Ep 29: More on Alan Scott, the Disassociation of Vineyard Anaheim, and Leadership Ethics
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 сен 2024
- On episode 29, Luke Geraty and Wesley McLachlan are joined by Dr. Steve Burnhope to discuss Alan & Kathryn Sarah Scott's leadership, the disassociation of the Anaheim Vineyard, and the complexities of the recent lawsuit that has been filed against them. Plus we talk a bit more about the theological implications, honor culture, and more.
If you missed episode 28 where Luke & Wes discussed this more, go here: • Ep 28: The Anaheim Vin...
❇️ Recommended Relevant Reading ❇️
"Lawsuit: Vineyard Anaheim Exit Was About Money, Not Holy Spirit"
www.christiani...
The website from the plaintiffs
friendsofviney...
The actual lawsuit document
friendsofviney...
Alan & Kathryn Scott "family update"
dwellingplacea...
"Carol Wimber’s Letter to VA’s Board"
vineyardanahei...
"Vineyard USA Statement on Anaheim Vineyard"
vineyardusa.or...
"Leading Church Exits Vineyard"
www.christiani...
"Why Anaheim’s decision to leave the Vineyard is a betrayal of trust"
www.premierchr...
"The Vineyard was built on friendship and shared values. Then a leading pastor split"
religionnews.c...
"Vineyard Anaheim renamed the Dwelling Place after split: 'Not a departure from what has gone before'"
www.christianp...
"‘Extreme Betrayal’: Flagship Vineyard Church Announces Split from Vineyard USA"
julieroys.com/...
"VINEYARD ANAHEIM STATEMENT"
www.dirtyglory....
"Bob Fulton’s Letter to VA’s Board"
vineyardanahei...
"Penny Fulton’s Letter to VA’s Board"
vineyardanahei...
"The Theological One About the Anaheim Vineyard"
www.thomascree...
"Be Like Lance"
lukegeraty.com...
"On Associations, Networks, & Denominations…"
lukegeraty.com...
Steve Burnhope's books 👇🏽
"Atonement and the New Perspective: The God of Israel, Covenant, and the Cross" amzn.to/3VcPBRE
"How to Read the Bible Well: What It Is, What It Isn’t, and How To Love It (Again)" amzn.to/3tZPzAM
"Telling the Old, Old Story: In a Postmodern World" amzn.to/3ETSX6K
👇🏽👇🏽Leave comments or questions below👇🏽👇🏽
|| FOLLOW ME ||
Facebook: / lukegeraty
Twitter: / lukegeraty
Instagram: / lukegeraty
Podcast: sacramentalcha...
Website: lukegeraty.com
Support: / lukegeraty
What Alan did was flat out wrong. I attended Vineyard until Alan made the announcement. He said alot of nothing. I emailed the church many times asking for a reason or explanation and all they said was " we posted it on the web site. Alan is a coward for not doing a Q&A with the church. He should have left and started his own church. What a weakling he is.
How was it any more wrong than the stuff Lance did? It's selective anger by you bitter ex-Anaheim folks. The "Anaheim Vineyard" ceased to exist about a week after Lance took over, and certainly it was done when John died.
I mean, even Carol went to Christy's church......but now she's crying? Where were her and Bob Fulton when Lance took over?
Lance didn't change the name, so it was all good the evil he did? Seriously?
@@michaelsbeverly Hi thanks for the comment. I was only at Vineyard when Alan was Pastor. I knew nothing of Vineyards history. Bummer the way things went down because I loved Vineyard under Alans leadership until the split. My opinion is he handled it all wrong...never giving a real reason or answer for the split. Again, this is my personal feeling toward The situation and I also respect your position. Thank you
@@miket9732 You're in an interesting position, not being old school Vineyard at Anaheim, so no history under Lance....well, I'm an atheist, but if you're looking for a good church, go out to Inland. Not saying you should be a Christian (really, study atheism and be free) but at least Travis is a good person (even though I totally disagree with his worldview and profession).
Hey any time you want to go back I’ll be there only listening to the worship but then I’m out. I don’t think I’m gonna stay past that guy needs to go
@@michaelsbeverly they are all evil to me idk why I bother going.
I been attending Anaheim Vineyard since 92; what Alan Scott did to are church is totally evil from the very beginning; he is lying. I know people that try to negotiate with him, and I know there was no respond and his part so he’s lying, I am intercesor I saw that he was doing from the very beginning, and I know God’s going to do justice to us 😢
They should've started their own church. So wrong to change names and leave the Vineyard denomination. But they kept the building, the land, and all the financial funds. Just wrong, so many peoples lives have been changed at Anaheim Vineyard.
I know mine was.
The best thing they could have done in my outsider's view is left and started a church on their own if they didn't want to be a part of Vineyard. This is still what I think they should do. Especially so since this particular church is one of the biggest players in the early vineyard movement.
I wonder too about the vineyard school also abruptly being shut down and no longer a thing prior to 2020 lockdowns. I'm sure that left many uncertain of what's going on. It was very strange to me
The school was in the red financially way back under Wimber, under Lance he kept it afloat by bleeding the general church fund to keep the school afloat. Alan gave the school a 24 month chance to be financially sound under the new principal but due to competition in the area, it failed. Having a congregation of 287 when Alan took over, (a count by one of the board members who told me the number), Lance and the overpopulated administration and staff were living off the proceeds from the sale of the building that is now the Fairmont School. Failing infrastructure, not having enough money to repair one of the two elevators, Lance filled it with sand, etc etc of examples.
Alan “had all the board members resign.” Is that literally true as you say, or did the board members term out and were then replaced? Huge difference.
I've always thought the phrase "discernment is a two-way street" deserved a bit more discussion and reflection.
Very good point.
I think that vineyard was pretty dead and dying. Two large vineyards in my area are closing and their buildings are for sale. I think it’s God’s grace to give this church another chance.
He won't honor liars and deceivers!
Judge dismisses $62m US lawsuit against controversial former NI pastor and singer wife. Wed 20 Dec 2023 at 22 :50 - Belfast Telegraph
I love the Kingdom of God!
The Vineyard seems to me better suited to a Presbyterian (or Presbyterian-type) government.
If you modeled it on the ECO, EPC, or PCA, you can get a balance between the place and power of the congregation, the senior pastor, and the “episcopate” expressed collectively in a presbytery.
In the ECO, EPC, PCA, any church can leave the denom/association, but it requires a majority of congregational vote. A pastor/board would not be able to suddenly, unilaterally leave from one day to the next.
It’s not perfect, but would be progress in the right direction, imo.
I think the new reorganization is definitely moving in an Episcopalian model, though I'm not sure anyone has said that (yet). But the structure seems to be set up in a manner that could eventually end up there if the authority extends beyond the local church, which is the primary question / concern / solution!
I think the new reorganization is definitely moving in an Episcopalian model, though I'm not sure anyone has said that (yet). But the structure seems to be set up in a manner that could eventually end up there if the authority extends beyond the local church, which is the primary question / concern / solution!
Agreed. A modified presbyterian form seems like a better fit, and has long and deep Christian roots
@@sacramentalcharismaticI think that the Vineyard movement has learned some hard lessons over this.
The problems with an Episcopalian church structure have been building up for many years in Vineyard churches, but this situation has brought them out of hiding. They are all in the light now, and from what I have heard, the new US leaders seem to be open to addressing this.
When problems can no longer be swept under the rug, they get addressed to some extent. I have noticed too that when Episcopalian style church leadership won't deal with problems, you have to appeal to their self interests. And that usually includes publicity. I have seen that work in the Vineyard movement when oversight leaders had previously turned a blind eye to people's valid concerns.
Is the Vineyard opening up to even more deception allowing a woman "co-pastor"? (1 Tim.2:12)
Why do you stay there?
If we have time to talk about the people involved we have time to pray for them! Why spend any minute on things that fall short to the love of the LORD?
Speaking the truth IS love. And plenty of people are praying... we should continue to do so!
Why do you assume we aren't praying for them...to repent! Evil must be exposed or it will take over. Wake up!
The biggest error in this video is acting like Lance Pittluck succeeded John Wimber. Carl Tuttle succeeded John and Lance succeeded Carl. Hugh difference.
Carol Wimber once miscaractorized me in writing as an accusing stalker type who fancied myself an expert on the law. No there was no mechanism for whistle blowing at the Vineyard during the Wimber/ Tuttle/ Pittluck transition.
John Wimber himself talked about his problems with church boards, leadership, and colleagues throughout his career frequently from the pulpit. He joked about the time he asked Chuck Smith if Smith remembered when they got a divorce and Wimber got custody of the kids.
The US constitution prohibits Congress from making any law establishing religion. The US supreme court has therefore determined that no court can hear an eclesiatrical debate. It may decide on matters of incorporation, which is mostly a function of state law.
Back in Wimber's time, the only legal members of the church were the board in members. The congregation were told they were members, but when they brought up questions, they were told that really they were not members.
John appointed members who were fairly weak to his will. They hired Carl and then Carl appointed board members of his choosing. They hired Lance and then so on. This was the design. It appears that Alan Scott followed the design and legally has control of the $62 million in assets.
Legally, Carol Wimber and the other plaintiffs are not or no longer members of the church. The only way that they have a prayer in court is to aledge fraud. This is an uphill battle.
The plaintiffs say that they have tried to appeal to Alan Scott according to Christian standards. This and other videos treat this as 90 per cent an case of Christian peace making. However, at this point it is 90 per cent a secular case over the control of assets.
Well, I agree with much of what you say here, but you're wrong about your history.
When Carl fell, John stepped back into leadership. I know, I was there. John was the defacto pastor when Lance was hired, he was preaching, etc.
Perhaps it was a temporary position for John and not all legally drawn up into the corporate charter, but to claim Lance succeeded Carl is to forget what actually happened.
When you write, "They hired Lance," you write that after stating Carl appointed board members of his choosing. You're implying that Carl was part of the hiring of Lance.
Obviously not true, when Lance was hired, Carl was back working as a painter (I know, I ran into him getting coffee one early morning at 7-11).
All that said, I agree with you that Carol Wimber, et al are going to lose and be further embarrassed (if that's possible, actually, they probably have no shame).
When Lance was King, he hired and fired as he wished. Nobody said anything when he cursed Christy Wimber (he and Bert W. called her a bat and told staff they were forbidden to talk to them, ie her and her now ex-husband, because they were in league with Satan.
Where was the gnashing of teeth when Lance fired people for political and business reasons? Or for nepotism or whatever?
Nowhere. Nobody cared.
Now Lance is part of a lawsuit? To unwind something he helped happen? Really? You'd think he'd have better things to do, like write those books on how to be a terrible leader while getting paid a huge salary to play golf, talk to people at Starbucks, and work for a few hours on a Sunday.....
From my recollection, Todd Hunter filled in for a little while. I think that was after John passed away and before they hired Lance to leave NYC and come back to So Cal. I heard that Carol and Penny pushed to get Lance to come home to So Cal after he and his wife lost their young son.
actually called Great Britain
From my understanding, Great Britain is the island itself, England, Scotland, and Wales. The UK also includes Northern Ireland and the other small islands.
Don't know if you ave heard the latest... The Pastors at Causeway Vineyard have resigned/pushed. Given that Neil was married to Kathryn Scott's sister; it's hardly surprising. Many of the leaders of the various teams have also resigned (I can give some names privately if needed). This situation is pathetic. Listen; l am no fan of Alan Scott (I am a conservative evangelical but have family members caught up in this), but it is quite obvious that UK Vineyard have been instructed to throw him under the bus. It is causing chaos. Causeway Vineyard is being taken over by a coup driven by the Lynas family. What about Alan's former friends who are still on staff, such as Tre Sheppard - how can folks like that continue in good faith?
Interesting news found online: Judge dismisses $62m US lawsuit against controversial former NI pastor and singer wife. Wed 20 Dec 2023 - Belfast Telegraph
Pi
Ya’ll are very invested in the politics and heritage of a man-made name and community. Being a bit more flexible with things, that ultimately have no bearing in the grand scheme, would be super helpful for everyone’s peace of mind. A lot of people are offended when there’s really nothing to be offended about.
I get people might dislike the choices and believe them to be disrespectful or dishonourable. But sueing for $62m fraud… it’s retaliation and veryyyyy unchristian.
Sara, what you refer to as a “man made name and community” significantly overlooks the work of the Holy Spirit in the past. The Vineyard, and in particular THAT Vineyard, was birthed by a move of the Holy Spirit. The name itself was even seemingly communicated via the Spirit to Vineyard founders. Things like this have a HUGE bearing on the present moment and the significantly spiritual abuse happening under Alan Scott’s leadership not only impacts people in the present, it impacts people in the future.
Pretending there’s nothing to be concerned about or addressing is a deeply flawed and unChristian approach to the matter.
As a matter of fact: none of us are suing the Scotts for stealing that church community and destroying so much of God’s work from the past 40 years. That’s a group of people who were involved in the Board and based on their concern for truth, justice, and ending the spiritual abuse taking place there.
Do you attend that church? Are you local to it? I’d be curious if you have attended.
@@sacramentalcharismatic things like that don’t have a HUGE bearing on the reality of what the Holy Spirit is doing right now, though. It was a great movement and it did great things, now it’s evolving, as God often does with the things he has created and blessed. He tells us to be on the look out for the new thing he is doing. Imagine, for a second, that God truly did speak to Alan and he’s acting in obedience. Do you think God is concerned about the legacy of Vineyard? Do you think God is concerned about the man-made politics and legal system surrounding the issue? I honestly find it hard to believe that, considering everything I have read and learned about Jesus’ walk on earth. Don’t hold fast to what God did, look for what God is doing.
Absolutely, honour and respect the things that God has done in the past: but not to the point of calling is spiritual abuse because a man is convicted to believe that God is doing something new on the ground where great things have happened in the past.
I believe your anger, confusion, disappointment and sentiment is all valid and absolutely, you’re allowed to feel those ways. But I think there’s a degree of misplaced emotion and it may be clouding the lens of some of the views that people involved have taken.
Your response highlights my point. Stealing a church and its assets is not “evolving.” And your minimizing such spiritual abuse is EXTREMELY suspicious and makes me wonder if you really are following the facts here. God doing new things equals deceiving a church community and pulling them out of the movement they helped birth? That’s a version of discernment that’s extremely dangerous, which is probably why you aren’t suspicious of his SINGLE opinion on the matter, to the point of ignoring THOUSANDS of other voices and people who have been closely rooted in what God’s BEEN doing and IS doing. The emphasis on “used to” in your language makes me wonder if you are aware of how arrogant such thinking is? It’s the same type of spiritually abusive language that’s been used for the past few years… and it’s deeply unbiblical and dangerous.
Following Jesus isn’t spiritually abusive. Taking the risks that the Spirit invites us to take isn’t spiritually abusive. What’s spiritually abusive is manipulating people with misleading statements and claiming to be under spiritual attack when once has done all of the things that Alan Scott has done.
So again, I ask you.. do you attend The Dwelling Place? You didn’t answer my previous question on that and it may or may not be an important part of your process of discernment too.
@@sacramentalcharismatic asking personal questions to determine a bias toward what I’m saying is unnecessary which is why I haven’t answered your question about my relationship with the church or the people involved.
You can’t steal a church. That’s absurd. You can change a church, move a church, rename a church, alter the dynamic of a church. Even if you wreck or a ruin a church, you can’t steal a church. That’s very sensationalised language that I think is being used to evoke an emotive reaction.
As for the assets: the church is not a business, it’s a family. If I think of this in the context of my own family, if I gave a family member stewardship over funds and the authority to lead a project, and they used those funds to carry the project forward with their own vision, I wouldn’t think they had stolen from me. I would be excited to see where they took the project next. If I were to approach that situation with offence because they weren’t aligning with my vision, I would think that was my own pride issue. If I were to view the changes as an insult to my own achievements, that would be my ego talking. I certainly wouldn’t sue them.
Vineyard have to decide whether they’re coming from a business point of view, or a family point of view. God’s view of managing the church as a business is pretty clear, I think.
Spiritual abuse is using spirituality to control other people; by using emotional tactics like shaming, fear or intimidation; preventing or demanding particular practises; causing harm to individuals or compromising their safety; or patterns of control or possession that compromise an individual’s freedom or rights.
From what I understand, the Scott’s have changed the name of the church and the denomination that the church is associated with. I personally don’t believe that comes under the category of abuse. Again, it’s very sensationalised language.
The congregation are free to leave, they’re not being forced to join Dwelling Place or contribute to it in anyway. So it’s not a matter of freedom or rights, it’s a matter of a name and some money. Again, I think people are free to be disappointed or mournful about the changes, but calling it abuse is a leap.
I’m not speaking of the approach that the Scott’s have taken or individual conversations that have taken place. Only the overall context of the decision that was made.
Of course that doesn’t affect how people are feeling about the situation, and as I’ve said all of those feelings and experiences are valid, so I’m not undermining or overlooking them. I just don’t think that how people feel is necessarily a good measure of right or wrong-doing. And people are free to voice their feelings, opinions and beliefs on the matter, so nobody is being silenced.
I think it’s also important to note that the Scott’s are not American, they come from a country where loyalty to a name or denomination just isn’t a thing. There’s no great pride in the UK and Northern Ireland in planting a church under a denomination and holding onto the legacy of that name for generations. In the UK there have been revivals and huge growth within denominations that then branch off, or change completely, and that’s considered normal, healthy evolution of the church. In fact, churches that don’t evolve in this way often become stagnant.
I think, ultimately, people need to ask God whether he cares as much about the vineyard legacy as they do. And if he does, and if the Scott’s are in the wrong here, what is God going to do about it? Is God leading these Individuals to sue? Because tbh, leading a church in a new direction sounds like something God would do, suing for millions of dollars does not.
@@sarasweeney1480I don’t know you or Luke. What I found interesting, Sara, was your question/response asking if God cares about a people’s legacy or about something that happened decades ago. I could be overthinking, but I don’t think God is overly concerned about building church brand names for the sake like businesses. However, I think there’s a side to treating the legacy with respect, as respect towards God. We regard the writings of the Apostle Paul, and the man himself, as good things. He lived a long time ago and his writings are just as old. But we hold them up with high regards in respect to Jesus Himself. Jesus even proclaimed He would bless those who bless those He has sent.
Too often we can treat “older/previous” generations as yesterday’s news and as unwanted, and invoke the name of God and the Holy Spirit to confirm our arrogance. Being there first hand for many of these types of “prophetic” utterances from current Dwelling Place leadership, it showed me the pastors weren’t pastoring. They were generating hype, followed with a donation basket. To me, the name of God was not made holy, but profaned to be a pressuring tool to get people to donate. That is not a legacy to be proud of now, nor in the future.
I attend DP-Anaheim, and have adopted a wait and see position. It's Very concerning to say the least. It appears that DP-Anaheim wanted closed door meetings with Jay, but Jay of V-USA wanted open and transparent meetings, which seems like the honest thing to do. DP-Anaheim speaks of transparency but only in lip service concerning the departure. Now, the congregation gets to pay for legal fees, which I'm sure nobody signed up for that.
Lastly, on Nov 20, 2022 in service, Allan Scott tells us that "our Board of Directors have done everything possible to try to resolve that in a relational way in a peaceful way, in biblical way, and unfortunately despite our efforts in that, that just hasn't been possible." Which cannot be true in the light of Jay's attempts to get them to come to the table in the spirit of truth and transparency.
See link below with the legal complaint which is now public.
friendsofvineyard.com/
What exactly are you waiting to see? I think you make some really great points!
@Luke Geraty I was waiting on the Lord to give me direction from His Word and to see if Alan would give us clear, real answers. However, the Lord has taken me thru His Word, given me scripture, and I no longer attend DP-ANAHEIM.