't trust "uneducated" lay people. Doesn't trust 'em to teach a bible study (need small groups), doesn't trust them to deal with knowledge of bylaw changes, doesn't trust 'em to manage their finances or handle raises, and doesn't trust 'em to teach Church Training classes (had to disband that and bring in seminary classes). Sure Jim, you can tell us what books you recommend and don't recommend - but must you demand that Lifeway pull books from the shelves YOU don't agree with theologically? Mac and Jim think their sheep are just too stupid to think for themselves; they don't trust the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer to help them discern truth and error. We need Mac and Jim to tell us what to believe, what to read. We're just supposed to shut up, listen to Mac and Jim, and fork over our money to Mac and Jim to start satellites, purchase TV advertising for Mac and Honey and Mac's new school.
- If a shopper at the Lifeway website searches for "The Shack" on Lifeway's website, they will see a warning that says "Read With Discernment"...and it gives an excellent warning AND explanation of why they offer it...if you click on the "Read With Discernment" link you will see Lifeway even provides hyperlinks to critical reviews and explanations that would be helpful to a discerning reader. Lifeway I think trusts people, and trusts God and the Holy Spirit to help readers discern truth from error.
Lastly, some helpful advice to Jim: MIND YOUR OWN STORE JIM. You and Mac have enough problems and scandal at your own church before you go pointing fingers at SBC agencies that are NOT accountable to you. As a member of FBC Jax I'm sick and tired of you using our church website to blast Catholic priests, Obama voters, and now Tom Rainer and Lifeway. If you must do this, start your own blogsite and stop using our church name to lend credibility to your views. Maybe someone in the SBC needs to write a blog post about how Mac accepted a land gift and call him out and threaten to bring a motion to the floor of the SBC convention censuring Mac for that breach of basic ethical standards. How would you like the pastor of FBC Dallas preaching about how Mac lied in his pulpit about Sheri Klouda or about how FBC Jax is using trespass warnings to ban members who have been accused of blogging from stepping foot on the church property?
So stick to solving problems at FBC Jax, Jim. You've got your hands full.
"Lifeway Without the Way", by Jim Smyrl - as appeared at FBC Jax Website 1/28/09, and available in the Google website cache.
Word got out regarding the recommendation. I received a phone call asking for a meeting with Tom Rainer, President of Lifeway, and one of his associates. In a spirit of accountability, I took my colleague to the private meeting at the convention. In order to maintain integrity, I will not discuss the details or spirit of the meeting. I will confirm that in that meeting it was agreed that we would not go to the convention floor with the recommendation, on the basis that Dr. Rainer had, that day, taken steps to form a review committee that would scrutinize what went on the shelves of Lifeway. As an apparent bargaining chip, Dr. Rainer offered to remove The Shack from all Lifeway shelves and immediately did so upon my agreement to withhold the recommendation.
To my shame, as a man that did not know how the SBC hierarchy played the game, in just two weeks after the meeting, when time had passed for the recommendation to come to the floor of the convention and call Lifeway into accountability, Lifeway leaders made the choice to put The Shack back on the shelves. They placed a “warning to the reader” out to inform readers to be cautious and that books like the one in question were just fiction. It is incomprehensible that Lifeway actually believes Baptist readers can filter through the bad theology and not allow the gross misrepresentation of God to influence their thinking. The problem with that logic is the assumption that Baptists or believers in general have been taught to read critically.
Proponents of contaminated Lifeway shelves will readily inquire as to the viability of certain C.S. Lewis fictional works or Tim LaHaye works that may picture God in a less than biblically accurate manner. It is frightening when our convention leaders justify one gross misrepresentation of the very nature of God with a lesser misrepresentation of imagery relating to God. If Lewis or LaHaye serves as the standard by which we now choose our offerings on Lifeway shelves, I’m thankful they did not fictionally present Christ as a lesbian woman. If they would have lowered the bar to that extent, what would Lifeway leaders offer as Christian literature to young and immature believers today?
I believe believers should read from all genres of literature and have opportunity to critically examine all materials. However, for immature believers, such examinations should take place in environments where questions can be posed to them and answered from an open Bible. Such an environment does not diminish the priesthood of the believer, but rather allows pastors to build up a priesthood by properly equipping believers to become discerning, theologically minded readers. Currently, Lifeway offers poison and purity on the same buffet in hopes believers that purchase and ingest can discern, without help, between the two before damage is done.
When Scripture ceases to serve as the standard by which we make choices, even book choices we recommend to believers, anything goes. A few weeks after the convention Lifeway pulled from the shelves a magazine that contained a polemic in favor of women serving as pastors. Chris Turner, a Lifeway representative, said, “The buyers said the statements that were in it took positions that were contrary to what we would say. It wasn’t so much that there were women on the cover.” Who is “we”? What standard was used to make this decision? Why is such a standard not applied to much more influential books like The Shack or should I say, “much more financially lucrative books?”
Lifeway’s actions regarding this magazine should be applauded since women serving in such a role are clearly prohibited in Scripture. However, the inconsistency is glaring. Based on what is offered and not offered by Lifeway, are Southern Baptists to conclude that it is not acceptable to provide literature that presents women as pastors, but it is acceptable to offer literature that presents God as a woman? Or is the decision not ultimately about providing literature that promotes sound doctrine? Does Lifeway choose products that believers walk in, pick up, read and adjust life and belief accordingly based on financial gain? Would it not be better to have smaller stores, fewer employees, less merchandise, and lower profit margins in order to allow Southern Baptist pastors the ability to direct our people to a store that offers materials that represent God in the manner that He has revealed Himself?
Yes, it is the pastor’s role to equip the saints. Lifeway does not have the biblical mandate of the pastor. But why would Lifeway work in contradiction to the pastor’s effort to grow godly believers? Why would a Southern Baptist entity be allowed to offer materials that oppose the preaching in Southern Baptist pulpits? I say to Southern Baptists, either sever Lifeway from the Southern Baptist Convention or require Lifeway to fall within the boundaries of theological integrity in which our seminary professors and denominational agencies daily function.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Neither of the commercials is "blasphemous", as in their total neither commercial involves humans declaring themselves to be God. In typical Brunson fashion, Jim Smyrl did pull out a few select quotes from the FBC Dallas commercial to make it seem blasphemous, but the commercial is merely defining the church's history and purpose and mission in downtown Dallas. A mention of "Christ" is made. Shame on Jim for mis-characterizing it. The commercial doesn't glorify the pastor, his wife, his family...it is Christ-honoring. As far as "self promoting" - Jim must agree that the only "self promoting" that is going on in either commercial is that of the promotion of Mac and Deb.
Now the FBC Jax commercial: its all about Mac and Deb - not about Christ, not about even FBC Jax. The message: why, Mac and Deb are just like you, they have the same struggles as anyone does. This is an attempt once again for Mac to use his position to elevate his family. He wants everyone to see and hear his wife. The next commercial will undoubtedly feature Mac, Deb, and Trey, and we can give Trey a speaking part to vouch for the greatness of his dad. Deb and Mac are the draw to our church? We pay for commercials for Mac to tell Jacksonville how "normal" he is? No mention of Christ, no mention of the Bible...they declare their doors open.
FBC Jacksonville is still a great church...but its greatness, its draw is NOT the normalcy of Mac and Debbie Brunson, or their open doors - it is great because of what the church stands for: Jesus, the Bible...and the thousands of humble, loving Christians that love Christ and minister to people. People who don't serve for a salary and to build a brand, but laypeople who serve out of love for this city and its people. Its great not because of Mac and Deb, but in spite of them.
Whenever Mac showcases a ministry that his church is involved in, he likes to tell his church: "When you give your tithes and offerings to our church, you're helping to support this ministry." Well, FBC Jax, a portion of every dollar you give to Mac helps to pay for commercials like this featuring he and his family. Wise expenditure of funds? Dig deep - there's more to come.
First Baptist Dallas Brand Manifesto from First Dallas on Vimeo.
Friday, January 23, 2009
So FBC Dallas: your former pastor's right-hand man is accusing your church of blasphemous self-promotion. Imagine that: FBC Jacksonville accusing FBC Dallas of blasphemous self-promotion? Are you kidding? Isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black?
Well, we can at least say Jim is learning well from his mentor Mac Brunson. To make a point in his sermon, he uses a half-truth - half of a commercial - and thereby declares a church as being guilty of "blasphemous self promotion". Pretty strong accusation there, Jim, against FBC Dallas. They are not promoting man, but are communicating their church mission and their vision of the church's role in the life of their city and its people. Not promoting even the preacher, but promoting their church's faith in Christ.
Watch the clip below...you will see and hear the commercial Jim partially quoted, and you will then hear Jim's selected quotations from it. Jim doesn't tell his audience that its only a select few quotes...he describes it as though he is quoting it in its entirety. That's pretty deceptive there, Jim.
Now, let's compare that commercial that Jim says is "blasphemous self promotion", with the most recent TV spot getting airtime here in Jacksonville for FBC Jacksonville.
It is Mac and Deb sitting on a bench. Mac says something like: "This is my wife Deb, she's been my partner in ministry for over 30 years." Then Deb goes on to describe how they have persevered through many of life's trials, family struggles, life-threatening illnesses, caring for aging parents....and that their doors are open (not the church's doors, but Mac and Deb's office doors) and they want to "walk with you" in the Christian life. Now I will go out on a limb, and declare that this is SELF PROMOTION. Not a word about the church. Or about Jesus. Its about Mac and Deb. They are so AWESOME, you must come and meet them by walking through their open door. Mac and Deb are just like you. They want to walk with you. So the draw to FBC Jax is not Christ, it is Mac and Deb.
So Jim, please don't point fingers at other churches from our pulpit. Look at OUR OWN church.
I mustn't either pass up the chance to make this very humorous point: Mac brought the A-Group to Dallas, and FBC Dallas kept the A-Group on board even after Mac left. I wonder if Maurilio and his company dreamed up the FBC Dallas branding commercial that is now criticized by Jim. Wouldn't that be ironic: our preacher declaring a commercial as "blasphemous", when it is was a product of the very same church marketing firm that we ourselves pay for marketing of our own church!
I would close with this: In his sermon Jim does make a valid point in all of this: that the modern church is shamelessly using marketing strategies appealing to people's perceived needs, or other marketing gimmicks and images - rather than lifting high the name of Christ to draw men. So Jim is right on that point...the shame is that our own pastor and lay leaders need to listen to Jim's message - and stop the outflow of hundreds of thousands of dollars of God's money to pay church marketing and promotions firms in Nashville and Atlanta.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Granted, announcements were made several weeks in advance in the church bulletin that bylaw changes were being proposed, and members were told they could view them in the library and email questions. However, since bylaw changes have to be voted on by the membership, one would think it a prudent step for someone - either the pastor or perhaps president of the trustees - to characterize the nature and purpose of the changes before asking the congregation to vote on them. We hope that the deacons who apparently did vote unanimously to approve the changes the night before the church vote - were given full explanations on the changes, and that questions were asked at that time.
So why write about the bylaws here? Some of the changes in the bylaws are fine and probably very prudent - and some most members wouldn't care to know about. But here is the Watchdog's point, and the reason for these articles on the bylaws:
If you want to listen to the 11/28/07 business meeting where the vote was called for, click here.
Finance Committee Dissolved
The December 2007 bylaw changes dissolved the finance committee and moved those responsbilities to the "Trustees" of the church (see below). Most SBC churches have a "finance committee" that is responsible to attend to the financial matters of the church. In our church it was a standing deacon committee. They were responsible for the disbursing of all funds, and were responsible to furnish Deacons and the members a detailed financial report each month and at the close of the year. So we don't have a personnel committee from the deacons overseeing the personnel matters, and we no longer have a finance committee of deacons overseeing the financial matters of the church. Very interesting.
Board of Trustees Expanded from 11 to 17
The Board of Trustees was expanded from 11 to 17 members, and this is what necessitated a change to the Articles of Incorporation that were voted on the same night as the bylaws.
The selection of Trustees was defined in the new bylaws as "...nominated by the Pastor, with the advice of the Chairman of Deacons and Vice-Chair of Deacons. The trustees shall be elected annually by the Church..." So they are nominated by the Pastor only. The previous bylaws were silent on how trustees were nominated. The are hand-picked by the pastor, and the congregation votes up or down on the entire board at once.
Role of Board of Trustees Expanded
There now is a statement in the new bylaws that says: "It shall be the responsibility of the Trustees to manage the legal and financial affairs of the church" ...and then goes on to describe what those responsibilities are, which include the responsiblities given to the Finance Committee before the bylaws were changed.
So they are no longer just a body from whom the officers of the church are chosen to sign legal documents when necessary...they are to manage the legal and financial affairs of the church. A role that was partially vested in the Deacon body through the finance committee.
Trustees are now responsible for annually hiring an independent auditor of the church financial records, not the Finance Committee.
Approving Non-Budgedted Expenditures
The previous bylaws stated: "Any disbursements that exceed $25,000 and is not a regularly budgeted item shall be presented to the church for approval."
Under the new bylaws, the Trustees can vote and approve non-budgeted expenditures up to $50,000 - a quorum of trustees is 50%, so anywhere from 5 people to 10 people (including the pastor) can vote to spend up to $50,000 of money on non-budgeted expenditures. Any expenditures over $50,000 still have to come to the church.
The bylaws now require the appropriate "Executive Pastor" to approve all "checks and contracts obligating the Church" for their respective ministries. That seems to be a very reasonable change. Makes perfect sense.
To be generous, perhaps these changes were made not so much as to change how the church is run, but to make the bylaws an accurate representation of how the church was already being run, even perhaps prior to Brunson arriving. But if that is the case, why not explain it to the people who are present on Wednesday night to vote? Why can't the Pastor demonstrate leadership in this area by giving some explanations?
From what we have seen of Mac in his first 3 years, perhaps the bylaw changes was a power grab on his part. As I will discuss later, part of the changes were to avoid conflicts as were observed at Two Rivers Baptist Church in Nashville, Tennessee. Also these changes effectively secure Mac's position as pastor and make it impossible for a congregation to fire the pastor - as we shall see it is now only possible if the Trustees decided to remove him - and as we know the Pastor picks the Trustees! He has concentrated power to run the church within the body of Trustees that he selects. His board can decide to spend up to $50,000 of church funds not budgeted...which makes me wonder how we approved to spend money on the INSP network program as a church since that expenditure was certainly NOT in the approved budget, and by Mac's own admission was more than $100,000.
Bottom line: Mac has done enough, and treated us in such a manner since coming here that I don't trust him to change the bylaws as he did, and I don't think he has earned enough trust that would cause us to make any bylaw changes that concentrates power into those that are his close buddies on the Board of Trustees.
In the next few articles, the Watchdog will present issues in the bylaw changes that involve how business meetings are called, how church discipline is carried out, and what "right" members have forfeited to become members of the church under the new bylaws. The Watchdog has more to say as well regarding the function of deacons in the church in light of Mac's intimidating statements to deacons about being "worriers" and that they are not to be "businessmen". These I think will be of more concern to many members that the issues above, and certainly issues that the Pastor should have explained to his people before asking for a vote.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
I would say the potential for harm is even greater when we hire a new pastor that has no track record with the lay leaders and the congregation. It makes virtually no sense at all to concentrate power over a mega church and its staff and ministries in one man that is a virtual UNKNOWN to the congregation. I believe this is perhaps our biggest mistake as a church during our pastoral transition after Vines.
Too bad our trustees - most of whom are learned business men and lawyers and leaders - didn't have the foresight to see potential problems of our pastor-led system with a new pastor. We failed to make some important bylaw changes to reduce the power of the new pastor...which would make sense given that he was an UNKNOWN. As we shall see starting tomorrow as we look at the bylaw changes at FBC Jax from December 2007, not only did we give the same power and control of our church to Mac Brunson that our very seasoned and trusted pastors had, but we actually gave him MORE POWER, LESS ACCOUNTABILITY in the bylaw changes of December 2007...while not even making sure the most faithful and trusted members understood the changes and how they impacted their church and their church membership. Shameful. Shameful.
Now I'm sure Burleson didn't have Team Brunson and our lay leadership in mind when he wrote his article, but boy it sure fits our situation and the leadership of Mac Brunson. By the way, Burleson, contrary to slanderous remarks made to our church staff by a certain FBC Jax staff member at our church who has served with Burleson at the IMB...he IS a solid, bible inerrancy conservative SBC pastor...who happened to fall out of favor with the SBC big wigs for using his blog to hold the IMB accountable for decisions he believed were harmful to the SBC. Its a story too long to tell here, but his blog is probably the most read blog in the SBC and a definite must read.
Here are some excerpts from his article cut and pasted here. Please see if any of these statements could or might apply to Team Brunson:
From WADE BURLESON's January 10 blog article:
"We Christians should take an honest look at what it is we think qualifies a person to lead."
"We have pastors who bully those who question them,... and other actions that lead me to believe we have a God-complex among some of our leaders."
Nothing more "bullying" than issuing trespass warnings to suspected bloggers and their wives. Ask the members - there is a aire of fear at the church, that those who question the leadership will be singled out or asked to leave. This entire blog is about the "bullying" and intimidation of Mac Brunson from the pulpit.
"This false sense of moral invincibility has led to a climate where transparency, honesty, and personal integrity are no longer a part of our corporate faith."
Amen. We have to realize that our leaders need accountability. For instance, Mac loves his family so much, he is such a wonderful husband and father (I mean that sincerely), that if not checked he may use his position as pastor to give ALL of them jobs at our church. That is a "weakness" that he has that needs to be checked through some system of accountability like most other churches have through a personnel committee and perhaps a nepotism policy.
"Had people known of his [Haggard's] struggles, they could have held him accountable. Had people had the sense that their leader was fallible, they might have never given him such unbridled freedom and authority."
I think admiting one's mistakes to the congregation would be a starting point. When a lie is told, apologize. When you blasted us to a group in North Carolina, explain your words or apologize. Its OK Mac to let us know you've done something wrong or hurtful.
"The problem with organized Christianity is not the gospel. The problem with organized Christianity is that too many Christians have forgotten that leaders are fallible."
"Yet, in my mind,the true gospel is only strengthened when Christian leaders lose their public sense of absolute authority and spiritual perfection. Anybody who presumes to talk on behalf of God should remember that the treasure we possess (the gospel) is carried in fragile, clay jars."
This is so true today more than ever. We see this right in front of our eyes at FBC Jax.
"The SBC church, institution or agency that believes the "leader" is beyond simple accountability will find that leader has the capability to ruin the organization. When and if that happens, the fault will reside not only with the leader, but those laymen who were unable to see that a lack of transparency is the first indication that something is wrong."
Exactly. An unchekced leader has the capacity to ruin an organization, and if it happens, the blame falls not just on him, but the laymen, the churchmen, who didn't stop it.
AMEN and AMEN!
The Watchdog has been saying virtually the same thing for months on this blog. As I said Wade may not have had Team Brunson in mind when he wrote that article, but if the shoe fits...
Do any of you lay leaders at FBC Jax get it? Do you realize what you have done by changing those by-laws and giving full authority and power to Team Brunson (which means Mac, Deb, Trey, and Maurilio) with no real accountability or transparency? Do you think you've done them or our church any favors in this?
I pray that some of you staff and lay leaders will read this blog and wake up.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Trust between congregation and pastor is important.
I don't trust Mac Brunson. After nearly 3 years, I and others are conditioned to look closely at MOTIVES. I refuse to drink the Mac Brunson Kool Aid and place the same trust in him as was placed in previous pastors.
When a church is "pastor led" as ours has been for decades - that is he has sole authority to hire/fire staff, appoints his trustees, has a provision in the bylaws stating that members are to "love and esteem" the Pastor and to "manifest a tender regard for his reputation"...it requires the congregation to have immense TRUST in the leadership, motives, and direction of the pastor of the church. This worked very well under Lindsay and Vines. Men of high integrity - who didn't use their positions as pastor to give "splash over" blessings to their family through nepotism - and who demonstrated their love for the congregation over and over and actually earned their trust. They didn't give their wives a co-pastor position and use the TV ministry to give their wife airtime as now is happening on our TV broadcasts (if she is Mac's co-pastor, can't we just admit it like so many other mega ministries have -like Joel Osteen has?).
My point: this hyper "pastor led" system doesn't work with Team Brunson.
While obviously many still do trust them, its obvious that many more are catching on and either are completely disgusted and have left, or they are scratching their heads and holding on, hoping that nothing here on this blog is true.
I say all of that to say that when Mac expresses concern in January about how we spend our money (after thanking Jesus in the fall that we aren't getting raises), and assumes in the pulpit that we're all a bunch of mindless overspenders - and is going to force us in our Sunday School to look at financial matters in February...I ask, WHY? What are his motives? Does he love us, and want the best for us and our families financially? Or is this part of he and the Nashville marketing firm's fund raising technique this spring culminating in the grand fleecing of getting us to give $20 million dollars so we don't go into debt to implement his "vision"?
Mac's sermon on 1/4 I think is the "kick off" for the campaign to get us to give money to support his vision...and it will be cast in this light: if you want to keep the church out of debt, if you love the church, and if you respect Lindsay and Vines, you will fall in line with all of his vision. By the way, if you read about the vision on the website, it calls for satellites in all sides of town - not church plants but satellits to spread the FBC/Brunson brand...must be there are so many "sorry" churches in town that just aren't reaching Jacksonville with the gospel. Mac I predict will continue to attack our spending habits and money management, will load us with guilt about our lifestyles...it all just rings hollow while he and his wife are living in a million dollar home, using our church website to entice the wealthier members to spend thousands to accompany them and the "Brunson family" to the Holy Land. Why, yes, a call for prudence and a halt to the over-spending....of course after they have already "gotten theirs" - by accepting the land gift from one of our wealthy members and putting the family on the pay roll. Sounds great.
I predict the next three months will be the execution of one long promotions plan developed by our church marketers to maximize revenue to the $20 million vision. Small groups will be used to help shape people's views. Instead of casting the vision to everyone and letting the Holy Spirit work on us and letting us begin to give money out of our convictions and promptings of the Holy Spirit, the vision is in full swing - and we will either pay for it or we will go into debt.
Below is a collection of clips from the 1/4 sermon...with some commentary on the hypocrisy and condescension of Mac Brunson contained therein. This is a taste of what you will hear over the next few months as Mac tries to get us to support his vision and to give the money to support it - and when he gets done executing the strategy in March - IT WILL BE OFF TO THE HOLY LAND with the wealthier members of the church while the plebe stay back state-side and work and look for jobs to pay for the vision.
Friday, January 9, 2009
The conference website says that the women's conferences and premium sessions are now free of charge. The $50 fee for "premium" session and $30 fee for "women's sessions" is now waived. That is great, and we hope that anyone who has registered already will get a refund of the $80. If you already paid your registration fee, be sure to contact Trey for your refund. The cut in fees is a nice gesture I suppose on behalf of Mac, Trey, Maurilio, and the Nexus Promotions firm in Atlanta...the rationale for waiving the fee is that the "economy is tight", which is to say: "registration is so far off from last year that we need to do something to increase attendance so we don't embarrass ourselves." The economy wasn't doing too well when the PC 2009 website started the registrations last fall, so I suppose its a bit disingenous to say they're cutting the fees to help people out...in a marketing and promotions-driven mindset you try to maximize revenues by charging as high a price as the market will bear. But we do thank Team Brunson for the price cut - this must have been a tough decision on their part given how they have to pay the A-Group and Conexus for the marketing and promotions for the conference.
Also, the good people of FBC Jax want to thank the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association for being a sponsor this year of the conference. According to the conference website there is only one "sponsor" listed - the BGEA - so apparently we were able to extract a fee from the BGEA of between $5000 and $12,500 for them to be "sponsors" - depending on which "promotions package" they were sold by Trey and Trey's promotions firm, Conexus, in Atlanta. Way to go Trey! We are so proud of how well you are able to "raise money" for the Pastor's Conference (even though we know it is not you, but the promotions firm - your dad left that little detail off when he patted you on the back for "raising $100,000" last year just before Dr. David Jeremiah spoke) - for 20 some years we were too ignorant to know we could actually get away with selling promotions and advertising at the conference, but now that you and your dad and Maurilio are here....CHA CHING...and the sky's the limit now! We eagerly anticipate seeing how many other sponsors you were able to sell...will we get Jim "Jesus" Caveizel to come and sell us on the tape series again? We were all so blessed by that commercial last year.
We also thank the exhibitors that have paid $750 each for the use of a table, a cloth, two chairs, and a power strip. According to the conference website, we have SEVEN exhibitors who were lucky enough to have their organization's hyperlink posted on the website...this would mean that they purchased the $2500 "SPECIAL advertising package" since this is the one that allows them to get their hyperlinks on the website. Way to go Trey! Cha-Ching! Keep selling those promotions Trey!
So let's see where we are at, and what Trey will be congratulated for by the EMCEE, Mac Brunson, on the stage as he was last year (we'll assume there are 20 exhibitors who paid the $750 for a measely table, drape cloth, two chairs, and a power strip):
BGEA - Platinum Package - $12,500
7 "Specials" @ $2500 - $17,500
20 Exhibitors @ $750 = $15,000
That is great! Ain't God good? ALL THE TIME!
$45,000 is great, don't get me wrong Trey...but last year you hit $100,000, which according to your Dad was twice your salary. We expect at least $100,000 this year too...$45,000 is good since it really is not money collected to offset costs to provide services...its just selling access to the eyes and ears of our attendees...its gravy so to speak...but we need all the gravy we can get in these hard economic times.
Also, those of you who were sold the promotions packages - like the "Gold Sponsorship", "Silver Sponsorship, and the super duper "Platinum Sponsorship" - and other exhibitors - the deadline was yesterday to pay the other 50% of your advertising fee. Make checks payable to "Team Brunson". Thank you for your support!
One last word to the exhibitors and sponsors: give Trey a call and ask him how many people are registered for the conference. The fees charged by Trey and the promotions firm are presumably based on their claim that there will be "over 3500 Christian leaders" at the conference to whom you will be able to reach with your message (see the different fees charged by Conexus for their other conferences). If they are far short of this number, you might want to ask for an adjustment of the advertising rates being charged.
Also, if you decide not to attend, you can still get a refund of your registration fee, minus a $50 cancellation fee...if your cancellation request is approved by Trey.
Just trying to help everybody out!
Now Trey, get busy selling those sponsorships, time is running short! We would hate to have to adjust your salary downward!
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
That is a flat out lie.
But leave it to Mac to think we're a bunch of dolts who can't sit still.
He's such a flaming hypocrite, when HE is the one who is regularly rude in his sermons. He's the one who has left early to catch a plane for his Mediterranean cruise and left while the invitation was given.
His brazenness and hypocrisy is breathtaking...almost as breathtaking as the Kool-Aid drinkers who actually applauded his rudeness.
Watch the video for yourself.
I think its all about power.
He loves to talk down to his people as though he is the one who has it all together...that if we would just listen and obey him, and sit still while he preaches, we would all achieve the wonderful spiritual plane that he is on. It gives him a feeling of power over his people.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Saturday, January 3, 2009
"J. You have criticized, without a factual basis, the new visionary initiative of starting a South Campus Congregation"
The Watchdog has been critical of the South Campus start-up but not without factual basis. Read for yourself:
Are Satellites the Answer for FBC Jacksonville?
In this article the Watchdog examines the decision to start a South Campus, and is critical of the plan primarily because there is no basis to assume that a stagnant church, one whose attendance is not increasing and is possibly decreasing, can turn things around by starting satellites. Most satellite churches are born out of necessity, when a congregation finds that its main campus has no more space to accommodate growth.
Also, the Watchdog found it offensive that Mac on multiple occasions in 2008 tried to tell the people of FBC Jacksonville that the church in Rome in the days of the early church was a group of "satellite churches" - absolute rubbish - and its embarrassing that Mac tried to sell this to his congregation.
Brunson Discovers Church in Rome was Satellite Churches!
"K. You have belittled the work and service of many dedicated First Baptist Church members who have offered their time, resources, and homes to lay the ground work for a starting South Campus."
This is not correct. To question the pastor's decision to start satellites is not akin to belittling the work of FBC Jax members. Again, Mac is the one who has shown a disdain for FBC Jax members on many occasions.
Read for yourself:
Satellites and Life Links: It IS About Mac After All
You will see in this article the Watchdog was critical of several things, including Jim Smyrl's assertion in one of the Life Link informational meetings that there is no preacher in our city like Mac Brunson and we need to get his wonderful messages out to other parts of the city and country.
"L. You have encouraged and advocated, as a tool of retribution, that First Baptist Church members withhold their tithes and offerings in an attempt to jeopardize the security of the financial operations of First Baptist Church."
It is true that the Watchdog has advocated members withhold their givings - if they shared the Watchdog's concerns over the bylaw changes in December 2007 and the many abuses at FBC Jacksonville. But it is incorrect to say that this was to "...jeopardize the security of the financial operations of First Baptist Church." That was not the purpose at all. The purpose of withholding financial gifts to FBC Jax could be for any number of reasons including disagreement with how Team Brunson is raising and spending money. Another reason would be because the bylaw changes in December 2007 transferred power from the congregation to the pastor and trustees with no explanation from the pastor, leaving concerned congregants only voice to be through their giving.
"M. You have belittled and ridiculed, falsely, the manner and method by which the families of First Baptist Church can dedicate their new babies and children."
Total garbage. The Watchdog has been critical of Team Brunson for misusing their power in holding a special baby dedication on a Sunday morning for their grandson, and also a special ordination service for their son-in-law.
Read it for yourself:
Abusing One's Power and Position
The comments are levied directly at Mac Brunson, not the people of FBC Jacksonville. The writers of this letter seem to be afraid of using Mac's name. If the writers believe the Watchdog was sinning by being critical of Brunson's special baby dedication and son-in-law ordination services, why not just say it in the letter?
Tomorrow: Accusations N. through P.
Friday, January 2, 2009
"E. You have charged First Baptist Church of the manipulation of financial and ministerial responsibilities for personal gain."
Not sure how they would define "manipulation of financial and ministerial responsibilities"...sounds like some lawyer speak there. While this committee is very vague in their accusations made against the Watchdog , the Watchdog has been very specific in accusations against Mac Brunson to which they may be referring: Mac Brunson accepted a $300,000 land gift from one of the church donors just weeks after he arrived, he has displayed nepotistic tendencies in placing wife and son on staff in newly created positions of which the church has not been told what their ministerial responsibilities are...Mac has used the FBC Jax website to advertise for his "Holy Land" trips...he has used one of our most highly attended Sundays (Easter Sunday) to hold a special offering to raise funds to put his sermons back on nationwide TV (which by most reasonable standards is a budgeting issue and a recurring cost not subject to "special offerings). That's just a few. If pointing out those abuses of power is what they mean by "charged the First Baptist Church of the manipulation of financial and ministerial responsibilities for financial gain"...then the Watchdog is guilty as charged for pointing out those abuses.
"F. You have argued that First Baptist Church members should disregard and defy the decisions and policies of the clerical and lay leadership of the church"
Which "policies" and which "decisions" are they referring to? Very vague. Perhaps they are referring to "decisions" such as starting a school, or decisions such as starting a satellite ministry, or decisions to change the bylaws while keeping the congregation in the dark about what those changes were. In a church of tens of thousands of people, not everyone will agree with all of the "decisions" of the pastor, and some people will choose not to support those decisions with their money or their time and talent. The Watchdog has given his views of those big decisions made by the pastor, as well as smaller decisions: such as decisions to raise money for his TV ministry, decisions to utilize "church marketing firms", decisions to advertise Holy Land trips, his decision to call us names and belittle us from the pulpit, and a whole host of other decisions made by the pastor. As to which "policies" the Watchdog is accused of telling members they should disregard and defy is uncertain.
"G. You have held First Baptist Church's leaders in contempt before its own congregation and the world without restraint"
To hold someone in "contempt" would mean to belittle them, or to scorn them or to disrespect them. If pointing out abuses of a pastor and voicing an opinion on them is holding them in contempt, then perhaps the Watchdog is guilty. I would point out that the pastor himself is guilty of the very thing of which the Watchdog is accused, using this same standard, of holding the entire congregation in contempt as he belittles them on a regular basis with his condescending, looking-down-the-nose attitude, and he has done it without restraint as he continues this behavior. He has also shown contempt for Sheri Klouda in lying about her and not apologizing, and contempt for the memories of the late Mrs. Criswell and Mrs. Truett, as he has said disparaging remarks about them while functioning in his role as "pastor" of our church.
"H. You have questioned, without a factual basis, the legitimacy of the ministerial and operational policies of First Baptist Church."
Sounds like a repeat of letter F. Again, very vague.
"I. You have discouraged the success of the 23rd annual Pastors Conference and have repeatedly cast doubt on the integrity of its operations and objectives"
The Watchdog has expressed several concerns about the Pastors Conference - the latest of which is the charging of unusually large fees for the use of our facilities by other ministries - such as $750 for a display table, and up to $12,500 to display videos, banners, and to mention the ministry from the pulpit. The Watchdog has been VERY critical of transforming our Pastors Conference into a marketing bonanza where funds have been raised through the selling of promotional time. Our church facilities were built using the monies given by the people of God for the furtherence of the gospel - NOT so they could be used by Team Brunson and their marketing and promotions firms to raise revenues by charging access to non-profit ministries for the privilege of using the building. The Watchdog has also been critical of the decision to charge members entrance to portions of the conference. The Watchdog has also been critical of the pastor using the conference to give sole credit to his own son for its success, even going so far as to crediting his son for "raising $100,000, which is more than twice his salary" in front of the pastors and Dr. David Jeremiah who was on the platform. So yes, there has been much the Watchdog has said about the Pastors Conference. If shining light on these terrible decisions and commenting on WHY they are terrible decisions - if this harms the Pastors Conference - blame Team Brunson, not the Watchdog.
Here's a thought about "operational policies" of FBC Jax. Can someone please explain the role that Mrs. Brunson plays in our church? If she is on paid staff, and in the pastor's suite...and if she attends staff meetings...what is her position and role in defining the direction of our church? Is it defined in the bylaws? Is she a "co pastor"? What is her title, and what is her job description? Is her salary commensurate with her education, qualifications, and experience? No accusations. Just questions.
Tomorrow: Items J. through M.