Wednesday, October 4, 2017

HBC Troubles: The Appendix that Took Us Out (Part 2)

In our minds, this was the last, best hope for Tom Leake to bring out the truth and convince us that he was in the right and Scott was categorically wrong. It may not be self-evident that Scott isn't wrong, that Tom and the remaining elders of HBC aren't victims, without more context, but just the wording and style of this writing alone should send up multiple warning signals that something isn't right.

We were really hoping for some great bombshell that would explain the sense of vindictiveness, the need for propaganda-like reassurances, the sense of damage control we got through this process. If there really was something big about Scott they were hiding for his sake, that there really was a Christian need to not address this the way normal people would expect.

And yet...

The first thing that struck me was how childish much of this sounded, paying rapt attention to details that didn't seem quite the meat of the issue, retreating to policy and procedure too early in the game, the four-part pattern to address questions, many of which were not quite what we were asking. There was a stench of obfuscation in this. But... it felt childish. It didn't make sense for the respected father of the church to be stooping to almost schoolyard thought patterns.

But I think that's really what this is. Among Christian brethren, this really boiled down to a schoolyard domination that failed and came into the open. Neither side emerges wonderfully, but for the pastor, he has missed so many chances to take a high road, demonstrate wisdom and grace. I think there was little wisdom and grace to show since ultimately we were looking at a petty autocrat whose tactics came close to general exposure. And now he has to defend himself.

It sure felt this way, anyway.

The level of language and thought was too for me to believe Tom wrote this. I assumed the younger elder had, having acted somewhat as an attack dog (in other correspondence), but no, I'm assured this came from the pastor's pen. Extremely disappointing.





Appendix

Scott Barao’s Examples of Falsehood, Jumping to Conclusions, and making insinuations to Damage the Elder’s Reputation and thus the Unity of the Church

The following are a list of partial truths (falsehoods) Scott has written or spoken recently. We have done our best to be accurate and transparent in such urgency and with much exhaustion.

To make reading this long document clearer, we have used a similar pattern for each example.
       Here is the pattern explained:
o   First: (Scott’s Words): Scott’s exact words are quoted or a summation of
his words is given.
o   Second (Wrong Impression): We point out the wrong impression his words
leave.
o   Third (Truth Scott Did Not Tell): Information is given that Scott did not tell
or did not take into consideration when making his statement.
o   Fourth (Conclusion): We point to a conclusion to be drawn from his falsehood.

Some of these examples are fairly small and insignificant but are included to establish Scott’s pattern.

Of note, the names of the elders are used so you can know who is being spoken about. The names of others have been taken out to protect them, but they can be supplied if needed.

Table of Contents of Examples of Falsehoods

1.  The Delta witnesses were ill informed because they were not in community early enough
2.  The witnesses ran to Pastor Leake to tell on Scott.

3.  Pastor Leake believed the witnesses prior to the meeting with the elders

4.  Tuesday’s congregational meeting with the elders was not truthful and was essentially spin
5.  Pastor Leake treated Scott poorly by not picking up the phone and calling him first concerning the meeting the elders needed to have about his potentially divisive words on Sunday, September 24th in the Delta community

6.  Scott chose NOT to meet with the elders because Pastor Leake was unloving

7.  Scott is crushed and hurt because he is being forced out of the church

8.  David Mora sent a hurtful email to Scott making reconciliation difficult

9.  The Elders shut off hopebook so Scott could not get his side of the story out

10.Pastor Leake is heavy handed in decision making on the elder board

11.  Pastor Leake is not open and honest with communication

12.  There has been “much turmoil” on the elder board for the past 2 years

13.  There is something fishy about Rod leaving quickly to another church with no paid position
14.  The elder board does not have enough elders for 20 years and that is suspicious

15.  Pastor Rod’s departure and Scott’s are related because both elders were treated poorly by Pastor Leake
16.  Tom is pushing out elders to get Master’s Seminary men at HBC.




I.      The delta witnesses were ill informed because they were not in community early enough

A.   Scott’s Words - in his email to his flock group (Dated Thursday Sept 28)

1.    “If you were in community last Sunday, you know how things progressed from there. One interesting thing to me is that PERSON 1 and PERSON 2 [names redacted] both arrived after community started and could have had no actual idea of how the discussion started.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    The witnesses were ill informed and jumped to conclusions, and Pastor Leake should have checked his facts before calling for a meeting.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    There were more than two witnesses.

2.    In speaking to Pastor Leake, the witnesses were careful and measured with their words and at least gave the impression they remembered exact words, flow of thought, and who spoke and who responded.

3.    One of the other witnesses was there from the beginning and heard how it started and pointed to Scott fueling the issue from the beginning.
4.    The concern the elders had was not if Scott started the discussion (and this clarification was directly made to Scott) but his own words, the tone of those words, or what he may have been urging others to say.

5.    The witnesses did not even get an opportunity to present their concerns because Scott cut off the whole process and became his own judge about his own actions. So what they knew and what could be corroborated was never determined. Scott again was rushing to judgment about them and dismissing them without a proper hearing. Scott refused to submit to the God-ordained means of accountability for elders. Instead he decided to make his case online. So, in essence, he discredited the witnesses and declared himself innocent.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott minimized the accuracy of the witnesses to make his view appear more reasonable and his judgments not hasty.

II.    The witnesses ran to Pastor Leake to tell on Scott. A. Scott’s words - (from communication with a member)

1.    “PERSON 1 and PERSON 2 [names redacted], and maybe one more person, ran to Pastor Leake after community and reported that I had incited the
discussion and demeaned the other elders.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    The witnesses were out to get Scott in trouble and were in cohorts with Tom.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    PERSON 2 asked for a time to talk with Scott even over the phone if he was going out of town and was denied that opportunity that day. Only after this denial did PERSON 2 send his written copy to Pastor Leake.

2.    PERSON 1 did not rush to Pastor Leake but was in a conversation in which the Delta conversation came up.
3.    PERSON 1 made no rush to judgment but gave a balanced assessment and conveyed that the words were potentially harmful to the unity of the elder board.

4.    Pastor Leake made no conclusions from what PERSON 1 said.

5.    Pastor Leake spoke to another witness (PERSON 3) who had similar but different concerns and details.
6.    There were also others in Delta who had concerns about the tone of Scott’s words or the tone of other people’s words and how Scott talked about the elders.

7.    Pastor Leake knew there were other witnesses and did not take the time to pursue more information but to call for a meeting so it could be handled as a team of elders.

8.    Scott abandoned and accused the elders of foul play.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott exaggerated the response of the witnesses to make the process seem hasty when it fact everyone was even-keeled and careful.

III.   Pastor Leake believed the witnesses prior to the meeting with the elders

A.   Scott’s words – (from communication with a member)

1.    “Pastor Leake believed that report and called me to a meeting tomorrow night to bring 3 witnesses and confront me.”

B.   Wrong Impression

1.    Scott’s statement gives the wrong impression that the elder meeting with Scott and the witnesses was a sham since Pastor Leake already believed them. Scott’s words gives the impression Pastor Leake held the meeting to get to Scott.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Pastor Leake did not believe or disbelieve the witnesses because he refused to make up his mind until due process was allowed. It was not one pastor’s opinion that mattered anyway.

2.    Pastor Leake only believed there was enough credibility to receive the accusations after hearing two - three testimonies as 1 Timothy 5:19 makes
clear. Again that is what 1 Timothy 5 and common sense require in order for there to be a meeting to hear a case.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott again rushed to judgment about Tom without facts and dismissed any concern about his own words and their potential impact on a local church.

IV. Tuesday’s congregational meeting with the elders was not truthful and was essentially spin

A.   Scott’s Words – (from email communication to his flock group)

1.    “And, if you attended the church-wide meeting on Tuesday evening, you may not have heard completely accurate information so I feel I owe you some truth. Before I clarify some specific issues that I think were misrepresented Tuesday, I would ask you to simply ponder the following questions.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    The elders are purposefully “misrepresented” the truth about Scott in the meeting. The elders cannot be trusted to get facts right.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    No specifics of where the elders were false was provided.

2.    There was no need for the meeting if Scott would have come in the first place and met with the elders.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott wants to present himself as more truthful to his flock group than the elders.

V.   Pastor Leake treated Scott poorly by not picking up the phone and calling him first concerning the meeting the elders needed to have about his potentially divisive words on Sunday, September 24th in the Delta community

A.   Scott’s Words = (from his email response to elders, Sept 26 4:52pm)

1.    “ … I am completely confused as to why you would not have simply picked up the phone on Sunday after church, called me and said, "Scott what in the world went on in your community today?" That seems like something that a loving brother would do. That even seems like what we tell the sheep to do when there might be a misunderstanding or confusion.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Tom did not follow the Matthew 18 loving steps as a good brother would do and as the sheep at HBC are taught to do.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Matthew 18 is not followed in Scripture in every church discipline situation or potential situation. See 1 Corinthians 5:13 for an example of instant removal from the church. Titus 3:10 also commands a swift rebuke and removal of a
factions man. The fact that Scott was an elder and was potentially causing divisions or stirring up unrest, that this was not a Matthew 18 situation where one would go to a brother first, then bring along two more etc., but instead this was a 1 Timothy 5 situation. An elder like Scott is supposed to be mature enough to know the difference and not take offense when his fellow elders are trying to be loving and careful in their actions. This is the design for elder accountability.

2.    If Scott did not have confidence in the elders to decide this case he should have left the elder board quietly and not stir up dissension for a local church.

3.    Pastor Leake and Alan and David agreed this is the correct procedure for a potentially divisive issue and needs to be treated seriously.

4.    Pastor Leake followed the Scripture procedures exactly as the text points out so he could let the Lord Jesus work in His church. (He also informed the congregation about this on the Tuesday night meeting.)

5.    Calling Scott first would not have been appropriate because the only way for there to be a solution would be for all the elders (not just Pastor Leake) to hear both sides.

6.    1 Timothy 5 indicates that witnesses have to be gathered and listened to by the whole board of elders first to determine if there is consistency with the testimonies. Then, if there is, the elder board decides what to do about that.

7.    It was not up to Pastor Leake to get on the phone and talk to Scott, then back on the phone to talk to the witnesses, back and forth. That was the role of the meeting with all the elders, which Scott refused.

8.    Nothing Scott would have said on the phone would matter or resolve the case. Pastor Leake told Scott in his email response to him that Sunday night the importance of following this, but Scott refused to listen to Pastor Leake.

9.    Pastor Leake would have done the same practice if there were two or three witnesses speaking against any elder. This was not personal or unloving.

10. Pastor Leake’s role as Senior Pastor is to make sure this happens the way he said it was supposed to happen. Scott directly defied that leadership by Pastor Leake.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Pastor Leake shared the evaluating responsibilities with the other elders, and he refused to decide a case by himself.
2.    Scott made unsubstantiated judgments against Pastor Leake’s motives in calling for the meeting first and not calling him first.
3.   Scott’s rush to judgment, not the elders, is what caused this whole mess.

VI. Scott chose NOT to meet with the elders because Pastor Leake was unloving

A.   Scott’s words (from email to elders)

1.    “I am not, and never was, opposed to meeting with the elders. But, the way you approached this situation was in my mind unloving and disrespectful of me as a fellow elder. Calling for a meeting with the elders, bringing 3 witnesses etc. seems like step 2 of Matthew 18, not a loving response of a man I have served with now for several years and who knows my heart. That is why I expressed that I was offended. And, all of this in the context of and on the heels of what Rod went through was just too much for me to bear.”

B.   Wrong Impression

1.    The reason Scott did not meet with the elders was that Pastor Leake was unloving and put elders through unfair ordeals.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Scott not only did not meet with the elders at Pastor Leake’s request but continues not to meet even now.
2.    The meeting was meant to be loving of all sides including our church.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott jumped to a negative conclusion about Pastor Leake’s actions and motives.
2.    Scott used that judgment to excuse his meeting with the elders.

VII.        Scott is crushed and hurt because he is being forced out of the church

A.   Scott’s Words – (from his departing email to the Delta community)

1.    “I write today with a broken and heavy heart and a crushed spirit to say goodbye.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Since Scott is “crushed” it leaves the impression he is not just sad to leave but feels mistreated. Scott presents himself as a victim of injustice in some undisclosed way.

C.   Truth he did not tell

1.    This caused great pain to the elders.

2.    This entire episode was not started by the elders but by Scott’s alleged words in Delta community.
3.    It could have been dealt with very quickly without pain for the church.

4.    The elders were trying to work with Scott and understand what he was saying - not falsely accuse him or push him away.
5.    There was no talk among the elders about having Scott leave the church or be removed as an elder - especially not for just one statement. 
6.    Scott has inadvertently spoken words of division before causing some pain that Pastor Leake has soothed over. So there would be no reason he would not do that again.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott chose to make the elders look unloving even though the elders were following a just and careful approach for preserving elder unity and the unity of the church.

VIII.     David Mora sent a hurtful email to Scott making reconciliation difficult

A.   Scott’s Words – (from an email to Pastor Leake)
1.    “You should know that I did receive a very hurtful and accusatory email from David that will make reconciliation a bit harder with him I suspect.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Pastor Mora’s words were hurtful, accusatory, and unloving toward Scott. They make reconciliation harder now.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Pastor Mora gave an insightful rebuke to Scott for the way Scott left the church and caused havoc. It was not a personal attack. It was well measured and laid out so Scott could consider the error of his way. (Pastor Mora himself agrees that he could have waited for better timing to send it out.)
2.    Pastor Mora correctly pointed out that shepherds do not abandon their sheep or leave churches in confusion as Scott did. Shepherds don’t tear down their fellow shepherds. Shepherds don’t cut and run. That is a mark of hirelings.

3.    Pastor Mora pointed out other inconsistencies to lead Scott to repentance, even affirming his genuine love for Scott.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott excused his wrong actions, but was quick to put the blame on Pastor Mora’s motives.
2.    Scott has consistently positioned himself as a victim rather than the one who is causing pain.

IX. The Elders shut off Hopebook so Scott could not get his side of the story out

A.   Scott’s Words – (from email letter to his flock)
1.    “I knew that as soon as I stepped down my Hopebook access would be suspended and my gmail account would be gone so I did send out the additional 2 emails right on the heels of informing the elders. As predicted, they were both gone, I was essentially erased, before noon on Monday.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Elders are manipulative and controlling not wanting truth to get out. They cut Scott off from Hopebook to make sure only their side of the story got out.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Scott published his resignation on a forum that went out to the entire database putting the entire church in a very awkward position with hundreds of people and missionaries etc. … The elders were shocked by this.

2.    It was an abuse of his use of HopeBook and left a wake of problems for the elders including upsetting our missionaries.
3.    Scott did this without even telling the elders if he was going to meet with us. So we had no way of knowing how else Scott would misuse HopeBook.
4.    We had no choice but to shut it down temporarily so no more damage could be done.
5.    We were only making a temporary decision until we could gather facts.

6.    As it turns out, Scott’s continued written communication with his flock group justified our concerns that Scott was going to shun a meeting and use electronics to make his points.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott used this action by the elders to create suspicion against the elders.

X.   Pastor Leake is heavy handed in decision making on the elder board

A.   Scott’s Words – (from email to elders)

1.    “To me, this is an issue related to your heavy-handed rule, a lack of elder plurality in decision making (as required in our bylaws) I do not question your role as Senior pastor, I understand you are a leader among equals but the overarching issue at least in my mind is respect and congeniality.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Pastor Leake is heavy handed

2.    Pastor Leake does not follow the Bylaws

3.    Pastor Leake does not respect the other elders.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    The opposite of what Scott is concerned about is true. Almost all if not all the decisions the elder board has made over the past three years (where they disagreed among themselves) were not positions Pastor Leake agreed with. Pastor Leake went along with the majority on the board and supported their decisions even when he disagreed. Pastor Leake can only think of one instance when he insisted on his way.
2.    In fact Pastor Leake purposely did not insist on his way because that helped preserve unity on the elder board.
3.    This includes important decisions about the communities, the use of the deacon board, steps in church discipline, radio timing, facility decisions, pastoral hiring, etc…

4.    The bylaws state the Senior Pastor is the “shepherd of the elder board” and the agreed upon language is he is “a leader among leaders.” The elders are supposed to follow his leadership anyway so if he does once in awhile put his foot down, the elders are not supposed to make that hard for him to lead.
They are supposed to honor that position no matter who is in it. So leadership would not be heavy handedness but fulfilling his responsibility.

5.    The other elders are to follow his lead. Scott clearly has not in this case.


D.   Conclusion

1.    The opposite of Scott’s words is the truth. Tom has not led on the elder board but allowed the other elders to have their plans and insights followed.
2.    The quietness of Tom’s leadership has caused a number of people to think Alan was leading the elder board.

XI. Pastor Leake is not open and honest with communication

A.   Scott’s Words – (from an email to elders)
1.    “… and even a lack of open and honest communication on your part. Let me give you one tangible example that speaks to me of respect and open communication. You visited at least 2 flocks in my community recently without even a simple heads-up to me about that. I in no way think it is/was inappropriate for you to visit the flocks, I hope you visit and encourage them all. I simply think it would have been a respectful and right thing to do to at least inform the community pastor in which the flock resides, of your plans to visit. It was a complete surprise to me to learn from Suzanne Young, as part of her asking the question that sparked all of what occurred on Sunday, that you had visited their flock and spoke about the future of the community strategy.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Pastor Leake is hiding thing from the other elders and potentially being dishonest.
2.    Pastor Leake is not respectful of the other elders because he does not give the community pastors a heads up about his visits of small groups.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Pastor Leake did inform the elders in an elder meeting this year, and in the elder prayer meetings on Sunday as a request, and the deacons of his attempting to visit all the small groups. This informing is even in the minutes of the deacon meeting.

2.    For example, here is one hope book post Tom wrote to all the elders and deacons

a)    “I recommend we postpone meeting as communities for these next few months and allow time for a discussion of what strategy to use - communities or thoughtful biblical courses or whatever — when we get to the new building. I would also recommend all the pastors use this time to visit the small groups and interact with them, have them in the home etc...

I have been doing this very thing and have found it very helpful in
terms of connection and shepherding oversight.” (emphasis added)

3.    Pastor Leake has been here 20 years and never has had a habit of informing the elders of any meetings unless they ask him. He holds some 15 to 20 meetings weekly. All the elders are generally aware of his responsibilities. There is nothing secret about them.

4.    Pastor Leake has visited small groups and had them in the Leake’s home since the beginning of the church and never has never hidden anything he is doing. Everything is right out in the open and always has been.

5.    Pastor Leake is very overworked - is being asked to do the work of 3 full-time pastors, has had pancreatic cancer and has a depletion of energy. Pastor Leake has told the elder board many times he needs lots of help. Even so, though overworked, he has always supplied information to any elder when they ask. Scott knew this.

D. Conclusion

1.    Scott purposefully ignored the work situation of Pastor Leake to make his criticism seem reasonable.
2.    Scott purposefully ignored the history of Pastor Leake’s interactions with his church and jumped to wrong motives on Pastor Leake’s part.
3.    This was clearly unloving and grossly unfair.

XII.        There has been “much turmoil” on the elder board for the past 2 years

A.   Scott’s Words – (in an email to his flock group)

1.    “My heart is broken over the events of this week but none of this has happened in a vacuum. This is really the culmination of much turmoil and confusion dating back well over 2 years but which was significantly accelerated in the last 2-3 weeks.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    There has been turmoil in the elder board over two years. Things are out of control and have reached a climax now.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Scott never told the elders he thought there was turmoil on the elder board.

2.    Even if there was, he was part of the turmoil.

3.    We have had regular elder meetings and worked through difficult subjects together.
4.    The elder candidates were present to give their testimony to the efforts of the elders to work together.
5.    The facility issues became urgent, strained and difficult but the elders hung together and did the best they could.

D.   Conclusion
1.    Scott exaggerated problems to make the elders seem incompetent or the leadership seem in disarray.

XIII. There is something fishy about Rod leaving quickly to another church with no paid position

A.   Scott’s Words – (from email to his flock group)

1.    “Do you find it odd that Rod would go to a different place of worship with his family when there is not a paid ministry position, or even an elder position or even any type of leadership position? Do you find it odd that he would uproot his family from the church that his daughters have grown up in and take them to a different church when there is likelihood that they might soon turn around and go to yet another church if he gets hired for a paid position? Do you find it odd that he left very suddenly? Do you find it odd that 2 elders left within days of each other? If you do find all of this odd, then don't you have to ask yourself if the reasoning given behind his leaving is really plausible? That is Rod’s story and not mine to tell. I am just asking if you find these things odd.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Something is very wrong with the elder board and Pastor Rod’s leaving should tip off everyone about this fact. This means the elders cannot be trusted.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Pastor Leake and Alan brought Pastor Rod onto the elder board years ago and oversaw Rod’s entire training, and ordination. They have been very supportive of him from the beginning. That is one of the reasons Pastor Rod expressed his appreciation.
2.    The elders voted to pay for some of Pastor Rod’s seminary and encouraged him.
3.    Pastor Leake spent time with Pastor Rod when he was not an elder to give him wisdom and opportunity as preparation.
4.    After Pastor Rod’s ordination, he made it clear to the elders (though Pastor Rod usually did not speak much or in great detail) he wanted to be in full-time ministry - possibly missions. So Pastor Leake periodically provided Pastor Rod with pastoral opportunities to consider and pursue beyond HBC. This was not a secret.

5.    Maybe as many as 5 times Pastor Leake encouraged Pastor Rod to find a full-time pastoral ministry.
6.    That is why Pastor Leake agreed to let Pastor Rod give a try at Baltimore Bible Church to see if it was a good fit for him.
7.    Recently Pastor Leake, Pastor Mora and Pastor Rod had a serious talk about what kind of leadership a Senior Pastor is supposed to provide for a church. We talked through various statements made and expectations. It was a productive, robust talk that ended in prayer as mature brothers in Christ are supposed to treat each other.

8.    Pastor Rod believed his views were compatible with the Bylaws of HBC.
9.    All of us accepted Pastor Rod’s testimony.

10. In the process of talking, Pastor Leake informed Pastor Rod that the church would be looking for an experienced man to be a first hire to work with Pastor Leake. Pastor Leake wanted a man who could take over the whole church if his health went back quickly. Pastor Plumley and Scott were aware of this preference in hiring a more experienced full-time pastor.

11. Pastor Rod still decided to leave HBC now and help a friend in Baltimore. He wrote out his own reasons for leaving and stated what he chose to say before the congregation. Pastor Rod left our church honorably without compulsion from Pastor Leake.
12. Pastor Leake also endorsed Pastor Rod to another position when another area pastor called him.

D.   Conclusion

1.    This is actually another example of Pastor Leake not forcing the elders to follow his will. This is especially important to understand given hurt Tom has experienced in the past.


XIV. The elder board does not have enough elders for 20 years and that is suspicious

A.   Scott’s Words - letter to his flock

1.    Did you know that HBC has had a total of 7 elders in 20 years? To date, 3 resigned very suddenly, 1 “retired” (you will have to ask him why), and 1 is brand new. Do you think that says anything about HBC leadership or how the elder board functions? (Some of you may have been at HBC when (Name taken out on purpose) stepped down as elder.)”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Something is wrong with the elder board. They should have more elders so you should question the elders.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    It is very hard to find men in our region who believe our definitive doctrinal statement and our exact philosophy of ministry. We are a normal church in that regard but required elders who have a hybrid theology that unfortunately few have on the east coast.
2.    We are an expositional ministry and doctrinally driven church, which requires much more teaching from our elders, and therefore need to take time to train men.

3.    We appointed Scott even though he was not as prepared as others or even properly vetted in all aspects, in part to show our willingness to keep giving the church more elders.

4.    Pastor Tony retired so that he could devote time to getting ready for his next step.
5.    We have 5 elder candidates who Tom is helping right now to get ready.
a)    Here is a statement from Pastor Tony regarding his retirement:

“My primary reasons for retirement last July 2016 are as follows:

(a)  I wanted to devote my time with MedMission2000 ministry with its increasing work. Besides, the medical healing aspect, the Lord has given us the opportunity to work with a likeminded church (Grace from Heaven in Pasay City) under the leadership of Pastor Leo Ordiales in friendly cooperation with The Masters Expositors Academy (Sean Ransom, Wm Vince Green, Allan Luciano and others). In fact, we have had at least 2 seminars held last year in training Filipino Pastors. In addition we have work in helping the Prison ministry and Feeding the poor.

(b)  Last year, I developed Type 2 Adult onset diabetes with Hypertension. They are both well controlled now.
(c)  As we get up in age, My wife and I desire to live outside MD where

the winter is not senior-friendly besides she wanted to live closer to her grandkids (Steven and Jeddah's) in Merced, CA.
I thank God's providence in our lives and for the remarkable journey He has given us. His sustaining mercy and grace are real not only for us but also for our beloved Hope Bible Church with the faithful leadership of Pastors Tom and Alan. Our church will prevail no matter what people say against it.

Grace to you, Pastor Tony (Emeritus)  (Philippians 3:7)”

6.    No one works harder at getting men onto the elder board than Pastor Leake. He spends time almost every week in training men for ministry.
7.    Some of the men we would consider to be moving toward being elders moved away including Steve Wreesman, Quincy Jones, Peter Lee, Steve Gatdula, and Terry Taylor.

8.    One elder who was quickly removed in the past admitted he did not believe in our Bylaws and realized he had made an ethical mistake, and withdrew himself. The same elder we later found out had hurt three previous churches before coming to HBC.

D. Conclusion

1.    This is a clear attempt to mislead the congregation away from trusting their hard working and honest elders.
2.    This is contentious.

XV. Pastor Rod’s departure and Scott’s are related because both elders were treated poorly by Pastor Leake
A.   Scott’s Words – (in his email letter to his flock group)
1.    “Is there a connection between my leaving and Rod’s leaving? Yes, absolutely. Not for the exact same reasons but based on how Rod was treated over the past 2-3 weeks and how I was dealt with on Sunday evening and into Monday by Pastor Leake, after accusations were made against me by some fellow Delta members, I could see what I thought was the handwriting on the wall.”

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Pastor Rod was poorly treated and so was Scott by Pastor Leake.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    Pastor Rod was treated with graciousness and kindness by Pastor Leake in working through a potential area of disagreement.
2.    There have been things that have been very hard for Pastor Leake on the elder board.
3.    Scott was not even at the meeting with Pastor Rod to know how Pastor Rod was treated.
4.    Written communication was done respectfully and with much prayer.

5.    Pastor Rod has been asked to continue to be one of our teachers in the GAMA Bible Institute.

D.   Conclusion

1.    Scott may find a correlation, but it is based on a false impression of Pastor Leake.

XVI.    Pastor Leake is pushing out elders to get Master’s Seminary men at HBC.

A.   Scott’s Words - (in his email letter to his flock group)

1.    “Will the elder board (or PL) require that if another pastor is hired at HBC, that that man be a “master’s seminary grad”? The simplest way to get a true answer to that question would be to say to the elders; “Please share the job description with the congregation”.

B.   Wrong impression

1.    Pastor Leake is not forthcoming about his true reasons for Pastor Rod leaving and his plans for the future hiring at HBC. He is trying to stack the elder board with TMS men.

C.   Truth Scott did not tell

1.    None of the other pastors except David Mora are from The Master’s Seminary.
2.    In our second year of the church we had another Master’s Seminary man here who was overbearing and was a very poor fit. This was very hard on Pastor Leake and almost led to him leaving the church. Pastor Leake hardly wants to repeat that mistake.
3.    Scott did not ask for a copy of the job description for the pastoral hire to know one way or the other.
4.    The job description is not even completely finished since there was no reason for it to be published until the funds were available.
5.    The current wording of the draft on Pastor Leake’s computer is the following

a)    “A Master of Divinity degree or higher (required)
b)    Graduate of The Master’s Seminary or another like-minded institution (preferred);”

c)    This is only a draft and was going to be submitted to the elder board for alterations and approval at the right time. But even here with Pastor Leake’s wording specifically states other seminaries are fine. It is like-mindedness we are after.
6.    The last time we were looking for a full-time hire we did not have a TMS graduate as a requirement but as something preferred. Scott showed no interest in researching this fact.

7.    We work in the GAMA region with those who are not TMS, like Paul Shirley.

8.    Pastor Leake and the elders are much more interested in the right man than a TMS graduate.

D. Conclusion

1.    Scott has made an unfounded insinuation.

Closing

The above documentation is only what we had time to go back and prove presently. It is my testimony as the Senior Pastor that there is quite a bit more evidence from the past of Scott’s mishandling truth or causing unneeded friction between people.

Some of the difficulties of working with Scott have become public and you know and have seen them yourself, such as at a recent congregational meeting.

Some of them are more private and several in the congregation have had run ins with Scott which required smoothing things over afterwards. A couple of sheep have had their feelings hurt and almost left the church.

There were also two issues when Scott was being evaluated as an elder that we had to sort through and overlooked in hopes they were not indicative of his character. In hindsight those issues appear to be more important now.

Recently Scott was corrected by a couple of other leaders for a divisive comment in a hopebook thread with the elders and deacons.

Elders have asked Scott to try to moderate his words and not be so reactionary, alarming, or brusk when working behind the scenes with the other elders.

There have been many examples of Scott not using gentle wisdom from his over reaction to the deacons announcing a new logo - to what appeared to be wasted money on the locks on our doors. Each could have been handled more wisely but were not.

We have prayed to the Father above that your hearts will not be deceived or think less of us for keeping a lot of information private. We don’t tell some things because we are trying to show love and protect reputations. Only when we are pushed like this do we feel compelled to make some information known for the sake of the unity of the church and our ability to lead the congregation. Satan would love nothing more than for your opinion of us to be diminished by these subtle falsehoods.

No comments:

Post a Comment