Politics and Mac Brunson: A Ticking Time Bomb

I like Stan Jordan. I hope he's elected to the Florida Senate this fall. Stan Jordan is a conservative Republican who shares my conservative values.

Stan is a long-time member of First Baptist Church Jacksonville.

Mac Brunson is his pastor.

Its no secret that First Baptist Church has had a long history of influential politicians as members, too long to list.

But one of the dangers of having Mac Brunson as the pastor after his antics the first 3 1/2 years of his tenure, is it invites media scrutiny and public criticism of political candidates, like Stan Jordan, who have chosen to remain members of FBC Jacksonville under the teachings of Mac Brunson.

Its only a matter of time before an opponent of an FBC Jax member and politician runs TV commercials asking the FBC candidate why he remains a member of and financially supports a church that:

- has an associate pastor on staff who unashamedly has declared in writing and in a sermon from the puplit, the Catholic Church to be a "cult", and has declared Catholic priests to be "cult leaders", and who has declared that voting for Obama is a sin that a Christian must repent of;

- has a Senior Pastor who has declared that if a hurricane hits Jacksonville, he hopes and prays FEMA does NOT come and help us;

- has a Senior Pastor that has declared our terrible economy to be caused by a judgment of God, for the failure of Christians in this country not donating 10% or more of their money to the church;

- has declared that 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, rising gas prices, and the stock market crash and resulting economic recession to be the direct result of God "working behind the scenes" to see how he can punish Americans;

- has a pastor whose personal body guard was involved in leading a criminal investigation and issuance of subpoenas to unmask a blogger who had the "audacity" to exercise his rights to free speech and publicy criticized the pastor of the church;

- has a pastor who has attacked a former church member and blogger publicly, defaming him as a "sociopath", and issuing trespass papers against his wife for the sin of "associating" with her blogging husband;

- has a pastor who "praises God" that his parishioners didn't get a raise during the tough economic times of 2008, while he himself lives high on the hog and takes expensive trips around the world and even accepted a six-figure gift from a wealthy donor.

I have no doubt that if Stan Jordan were asked about any of these, he would distance himself from Mac Brunson, as well he should; much like Obama had to when he was forced to answer for the ridiculousness of his own pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

So shouldn't voters ask Jordan if he believes and supports the Mac Brunson/Jim Smyrl nonsense? Why not? One of Jordan's lists of accomplishments is his faithfulness to his church. Last fall I'll bet Stan Jordan would've told you that Obama's affiliation with Jeremiah Wright's church caused him great concern. Shouldn't citizens be concerned that we might elect a man to represent us in Tallahssee who believes the solution to our economic crisis lies in having more people donate to mega churches, and believes on 9/11 and in Hurricane Katrina God has punished America for her sins just as Jeremiah Wright declared?

And shall we mention Mike Huckabee? He has come to preach in Mac's church - if he runs in 2012, will he be asked why he came to preach in a church that believes such nonsense as that?

We shall see.

Mac Brunson and politics: a ticking time bomb.

Televangelists - Its About the Money and the Image

Over the years I have sarcastically referred to the televangelists networks as "the hair channels" - since so many of the Christian preachers/performers seem to be infatuated with their hair styles and hair-dos just as much as they are padding their pocketbooks with donations from gullible Christians who send them their hard-earned money.

I get a kick out of watching these channels from time to time as I channel surf, and this week I saw two things that were humorous, yet disturbing at the same time. One of them involves Mac Brunson on the INSP network.

The first was a clip of Jesse Duplantis. Jesse is the cajun, folksy preacher from Louisiana that preaches unashamedly a health and wealth gospel - that is HIS own health and wealth. He is so far out in his views on money and wealth accumulation for himself and his followers that I was shocked earlier this year when I learned that one of Maurilio's clients actually had Duplantis into their church to preach.

In a wonderful display of just how brazen these health/wealth preachers have become, I saw Jesse say the following (I'm paraphrasing), bragging about his wealth: "I had a man come up to me one time and say to me 'Jesse, let me shake your hand, because I've always wanted to shake the hand of a millionaire.' And you know what I told the man as I shook his hand? 'Multiiiiii' " . If you've ever heard Jesse, you can imagine him saying "multiiiii" followed with his cajun giggle. To which the other hair channel phony balonies on the stage with him started hooting and hollering along with the studio audience. Yep, 'ole Jesse is not just a millioinaire, but a MULTI-millionaire, and proud of it. Nothing wrong with being a millionaire - but from donations of Christians who think they are giving money to God by giving it to Jesse and then BRAGGING about it? Praise Jeeeesus! God will get it through Jesse if he can get it to Jesse - ain't God good!!??

At Jesse's website he encourages people to become his "Partners" who will regularly donate money to his ministry. Benefits of being a "partner" include preferred seating at events, more personal prayer (Jesse will pray for YOU!), more heavenly rewards. Can you say "indulgences"?

But the next thing I saw on the INSP network was quite disturbing also.

I saw Mac Brunson delivering a sermon on INSP - pretty good sermon; but here is the disturbing part: it was obvious to me the sermon audio had been altered to include an applause track....at a point in the original sermon where Mac had only scant applause, there was edited in more rigorous, spontaneous applause. And it was so poorly edited that while the raucus applause was heard, at the same time a balcony camera shot showed that hardly anyone was clapping! There was also a portion where I believe they edited the tape to include more intense laughter at one of Mac's witty quips.

If indeed FBC Jax or the INSP folks are editing the audio tracks, how sad is that? I would think that FBC Jax would be above that sort of shameless image manipulation.

That has me wondering: who would do this editing? Do the FBC Jax media folks edit the sermons prior to sending them to INSP for airing to beef up the congregational responses? Why would they do that? Why would they alter the applause on the INSP version, but not the version posted to the 316 web site? What does this say about the congregation at FBC Jax? Are they just an audience who is expected to fork over their money to pay for INSP TV time, and to offer up their laughter and applause for Mac, and if they don't do that well enough the media bunch will "correct" that through clever audio track editing?

If indeed FBC Jax is altering the audience reaction to Mac's sermons aired on INSP, its another example of the disrespect and disdain shown for the sheep at FBC Jax by the leadership. From the accusations of them being a "hotbed of legalism", to the accusations made by Paige Patterson that Brunson never got a honeymoon at FBC Jax, to the disrespectful manner that Mac tells people they must tithe and give to his special offerings - even the praise given to Jesus that they didn't get a raise because they can't handle their finances....all of that, and now the stupid sheep don't even have the sense to know how to clap right and laugh loudly enough.

Used to be that there was a wide chasm, at least in my mind, between the hair channel televangelist ministries and our SBC mega churches.

But I'm not so sure there is much of a difference anymore.

Its all about the money and the image.

Wartburg Watch Series on FBC Jax

If you haven't been reading the Wartburg Watch (WW) blog lately, go check out their blog. This link takes you to the main page, and this link will take you directly to their archive giving a chronological listing of their articles. For the past 2 1/2 weeks they have written daily articles on a wide variety of issues at FBC Jax - many of them are the same kinds of issues that I have blogged about for 2 years now.

The WW blog began in March 2009, and if you scan the archives you will find some very interesting articles about pastoral abuse, Calvinism, the "Quiverfull movement", other relevant church topics.

These ladies pull no punches. They have written some very hard-hitting articles about the issues at FBC Jax. They are from another state, and are impartial observers as to what is going on at FBC Jax. They interviewed me and my wife on multiple occasions, and as you'll read in their last article they even interviewed State Attorney Angela Corey.

The Wartburg Watch bloggers do share my concern over the state of the "church", especially power hungry SBC pastors who have a penchant for using power to do away with those who dare to criticize their actions and scrutinize their public words. They also are very concerned over the Jacksonvile Sheriff's Office subpoenas - and what it means to freedom of speech when law enforcement can so easily obtain subpoenas from state's attorneys with no stated crimes, obtain personal information about citizens from ISPs, then share that information to powerful religious leaders - that in my case resulted in the powerful religious leaders exacting their non-biblical church discipline process, and ultimately disseminating my name to the congregation.

The Wartburg Watch bloggers summarize their concerns very well in their latest post when they say:

"As we clearly state in our overview of The Wartburg Watch, we believe that Christianity is once again under assault, not only from atheists and the left, but sadly, from within its own ranks. We have pastors who achieve rock star status and believe they are “entitled” to their affluent lifestyles. There are pastors who have an all too high view of their own status, forgetting their own penchant to sin against the body of Christ. We personally have seen pastors drunk on their own authority and hiding their own inadequacies, who “claim” that people are out to “get them.” We have then watched, in horror (no, we do not exaggerate), as these paranoid pastors retaliate by seeking to destroy those who would try to point out “sin in the camp.” Grace and love are merely afterthoughts in a responsive reading. Old Testament retribution is once again in vogue with many second tier church leaders surrounding the pastors and shouting “Touch not the Lord’s anointed!”

Kudos to the Wartburg Watch bloggers on a job well done covering the FBC Jax fiasco.

Here is a listing of the articles, in descending chronological order:

**NEW** "Its Our Constitution, Too" - 9/2/09

"Subpoena THIS Blog" - 9/1/09

"Dissenting Opinions are Not Allowed" - 8/31/09

"The Redneck Theologian (Smyrl) Meets God's Mind Reader (Brunson)" - 8/28/09

"Jimmy Smyrl - Redneck Theologian" - 8/27/09

"What is Truth?" - 8/26/09

"Mac Brunson and the Klouda Controversy" - 8/25/09

"FBC Jacksonville - Selling It and Selling Out" - 8/24/09

"The Pastor of the Model - Who Demonstrates a More Christlike Attitude?" - 8/21/09

"Poor Pastor Mac - Getting Killed for the Lord" - 8/21/09

"Shenanigans and Subpoenas" - 8/19/09

"The Way of Love Versus Hypocrisy" - 8/18/09

"FBC Jacksonville - Just Another Same Old, Same Old" - 8/17/09

BREAKING NEWS: Bad Economy is God's Judgment for Non-Tithing Christians!!

Mac has taken his doctrine of "storehouse tithing" to a new level.

According to Mac, God is apparently punishing us for not tithing.

We need to fork over 10% of our income to our churches, and then God will get us out of this economic recession.

Mac is now saying that our extended economic recession is the result of Christians not forking over 10% of their income to their church.

Here is Mac's quote from his Sunday service on 8/23/09:

"Have you ever stopped to think that this whole economic mess in America is not really the cause of Wall Street or the cause of the White House or the cause of Congress, but it might be an act of God on this nation? Would you agree with that, that this very well may be the judgement of God on this nation - the economic difficulty?

Let me give you one that you're not gonna amen:

Have you ever thought that the reason God's put us in an economic difficulty in this nation is because God's people won't prove him with their tithe? Well, more of you amened it than I thought. But I guarantee you somebody's not going to like it. I'm not so sure we're not in the situation we're in because God's people WILL not prove God with the tithe."

There you have it! The solution to our economic woes is right there.

The only person that could make such a ridiculous statement is someone who is out of touch with the suffering this economic recession has wrought on innocent people, even Christians. Recessions in America hurt people and families - it even reaches to developed countries as aid goes down. Its not a stretch to say that people die in developing countries as the result of economic recession in America.

And Mac blames it all on Christians who don't believe his storehouse tithing doctrine. God is exacting a punishment because Christians aren't forking over 10% of their incomes to their mega church to support the lavish lifestyle of their pastors.

That is shameful, and its a blight on the Southern Baptist Convention, and an embarrassment to the city of Jacksonville for such nonsense to be coming forth from the pulpit of FBC Jacksonville.

Did I just say that?

You better believe I did.

Some Interesting Anonymity Cases...

There have been a few interesting legal cases in the past week dealing with issues of anonymous speech on the Internet that I thought my readers might find interesting:

Model Identifies Blogger Who Called Her a "Skank"

Model Liskula Cohen recently filed a John Doe lawsuit to find the identity of a blogger who ran a website "Skanks in NYC". Apparently the lawsuit was over defamation, and the courts ordered Google to release the name of the blogger to Cohen.

Once Cohen found out who it was, she personally called the blogger.

"I said, 'I just want you to know that if I've ever done anything to you to actually deserve this, that I'm really very sorry. I'm sincerely apologetic,'" Cohen said.

So far Cohen has refused to release the name of the blogger.

The Wartburg Watch blog has written an interesting article on Cohen's story, comparing how Cohen handled her blogger with how Mac Brunson handled his.

DC Court of Appeals Sets Guidelines for Protecting Anonymous Speech

In a recent defamation and copywright lawsuit (Solers, Inc. v. Doe), the DC Court of Appeals established a stringent standard for lower courts when a plaintiff attempts to unmask anonymous speakers on the Internet. About the case, the court said:

“[this case] presents us with issues of first impression – whether the First Amendment protects the anonymity of someone such as Doe, and, if so, under what circumstances a plaintiff such as Solers may invoke court processes to learn Doe’s identity and have its day in court."

The court emphasized that a plaintiff "must do more than simply plead his case" to unmask an anonymous speaker claimed to have violated the law.

What is the stringent standard established by the court?

1. Ensure that the plaintiff has adequately pleaded the elements of a defamation claim.

2. Require reasonable efforts to notify the anonymous defendant that the complaint has been filed and the subpoena has been served.

3. Delay further action for a reasonable time to allow the defendant an opportunity to file a motion to quash.

4. Require the plaintiff to proffer evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact on each element of the claim that is within its control.

5. Determine that the information sought is important to enable the plaintiff to proceed with his/her lawsuit.

The court noted that states vary widely in what is required to unmask an anonymous speaker, but the court noted lax requirements in this regard "...may needlessly strip defendants of anonymity in situations where there is no substantial evidence of wrongdoing, effectively giving little or no First Amendment protection to that anonymity."

Sounds reasonable to me. If an anonymous blogger is thought to be breaking a law, defaming someone, let the plaintiff have the backbone to seek the anonymous blogger's identity through due process: file the lawsuit, demand the person's identity through a subpoena so that legal action can be taken against him/her, and give all the parties (plaintiff, defendant, and Internet parties) an opportunity to argue the subpoena's validity.

Besides, what other legal option is there, other than calling the police in an attempt to open a criminal investigation into the blogger - with the hopes that the investigation might lead to subpoenas being issued by the criminal investigator. If someone can do that, well the due process can be by-passed very easily. But of course success requires the criminal investigator is willing to then release the name of the blogger whether or not there was an actual crime committed.

And it would help, presumably, if the investigator has a personal friendship with the plaintiff - most assuredly the identity will be found and given up.

For further reading on the DC Court of Appeals Case:

Baptist Planet - discusses relevance of the case to the FBC Jax Watchdog case.

Citizen Media Law Project

Reporter's Committee for Freedom of the Press