Statement Regarding Heritage Baptist Church

Setting the Stage

The church that I attend- Legacy Baptist- was founded as a church plant by Heritage Baptist Church (hereinafter HBC). For many years, we have maintained close ties with HBC, which we refer to affectionately as our "sister church." We attend joint church events a few times per year, often give and receive invitations to major celebrations, etc.

HBC is my people, in other words.

Over the past few years, there have been accusations brought forward against HBC, and particularly against the lead pastor, Jason Young. These accusations have been made by folks who used to attend HBC- some of whom are long-standing friends of mine. These accusations have emerged in bursts, which have intensified into Google reviews and full-throated shouting matches on social media. (If one can shout through a keyboard, that is.)

So I LARPed a detective. I cosplayed an investigative reporter. I've investigated. Now to report.

Before I start, I must adjure you by the gazelles and the hinds of the field to read the entirety of this post. It's gonna be long. Grab a snack and a glass of water, and promise me that you will read the whole thing. This is not a topic to be covered halfway.

A Dog By The Ears

I want to first briefly explain the justification, goal, and process of my investigation.

Scripture warns against meddling in stuff that ain't yo business (Pr. 26:17). I've discussed my connection to HBC already; I believe that this endeavor is not only appropriate but necessary, because:

1. Proverb 26:20 tells us that where there is no whisperer, contention quiets down. This is not, however, a directive on how to deal with whisperers. A malicious whisperer will keep whispering regardless of what you do; that is par for the course of the Christian life. However, once the whispers have reached a level that cannot be ignored, they must be responded to, and the only way to respond is by dealing with the issue in the light. A fire in a fireplace burns out if it's left alone, but a forest fire has to be preempted with a control burn so that there are no more kindling-morsels in the dark crannies for it to feed on. If there is truth behind the accusations then the truth should be acknowledged and submitted to. If not, then the truth should be exposed for all to see and judge accordingly. (Rom. 3:8, Jn. 3:20)

2. We wait on God to take our revenge (Rom. 12:19). When the wolf bites, the sheep shouldn't chase it down a month later to stab it in its sleep. This is not, however, the same thing as a shepherd clonking the wolf on the head. We do rely on God to be our defender- but we must also be faithful to do our part to speak up for the truth and to preserve the purity and beauty of the Bride of Christ. Sometimes this means rhetorical "self-defense" (2 Cor. 11). We fight to preserve unity (Eph. 4) and to walk in love with one another. This will require dealing with the hard things head-on.

I believe that I am in the right place to undertake this because:

1. My family is directly affected by HBC and adjacent events

2. I am distant enough from HBC to not fall into the category of Biden's DOJ investigating Hunter, but close enough that these events have real ramifications for myself and my family, and I have an established relationship from which to launch into an investigation

3. It is a Christian duty to pursue justice (Micah 6:8), and whether that justice is in honoring my fathers in the faith by defending them against slander or in protecting victims from an abusive pastorate it must be pursued

4. I cannot preach patriarchy- and accountability for patriarchs- and then ignore accusations that within my own community patriarchal abuse is being protected

The goal of my investigation is:

1. To be able to stand before Jesus having been faithful in the pursuit of justice.

2. To have an educated opinion of the situation in my local church community that allows me to deal with the situation faithfully.

3. To give that opinion in a public and thorough way, in hopes of bringing light and truth to a subject that, so far, is shrouded in shadowy accusations and implications, and, by doing so, to provide clarity to many others who are wondering what in the world is going on.

4. I do NOT have any kind of authority over any of the parties in the situation, and I do NOT have any personal griefs with any of the parties in the situation. This post is observational; I am not attempting to deliver a judgment. I have investigated a public issue, and I am making a public statement about it; I am giving my honest and unvarnished opinion, and what the involved parties do with it is their business. This is also why I have not pursued discussion (other than for research purposes) with any of the parties before publishing this article.

5. I have immense love, particularly, for the people of HBC, and immense respect for the eldership of HBC. Like I said, they are my people, and Pastor Young and the other leaders are my fathers in the faith. I am also a pastor's kid, and I understand that being a pastor is a thankless job, and everyone always knows how you should have done it (half the church, of course, thinks you went too far, and the other half thinks you didn't go far enough). All that I say comes from this heart of love and respect, but I am committed before God to speak the truth in that love, and to speak with complete forthrightness; anything less would be unloving as well as dishonest.

The process that I have pursued has been:

1. To seek to understand the scope of the accusations against HBC; this has been ascertained primarily through the documents provided by Tyler Kirkpatrick and associates (hereinafter referred to as TKA)

2. To seek to ascertain the veracity of the accusations; this has been done by conversing with people on both sides of the issues, including HBC eldership, TKA, current members of HBC, and first-person accounts from victims and/or former HBC attendees, as well as by consulting the written testimonials of former HBC members

3. To seek to establish a framework that makes the best sense of the information gathered in steps 1 and 2

I had initially intended to provide footnotes and receipts for my observations (i.e. Jimmy Bob Jones said: "Jason Young beat me half to death with a pool noodle on January 32nd, 1903"), but have elected not to do so because:

1. Some of the individuals I spoke with did not wish to be quoted publicly

2. To quote any individual without quoting every individual could lead to a perception of either personal attack or favoritism, as well as feed the general air of partisanship in which I have no interest in participating
   

My foundational assumption is that all parties in this dispute are well-intentioned fellow believers in Christ. If love bears all things and believes all things (1 Cor. 13:4-8), then before I am willing to ascribe malice to any party there must be an extremely high bar of evidence that is met. Where there is benefit of the doubt to be given, I intend to give it. I acknowledge from the outset that it is possible that Jason Young is a master manipulator and gifted narcissist, or that TKA are malicious slanderers with no motivation other than the desire to smear the Name of Christ. I acknowledge these possibilities and reject them, trusting that if either is the case God is quite capable of exposing sin, and I pray that He does so.

Regarding the use of names and stories, my intention is to only publish either things which have already been made public, things which I have specific permission to make public, or things which I can see no imaginable objection to publication.

I do not pretend that I have attained an exhaustive understanding of every issue, every testimony, or every accusation in each category. My goal was to take enough of a core sample to be able to make a fair assessment of the issues, and I believe that I have done so.

This post has not been approved or commissioned or pre-screened by anyone.

Lastly, a note regarding humor. I know that this is a very serious topic, and I have not taken the process lightly. If you are reading this because gossip is fun and you want to get in on the "tea," then you need to take a hard look at the trail of wreckage that led up to this point. There is a wasteland of broken friendships, sleepless nights, deep hurts, and outpoured tears behind this post. I do not in any way think that the situations we are about to discuss are laughable; many of them are worthy of weeping with those who weep.

I also, however- and this is a very considered opinion based on all of my research- believe that everybody needs to calm the heck down. And that's about as close as I come to cussing, so... you know I'm serious.

Seriously y'all. Take a deep breath and allow a chuckle or two. Jesus is on the throne, and it is all gonna be OK.

With all of that as introduction, let us begin.

We Three Categories

The accusations against HBC can be broken down into three overarching categories:

1. Abuse

2. Culture

3. Preference

I will address these categories one at a time, beginning with the most significant, after which I will conclude with my opinion on the matter, and what I see as the best path forward for all concerned.

Abuse

Within this category I would include all allegations regarding domestic abuse, criminal activity, and death or risk of death in the cases of children and mothers. We are talking about things like:

• wives being given no support in pursuing a Biblically justified divorce

• wives receiving no protection from a husband who has cheated on them repeatedly or physically abused them

• wives being verbally and emotionally abused

• I will modify a statement from TKA: "The HBC culture of excessive husband-reverence and silence has prevented [multiple women] from getting meaningful help."

• sexual abuse occurring within the homes of congregants and/or former congregants

• acts of criminal violence occurring within the homes of congregants

• mothers having complications related to childbirth

• children dying or having been placed into positions of serious danger through negligence

• failure to appropriately involve civil authorities in criminally abusive situations

Marital Strife

I have spoken with multiple people who have received marital counseling from Jason. My conclusions are as follows:

Jason does indeed support women in Biblically-justified divorces.

Jason has a strong desire to see reconciliation in broken relationships, and will always pursue the preservation of a marriage if it is possible; he has a very high threshold for "OK, this marriage needs to end," and generally a very patient- or slow-moving, depending on which side of the fence you are on- approach to counseling.

TKA have identified a real problem in the failure to protect (some) women from manipulative/abusive husbands. This is not due to malice, but nevertheless it is a real, and serious, problem. Women in these situations, who perhaps cannot communicate clearly, who perhaps don't even know how to articulate what they are going through, who may not be able to produce much by way of evidence- they need to be able to get help. This doesn't mean we "believe all women," but it does mean that we need to recognize the vulnerability of wives and kids and have a very strong and aggressive protective/investigative instinct when it comes to claims of abuse, manipulation, domineering patriarchy, etc.

It is crucial that our understanding of patriarchy is clearly defined to explicitly give permission to women to speak up. Ladies should absolutely be taught not to publicly disrespect their husbands... but they also must be given a clear category for what to do when they need to get help. There is a LARGE gap between constantly bad-mouthing your husband in public ("he's still in training") and being able to honestly and straightforwardly bring your marriage troubles to some trusted friends ("it fees like he is always angry with me and the kids"). A wife can respect her husband without being a mindless, helpless automaton- and this distinction is easy for some women to understand and difficult for others. We would be wise to articulate this issue carefully and not assume that people will always be able to fill in the gaps; this is essential to faithful shepherding.

There is a concerning pattern of women with bad (manipulative, abusive, deceptive) husbands/fathers who do not get the help that they need because of excessive patience and/or optimism on Jason Young's part, an over-focus on the husband/father that he is trying to counsel, and a failure to give sufficient weight to the concerns/situation of the vulnerable party. Sometimes the family needs to be protected from the bad man before anything else should be pursued. This point cannot be skimmed over.

That's why it is underlined.

I do not believe this to be due to some sort of patriarchal cruelty on Jason's part, or a hidden misogyny, or anything malicious at all. Nevertheless, it is a glaring blind spot that needs to be addressed.

I believe this to be true while also recognizing that oftentimes "meaningful help," Biblically speaking, is a long process and not an easy out, and many forms of "meaningful help" offered by our culture are actually just quick- and temporary- fixes. So this can be a problem- and, as stated above, I believe it has been/is a problem for HBC that should be addressed immediately- when ladies are stuck and don't know what to do and the church is effectively just telling them to "hang in there." But it is also not necessarily a problem just because dealing with the issue is a long process.

The Miscellany

Regarding sexual abuse and failure to involve the state, I have found nothing that meets the criteria of criminal conduct on the part of HBC, and nothing that leads me to mistrust the eldership at HBC. I also find TKA's publishing and circulating of the names and stories of families who have- and are- going through extremely difficult situations to be frankly inexcusable. Jason and the eldership team have indeed involved the police when appropriate, and many of the instances cited by TKA have, upon hearing the other side of the story, been revealed to be far less damning, and often missing context and critical information.

This being said, if there is not already, it would be a good idea for there to be a clear, discussed, and defined pathway to getting help for women and children who could be undergoing sexual abuse. The congregation should know their options, and any would-be sexual abuser should be made to feel extremely uncomfortable by the vigilance and proactivity of the church body. This is part of caring for the weakest among us (Is. 1:17). But... sin-hiders are good at hiding sin, and as far as I can see, when the sin becomes known HBC has dealt with it more-or-less appropriately.

Regarding women undergoing complications due to childbirth, this is a very odd and inappropriate accusation. TKA may disagree with HBC's "quiver-full" worldview, but to turn that disagreement into a reason to attack a church? Really weird. Complications with childbirth also happen to people who use birth control and only want two kids. There is no church policy at HBC that forbids natural family planning.

Regarding harm to (and death of) children allegedly due to the parenting style of HBC families, it is appalling that these tragedies are being weaponized against HBC. Some family cultures are more rough-and-tumble. Some are more reserved. Again this is an area where plenty of responsible families disagree. To make this a point of attack on a church is both weird and also frankly disgusting.

Regarding criminal events that have occurred within HBC households, TKA asserts that it is the culture of HBC that is somehow partially responsible for causing these things. That is an assertion that needs to be proven. If the assertion is simply "women need a clear pathway to get real help," then yes, amen, there is room for improvement on this at HBC and at many other patriarcho-complementarian churches. But that does not rise to the level of an accusation worthy of this kind of treatment. It would be one thing if the correlation was direct- "HBC teaches wife-beating, and there are a lot of battered women at HBC." But "HBC is legalistic and patriarchal and doesn't like conventional psychology and therefore that's probably part of why there was a murder in a congregant's household one time" is extremely irresponsible rhetoric.

Culture

Within this category I would include all allegations regarding legalism, bullying, how people are treated upon leaving the church, issues of church polity regarding eldership and finances, etc. Examples would include:

• people are shamed, harassed, lied about, and bullied upon leaving the church

• the patriarchal culture is restrictive and burdensome to women

• HBC believes that they are the only truly righteous church in the valley, or at least one of the very few

• HBC professes to believe in elder parity but in actuality Jason always gets his way

• the culture at HBC is too legalistic regarding modesty, media, video games, etc.

• the culture among the young people at HBC is rife with bullying

In pursuing this investigation, due to the many accounts of the controlling and censorious attitude of HBC eldership, I kept anticipating that I would bump up against it. But in all of my conversations with members and eldership, I was not discouraged from pursuing the investigation; I was not bullied or threatened or coerced. No one tried to stop me from talking to former members. The conduct of HBC eldership (as well as of the members with whom I spoke), in my personal experience, did not square with the draconian picture painted by the accounts of TKA.

So where did this come from? I believe at least part of the issue here to be one of communication. I spoke with multiple people who attended the same meeting and heard the same words and left with different conclusions. If the eldership intended to say "I'd recommend not talking with Bob about situation X because that hasn't been properly dealt with between us yet," that is not a prohibition on all future friendship with Bob. But it seems that, either in speaking or in hearing or both, statements like this have been lost in translation. Both sides of these stories have been reasonable; I have not conclusively encountered lying on the part of either party.

This is also partly why the cloak-and-dagger stuff needs to stop. Everybody has opinions on everybody else, and this has happened with remarkably little actual conversation between the people in question. The game of telephone is a terrible way to deal with church conflict.

Regarding legalism (I am here discussing theological/ideological legalism), it must be clearly understood that the doctrine of HBC is not legalistic. There is absolutely not any form of heretical salvation-by-works stuff being taught, and Jason Young doesn't preach in Latin either. The five solas are alive and well at HBC, and the last Roman Catholic that came in and tried to pray the Rosary got burned at the stake.

(It's a joke, guys.)

But this is not really the accusation. The accusation here is that the culture of HBC is legalistic. If you don't measure up to their expectations for organic-food-eating, or long-dress-wearing, or lotsa-babies-having, then you are not one of the True Christians™️.

The concerns about legalism are – or, at least, at one time were – legitimate. However, they are also very unmerciful, and many of them are well past their expiration date. People struggle and grow over time. Heritage is not the same church that it was 10 years ago. Those young firebrands who ferociously argued theology and passed glib judgments on people who had different lifestyles are now much more mature, healthy, and wise young adults. To say that “the parents should have done better“ is extremely judgmental, and all I can say is that your standard of measure will be measured to you. (Matt. 7:2) I know that legalism within the conservative Christian community broadly is a propensity. I know because I am in that category, and over the last 15 years, God has brought me out of legalistic tendencies. But that was legalism not of doctrine – which would be heresy – but of practice; this can be a problem, to be sure, but not something to burn a church down over.

Do I see that kind of legalism alive and well in HBC today? No. Many of the young people who would have been the judgmental legalists – like me - have come a long way in realizing that there is much more room for freedom in Christ than we once thought. In fact, some of them have gone too far in this direction for my taste, and I worry about worldly influence! This is healthy growth, not the sign of a wicked church.

It should also be noted that many of the folks who are now condemning HBC for their excessive modesty or patriarchy or fill-in-the-blank were folks who helped establish that culture in HBC years ago. It is highly unfair to come back now, after growing (or straying) from their old convictions, and condemn HBC for being what it always was, and what they knew it was and loved it as and helped build it into. HBC is/was a family integrated church. It is/was part of a movement. It bore the marks of the movement- the strengths and the weaknesses. It drew the moths that liked that particular flame. Now that TKA have different perspectives, it strikes a sour note to condemn HBC for holding the perspectives that it always did- especially when HBC has grown and matured in many of the exact areas where TKA are demanding change.

Finally, on the question of legalism, there is a pattern here that far transcends this local kerfuffle. There are people who hear preaching or discussion on practical points and enjoy it as an opportunity to grow in holiness; there are others who hear it as condemnation, or as a checklist that must be followed in order to be a True Christian™️. Some walk away mentally stimulated and spiritually edified, and others walk away feeling defeated and disheartened. Some leave the church service recharged, and others leave feeling drained. Why is this?

This could be attributed to a number of factors, and I am sure that they all play in. Spiritual maturity, pride vs. humility, theological discipleship (particularly in understanding the Gospel), personality, family cultures, past experiences, current extra-church influences. I believe a massive amount of this point of conflict stems from miscommunication, and in such situations it is incumbent upon both parties to humble themselves and grow. Be quick to hear, slow to speak, and slow to anger. (James 1:19) Neither party may simply blame the other for "speaking too legalistically" or "being too easily offended." We start with the oak tree behind our own sunglasses. (Matthew 7:3)

We really need marriage counseling, but for churches. God made a body with hearts and fists and they are both necessary and they do not understand each other. We better figure out how to get along. You ever seen someone with an autoimmune disorder? This is a disease where the body is fighting against itself, mistaking other parts of the body for foreign invaders.

The Bride of Christ today has an autoimmune disorder, and it's a doozie.

Regarding the spiritual health of the women in the congregation, this is an important point that TKA has brought out, and it really needs to be meditated on. It’s not really a point against Heritage in particular, because I have seen HBC proactively take steps to provide for this need. But it is an important reminder for the patriarchal/conservative/family-integrated movement. Men are not higher-class Christians. We need to be ensuring the spiritual health of our wives and daughters. They need to have active and vibrant roles in the church of Christ.

Regarding Jason's failure to recognize the authority of other elders (and other related accusations like those regarding HBC's financial priorities), I suspect that the eldership parity issue has more to do with communication and personality disconnects than it does with anything else. However, I also believe that maturity would lead to working through communication issues. If there are former elders who are offended at Jason, they should take that up with him directly. If it has to be public then it should at least be man-to-man; if a third party is needed I would happily be there to take notes. If the former elders are not offended, then they should probably rebuke TKA for making a problem where there isn't one. (This is a consistent pattern here- where are the actual offended parties?!?)

Furthermore, current HBC eldership testifies to the contrary of this accusation that Jason always gets his way. So, at this point, it's a he-said-she-said, and not at all actionable.

Regarding the accusation that the elders of Heritage have tried to reach out to the pastors of the detracting families at their new churches - "chasing them down," so to speak - this is actually a point in favor of the elders of Heritage Baptist Church. This is what I would expect faithful pastors to do. I understand that TKA contends that they do not have a personal offense, but wish to see wrongs made right. However, this view results in an impasse. TKA believes that HBC has done wrong and will not dialogue with them until they right the wrong. HBC does not believe that they have done any wrong, and therefore wishes to dialogue and seek clarification and reconciliation. It is certainly not fair to demand an apology before a conversation has been had, and faithful shepherds pursue reconciliation. Especially if someone is going to carry on an online campaign against a church, they should expect the pastors of the church to pursue a conversation.

That said, TKA's primary objection to such meetings is that they are likely to be slanted- the mediation is likely to be partial to HBC's worldview and therefore to their side of the story. While I understand this concern on a visceral level I do not believe the eldership of HBC would intentionally stack the deck, so to speak. I would like to hear an alternative proposal from TKA, and would again happily be there to take notes if that would be helpful.

Regarding HBC membership hounding/accusing/slandering those who have left, I did not pursue this topic thoroughly and did not see any evidence (i.e. screenshots) of such conduct. This accusation goes both ways, with TKA also being accused of hounding former HBC members and/or current members who are going through difficult situations and seemingly trying to "recruit" (or, from TKA's perspective, probably to "rescue") them, speaking evil of HBC all the while. This one is pretty easy, guys. Everybody, stop it. And if you have done it, apologize.

I also have to address the "inquisition" sermon; it has been brought up too many times not to at least speak to it briefly. As a preacher's kid, I can tell you right off the bat that if you send an e-mail to the entire church enumerating grievances and making very serious accusations against the church, and you do it shortly before Sunday morning, the pastor is going to respond to it on Sunday, and most likely he will do so from the pulpit. How could he not? Everyone is talking about it. Everyone is wondering about it. He is the shepherd of that particular flock- what else is he supposed to do? I do not fault Jason for responding to the email from the pulpit. Not even a little bit.

That said, if I put myself in Tyler's shoes, I definitely understand how it would feel to (bravely, I might add) accept the invitation to come to church, only to sit with stiff backs and burning cheeks under an entire sermon seemingly designed to unravel everything that you just said. I believe Tyler was trying to do a good thing- to communicate clearly- to avoid simply fading away, leaving everyone with a question mark where their family used to sit. I applaud this intention.

So. Jason's perspective: "Whoa! This email accuses my church of heresy! I need to clarify immediately, and give Tyler a chance to respond!" Tyler's perspective: "I want people to know why we are leaving. I'm really concerned for the health of this church. We're gonna go to church anyway- whoa- I guess nothing we said is being heard at all."

Primary issue? Communication. Jason is a straight-shooting, git-er-done sort of guy. If someone said "you want to say anything after my sermon that dismantles your email?" he would say "you betcha!" But not everyone is like that, and it's actually a good thing that we aren't all Type A Debate Champions. We need to grow into unified maturity. (Eph. 4)

Regarding the concerns about a culture of bullying, I have simply not found this to be the case. The most egregious example given is that of boys being tied up and thrown into a pit (as part of a war game); on this point all I will say is that there are two sides to every story and from my research this is being grossly exaggerated. In some cases, bullies and bullied grew to be good friends. It's the circle of life. I found nothing beyond the simple reality that kids are little jerks that need to be taught to stop it.

Preference

Within this category I would include views on homeschooling, non-abortifacient family planning, conventional psychology, natural medicine, home-birthing, video games, preaching style, etc. This is distinct from the legalism point above because while the legalism accusation has to do with making people feel that they are not right with God because of their failure to conform to the practices of HBC, the accusations in this category have to do with the alleged risk or reality of harm resulting from the (common, not prescribed) practices of HBC. These practices would include:

• an aversion to "family planning," including non-abortifacient methods

• an inclination toward natural medicine as opposed to conventional medicine

• an inclination toward Biblical counseling as opposed to conventional/state-approved psycho-therapy

• a strongly homeschool-dominant church community

I believe the accusations in this category to be extremely overblown/overstated in the presentation given by TKA.

Regarding "mental health" (post-partum depression is a prominent example), TKA is far more fond of conventional psychology than I am. That is what it is, and we can argue on the merits later. But on a foundational level, this is an area of disagreement, and TKA should not be speaking of HBC as if they are crazy heretics because they have less trust in conventional psychology and therapy. We can disagree on this, and we can argue about it, but slandering one another over it is not the way.

That being said, HBC would do well to be warned against the error of emphasizing Biblical counseling to the detriment of the compassion and consideration of physical conditions and needs. We cannot compromise with humanistic psychology. But we also cannot forget that these are extremely delicate areas where there are people who are deeply hurting and need very careful and thoughtful help. We should be careful how we communicate. We should be clear that we are not condemning people for the fact that they are struggling- that we are not preaching that True Christianity™️ means always feeling good all the time (and if you don't, it's because you don't have enough faith).

I’m not saying that Heritage believes or intentionally teaches this – they don't! - I’m saying that different people communicate differently, and what is clear to some is confusing and misleading to others. It is essential that we grow in bridging these communication gaps. If this is the feedback you are getting, it is good to consider how so many of your listeners are hearing something that you are not trying to say. Sometimes it will be because they are determined to hear you wrong. Often, though, it is simply miscommunication, and "the heart of the righteous ponders how to answer." (Pr. 15:28) I know this is an issue- I've encountered it personally in situations completely unrelated to HBC. Communication is hard.

This issue must not be skimmed over by HBC. There are people who are withering under your counsel, brothers and sisters, because they are only hearing "do more, get better, try harder." Sometimes they need to hear "give me a hug, go take a nap, it's all gonna be OK, God's grace is enough." And they need to hear that in their language. If they don't speak Type A, then the mature Type A believer needs to learn to speak Type B. If this does not happen, these people, usually women, will continue living at the end of their rope.

And to turn this point the other way, the mature Type B believer needs to learn to speak Type A, too. He needs to be able to say "I know that the counsel I just received feels like they are condemning me for struggling... but I also know that that's not what they mean. They are trying to point me in the right direction for moving forward. That is the kind of counsel that they would want to hear."

If HBC does not have, or in the past has not had, a category for suffering and sorrow that is not symptomatic of a lack of faith- that is a huge problem, and should be repented of immediately. (Matt. 26:39, Gal. 6:2, Rom. 12:15) And if you have the category but you can see how you failed to communicate it- that's worth apologizing for too.

Many of the other accusations – that boys are encouraged to be rough-and-tumble, or not to play video games – that women are encouraged to wear dresses instead of pants – these are all true. This is an accurate picture of HBC culture, and there is nothing wrong with any of it. If you disagree with the culture of a church, you can become a part of the church and work to change it, or you can converse with the families and sharpen one another from a distance, or you can move on to a different community. But you should not go online and attack HBC as a false church because they like natural medicine and classical music and they would rather their boys be up a tree than behind a screen.

Nitpicking Jason’s sermons is another extremely petty line of attack. You may not like his preaching style. Plenty of people do like his preaching style. People who are now attacking him used to like his preaching style. If he is not preaching heresy then… Go to another church. Dissecting his sermons on YouTube is… Really weird.

As far as pants are concerned, you might see more ladies in dresses on Sunday at HBC than you do in your average Evangelical church. That is a feature, not a bug. However, there are also plenty of women in pants at every HBC event. In fact, one of the most prominent founding families, who attended for many many years before moving away, was a family of girls, and the only time I ever remember seeing their eldest daughter in a dress was on her wedding day. They were never shunned, condemned, disliked, or anything else – and they are still great friends of everybody in the HBC community.

I understand that someone might not like the pastor's style of preaching or the culture of the families in the church. This might be a reason to leave the church (although it's just going to lead to what you don't like being represented in stronger concentration). But it makes little sense to put it in a list of evidences that the church is apostate.

I also wonder why there is a preponderance of published grievances against HBC – why the appearance of a concerted effort? Why do people leave on good terms and then come back a year later with a chip on their shoulder? This sounds like the work of bitterness and gossip and festering wounds, not the work of the Holy Spirit.

Generally speaking, if people don’t like a church, they move on to a different church and move on with their lives and that’s the end of it. I understand the need to go public if there are severe issues being perpetrated and not being brought to light. But when those severe issues largely consist of opinions, inferences, allegations, disagreements – and when the vast majority of the people who have been allegedly harmed are not willing to come forward to testify - this does not add up to an actionable case that should be brought before the public with this level of vitriol. Write a concerned blog post and move on with your life.

To the dear folks who have published their accounts of how much better their spiritual walk is now that they have left Heritage, all I can say is that it is not generally the fruit of a thriving spiritual walk to feel the need to smear a body of believers for minor faults. And yes, these are minor faults. The preponderance of these open letters are not accounts of abuse, but rather lists of annoyances and opinions about how Jason should have done better. By your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. I hope that you have found a wonderful church and that your walk with Jesus is thriving. I am not at all upset that you have moved on (although I'll miss seeing you around!). But it's really weird to be coming back a year or two later with a disgruntled hit piece.

Three Sides to Every Story

Again- AGAIN- I believe communication is a very large factor in this whole kerfuffle. Like in a marriage, failure of proper communication – whether it is in words or nonverbal communication or in interpretations of implications - can lead to dramatic escalation of conflict. I believe that that is the case here, in spades – not that there are no real issues, but that the real issues are exacerbated dramatically by communication breakdown.

The Concluding Construct

There are so many accusations and testimonies represented here. Many of the testimonies conflict- or outright contradict. Given the lack of a clear right/wrong or honest/dishonest party, rather than "ruling in favor" of one side or the other, my goal is to assemble a construct that makes the most sense of - that synthesizes honestly - the testimonies that I have encountered. In my judgment, that is as follows:

I believe that Jason Young is a good and Godly man who genuinely wants to please God and bless his flock. I believe this because I know him, and have known him for years, and have heard so many testimonies that support this. I believe that he is an excellent pastor, and I am proud to fellowship with my family at HBC. I believe that Jason and the other HBC eldership are all of a certain type of communication style, and that they need to learn to build bridges to people of a different sort. I believe that Jason has a very specific and glaring fault, and this is to be excessively optimistic about the potential for success in his counseling. Is this pride? I don't know, that's for him to decide.

However, it has left a trail of collateral damage in its wake (in some cases), as his optimism and focus on helping the primary counselee- usually a man/husband/father- has led to failure to protect and help the woman and children in the home. This is most evident in situations where there is a really bad man involved- a deceiver, a manipulator- and usually a woman who is ill-equipped to defend herself, either because of her own sin issues or her own naïveté. These are exactly the situations where it is most important that pastoral care is aggressive and authoritative in defending the weak. (Is. 1:17)

I believe that this is an area where Pastor Young- and the rest of HBC eldership- should prayerfully consider public apology/repentance and should actively seek to understand why so many are saying this about them. I genuinely don't think that they understand- but I think that they really need to.

I believe that TKA are brothers and sisters in Christ who want to see real wrongs made right. I do not think that they would spend so much time and effort inviting investigation and compiling documentation if there were no reasons behind what they were saying. This would simply be asking to be publicly humiliated. The motivation of merely a personal vendetta makes sense if the action is simple fabricated badmouthing. But it does not make sense to construct an entire story of completely made-up lies with an entire list of footnotes and then to invite an investigation into those footnotes.

I believe that they have done too much stewing on this issue, resulting in vastly overstating their case, and that the way that they have presented their complaints has been very harmful. I believe them when they say that they felt like they had no other option, and from talking to them personally I have discovered that they are much less like rabid werewolf-monkeys than their writings would indicate. While I've heard from HBC that it seems obvious that they will only be happy when Jason is no longer a pastor and HBC has been destroyed, they have stated to me that they would like nothing more than for Jason and HBC to flourish, if the people there are being shepherded properly.

I believe that they should prayerfully consider repenting for how they have treated HBC for the past few years, and for their unmerciful assessment of the HBC community.

And I believe that the parties involved in this dispute speak two entirely different languages, and that communication problems account for about 75% of this whole mess.

Where Do We Go From Here?

I'm going to insert a soundtrack for this section. You gotta open it in a new tab and let it play in the background. Them's the rules.

Here are my recommended steps for how this situation should be de-escalated and resolved. This is going to include observations of where I believe the parties involved have, in my judgment, done wrong. If you are one of the parties addressed, please hear it as I intend it- in love, and with full recognition that there may be things that I am missing or wrong about. So take what I say before the throne of grace... I'm trusting in the Holy Spirit to do a work that transcends any of our individual abilities.

Again, you might wonder why I am not confronting the parties individually (Matthew 18); I answer that the entire purpose of what I am doing here is observational. I'm not a party in this dispute; I'm not offended at any of the parties in the dispute. I would happily sit down to coffee with anyone involved in this whole kerfuffle, and now that this is all out in the open I am happy to field questions from anyone.

To Heritage

I do not believe that there has been malicious conduct on the part of the eldership. I believe the elders to be solid, Godly, loving, trustworthy men- and men who have been through a lot of pain through this process, and deserve your prayers, a hot meal, and a warm hug. I would strongly discourage leaving HBC if you are doing so simply because of the things you have heard regarding this conflict.

However. This does not preclude patterns of serious weakness in certain areas, and I believe that those patterns are there and should be addressed:

Firstly, this is a very good opportunity for HBC to demonstrate humility and teachableness by seeking to understand the foundational contentions of TKA. They do have some valid concerns, and acknowledging and pursuing improvement in those areas will go a long way to demonstrate your goodwill in the matter.

I would encourage HBC eldership to investigate the claims, or at least a substantial number of the claims, by talking to the offended parties, one-on-one. TKA has offered to facilitate this. I would take advantage of the offer. If those conversations cannot be arranged, then that should be stated publicly – "we have tried to seek resolution and the opportunity to listen to the victims, but they are not willing to speak with us.“

(As part of this, TKA must understand that it is not charitable or Christian to expect HBC to simply listen and take a verbal beating and go apologize, regardless of their own convictions and without having any opportunity to give their side of the story. That is more reminiscent of some twisted identity-politics class than it is of any kind of biblical pursuit of justice and healing.)

Specific areas where improvement should be pursued have been discussed above, but to recap in brief:

• There should be clear instructions for how women/children suffering from overbearing patriarchs should pursue getting help- and proactive opportunities for them to do so

• Communication with people in abusive/manipulative/controlling situations needs to be carefully insisted upon so that those who don't know how to communicate their needs effectively do not end up stuck and helpless

• There must be persistence in understanding, shepherding, and addressing the needs of people in unhealthy family situations, including strong intervention on behalf of victims

• Communication in counseling should account for those who speak a different language- for example, "you need to rejoice in Christ during this trial," to one believer, is a potent encouragement, and to another it is an additional thing that they are failing to do because they don't feel happy about the difficult circumstance

• I humbly but strongly disagree with the way the concerns of TKA have been handled, and my thoughts on that are below

I believe that the lack of transparent, thorough, head-on confrontation of the issues has been a glaring failure. The aggregate impact statement was presented to the eldership team and, to my understanding, very little was done to actually speak to the individuals involved; after the investigation was completed, there was very little information- actual, detailed information, with receipts- presented to the church. This is problematic for a number of reasons, not the least of which is because it actually creates the appearance of evil. It feeds the rumors.

I have seen this approach before in other church instances, and I believe that it is well-intentioned, but that it is a missed opportunity to walk in the light in a way that would answer the questions of the congregation and clarify the issues at hand - clarity that is necessary for healing. I understand that for lack of wood, the fire goes out… But again, if that fire is a forest fire, sometimes a control burn is necessary to prevent the spread. The weed of bitterness is not solved by ignoring it, but by uprooting it.

There is a Harrison Ford movie, one of the "Jack Ryan" films, in which the president of the United States has a friend who turns out to be a corrupt criminal. Jack Ryan advises him that instead of running from the media's questions, he should lean into them. Instead of denying the friendship, he should say "yes, in fact, we were the best of friends!" In so doing, he would take the wind out of the sails of the rumor mill and give the paparazzi nowhere to go with the scandalous story.

The way that these issues have been handled by HBC has done much, unintentionally, to contribute to the propagation of the problem. I understand that the apparent reality that there is some sort of spy network relaying information from confidential church gatherings to your detractors would lead to an instinct to be as tight-lipped as possible, but I believe the correct response would be to go in the exact opposite direction. Wounds don't heal by being left wrapped up in the dark forever. Don't keep things secret; broadcast them. Then everyone can hear exactly what is being said and the lies (intentional or unintentional) lose their power.

I recognize that there are considerations of confidentiality; some things simply cannot be published, and that is absolutely correct. There is also the consideration of desiring to protect the sheep from poisonous influence. But part of faithful shepherding includes tackling issues clearly and head-on, presenting the facts, and trusting the sheep to God, that He will help them to discern truth from error. The best way to protect the sheep is not to keep them locked up, but rather to deal with the wolves. (I'm talking in shepherding terms here- I'm not saying TKA are wolves.)

I would encourage the elder body at Heritage to compile and release a clear and detailed public statement. Again, I understand that many of the issues in question are regarding confidential counseling situations, and therefore the responses will have to be somewhat ambiguous. Nevertheless, such a document could be a point-by-point response to every public accusation. This would provide the other side of the story that is biblically required for any observer to be able to make a judgment on the situation (Pr. 18:17). This public statement should also include an olive branch offer – a clear path forward that is a standing invitation to the accusing parties.

I would encourage the elder body to be transparent about its investigative process. I understand the desire to not participate in gossip and slander, but responding to accusations with general remarks that amount to “there is nothing to see here“ can only go on for so long before too many withdrawals have been made from the trust account, and people begin to wonder if something nefarious is being hidden. I don’t believe anything is, but I believe that the way things are being responded to, based on (even accurate) character judgments rather than research and specific, point-by-point responses contributes to an appearance of less than transparency. Because… It is less than transparent.

I would encourage the elder body at HBC to prayerfully consider public repentance for too readily dismissing the concerns of TKA based on partiality- regarding the person instead of the evidence.

There should be a clear path for holding elders accountable. I would strongly encourage the consideration of joining some convention of churches; this is something that I believe is necessary not only for HBC, but for the broader independent/family-integrated Baptist movement, and it is something that we are looking into at my church. There should be an appeal process where those who are in authority are also under authority. That process should be clear, well-known, and publicly available.

I would encourage Heritage as a whole not to hide from the accusations or downplay or dismiss them, but rather to look them in the face, investigate as necessary, respond openly, and move forward in love. The truth has nothing to fear. Do not cultivate an attitude of beleagueredness, and be aggressive in rooting out bitterness; humbly self-examine, and acknowledge where the "other side" has a point.

I have heard many times and from many sources that the HBC community has sent "hate mail" to TKA, judging, condemning, and shaming them. I have not seen any of this first-hand, and I know that communication issues make it entirely possible for what is written and what is read to be completely different. However, IF anyone from HBC has said nasty things to former members, this should be repented of immediately- and repented of to the people who received the ungodly communications.

In my conversations with HBC folks, they have proven quite ready to admit to me propensities towards legalism. HBC is a very driven, holiness-focused community. This is a strength and a weakness, and many of them are very willing to acknowledge that reality. I would encourage them to consider the merits of acknowledging that reality publicly. Don't jump to defend. Jump to confess. If your accusers are malicious, it will not satisfy them, but it will take the wind out of their sails and the power out of their punches. If your accusers are not malicious – if they really are good-willed – then it will show them that you are acting in good faith and are willing to listen to and learn from what they are saying. In either case, it represents Christ well for us to acknowledge what we are learning and confess areas where we may have misrepresented the Gospel – even if unintentionally.

This all takes time.

What could be more worth our time than beautifying the Bride of Christ?

To TKA

I understand the desire to protect others from undergoing the unpleasant experiences that many of the folks on your list have gone through. It is indeed a good thing to defend the innocent. However, in this case, this has gone far beyond a healthy word of warning to those considering attending a church; it has transformed into what can only be described as an attack campaign, spanning multiple venues and multiple years and resulting in bizarre explosions in Facebook comment threads. This is not good, healthy, or Christian.

If you do not believe the pastor of a church is doing a good job, it is good to confront – which has been done – it may be good to leave – which has been done. But to continue to make a life's work out of attacking a church that many others are being blessed by, are grateful for, and testify to the effectiveness of? This is highly suspect.

With all love and respect, my friends, you are presenting demands that cannot be met. You want apologies for wrongs done, but are not willing to pursue arbitration so that both sides of the story can be heard. You say that Jason will only accept mediation from a party that will back him up. Then present your path forward – and it cannot simply be a list of demands for repentance and change.

When you disagree with someone you can’t simply say “well, agree with me and then we can be friends.” If the truth is on your side, you shouldn't be afraid to meet up and hash it out. If you don't feel like you will get a fair hearing, I offer myself as a third party to watch and report. For that matter, I would be willing to post a recording of the whole thing on my YouTube channel, if both parties agree to that level of transparency (although this would require discretion towards some of the more sensitive accounts in question).

There is also, again, a weird pattern of people leaving HBC on good terms, only to come back years later to join in attacking the church. The look of a coordinated assault is unmistakable, and I have heard that there is a good deal of ambulance-chasing that happens when any in-house problem with HBC becomes known; struggling families are approached and invited to join the campaign against HBC. The feeling of an anti-Heritage spy network is an oppressive cloud in the air, and it goes a long way to discredit your concerns.

I would strongly encourage you to cease and desist your attack campaign against HBC. It is an embarrassment to you all, a hindrance to the faithful ministry of HBC, and a smear on the face of the bride of Christ. You will likely say that the conduct of the elders of HBC is the embarrassment and the smear – and I've been addressing those issues throughout the post. Right now I'm asking you to consider your own potential ocular redwood. You are gossiping and slandering, and this is, Biblically speaking, very bad. (1 Cor. 6:10, 1 Tim. 3:11, Jas. 4:11, 2 Cor. 12:20)

I am concerned for you, brothers and sisters.

I understand that you felt like you had no other option. Honestly, I get that, and I am not even saying you should not have gone public. I am saying that, regardless of your intentions, the result has not been a reasonable public critique, but a wild-eyed espionage campaign.

I know that you have defended your actions as not being gossip or slander because in order to be gossip or slander the statements would have to be false. But this is not at all how this works. As an example, let's say my wife called me "a big fat tub of lard."And it wasn't a joke. It was plain, mean disrespect. OK, would my grievance be true? Yes. Should I seek resolution with her, and maybe get a third party involved? Sure. If her conduct is egregious enough, should I release a public statement? The analogy breaks down, but sure, that would be on the list of options. But should I go posting about it all over the interwebs, make veiled comments about her to my friends, and start a community of men who have grievances against their wives? No. That would clearly be gossip and slander even if every word I said was technically true.

Additionally, the odds that my statements would be 100% true are very, very low. There are three sides to every story- his, hers, and the truth. This is why it would be wise for me and my wife to go talk to a well-grounded third-party, so that they can help us see where we are doing it wrong; otherwise I run the risk of not only slandering my wife by overstating things, but of actually misrepresenting reality, even if unintentionally. This is still slander, even if it's not simply a lie made up out of whole cloth.

My wife requests that I clarify that she never called me a big fat tub of lard. (Between us, she actually considers me a chiseled and charming hunk of meat.)

I would encourage you to prayerfully consider how much bitterness is actually a part of this project. It is not normal or healthy behavior to spend such an impressive amount of time on attacking a church. Most people in this sort of situation would simply leave the church. In America today, though, there is a subculture of victim fermentation within the community of those who were formerly family-integrated or otherwise conservative. Get out of there. Get out of there and move on to a fruitful life working together with brothers and sisters to build the Kingdom of God. Imagine how much good you could accomplish if the time you've spent attacking HBC was spent in a positive direction.

It is not my place to judge the heart, but it is my place to judge the fruits, and I find it hard to believe that there is no bitterness involved in the level of vitriol that has been publicly displayed online. You don't have to feel offended directly at someone to have a root of bitterness that is festering and causing all sorts of ugly fruit. Your methodology has been the greatest obstacle to your complaints getting a fair hearing; you really have represented yourselves in just about the worst way possible.

To put it bluntly.

Many of the issues that you are addressing are simply no longer even a thing at HBC. On other issues, it would seem, you have not heard the other side of the story. The overall perception that I get from the content and the method of your accusations is that you had true and valid concerns that have festered over the years to the point where they are now gangrenous and egregiously overblown. It seems that you have cultivated an echo chamber of Heritage hate, and that isn't healthy for anyone.

I do believe that you guys have a unique and important perspective that needs to be a part of the body of Christ, and that communities like HBC need to hear. But this is not the right way to present it.

Also, you cannot expect the elders of Heritage to be able to do anything if no one will talk to them. Heritage elders have repeatedly offered to meet and have repeatedly been rebuffed. But this is not how healing is sought – whether that healing is interpersonal or in dealing with problems of church, culture, and practice. These all require conversation, which is much better accomplished in person than over internet letters and Google reviews. My own experience has proven that those who seem like crypt-dwelling vampires over screens make for quite pleasant conversationalists when actually speaking to them the old-fashioned way. It is essential, if any progress is to be made, that you guys meet with the elders of Heritage, and if you will not do so, then you should not continue attacking them.

I also do see patterns of compromise with the world that are strong red flags as to the direction that you are headed. The pursuit of righteousness is not legalism, and lack of biblical discernment is not “freedom in Christ.“ The amount of influence that conventional medicine, psychology, and entertainment evidence in your conversations and conduct is concerning to me – not because of a legalistic belief that all of conventional medicine is evil, or that there is nothing to be learned from conventional psychology, or that the Bible has an appendix of movies that you’re allowed to watch, but because “you will know them by their fruits." When bitterness and angry rhetoric and reviling characterize your discourse online, this is not good fruit.

My final exhortation to you guys would be to quote a man who was overall not a good role model – but who got it right when he advised the Sanhedrin to leave the apostles alone. If what is going on at Heritage Baptist Church is simply the work of men, then it will not stand. But if it is indeed the work of the Holy Spirit, then you will be found fighting against God. They are not pursuing and hounding you; you are pursuing and hounding them. So, follow Jesus, bear fruit, and if you cannot be reconciled, then at least stop reviling. God is quite able to bring down a wicked church. He has, many times. But what you are doing is simply stirring up dissension, and it's making Jesus look bad.

Bury the hatchet. Come out of the shadows. The darkness is not a good place to live (unless you are Batman).

To be fair, if any of my friends are tacticool enough to be Batman... all I'm saying is I've never seen Batman and Tyler in the same place at the same time.

But I digress.

On Apologies

Dear brothers and sisters, please prayerfully and thoughtfully consider the part that I wrote to you. Don't focus on the other guy. You aren't responsible for them. You don't have to agree with me, but if you're gonna get anything out of this post you have to listen to the part that you can actually do something about.

I am not advocating for anybody to issue blanket apologies- or fake apologies, which are even worse. But if anyone involved in this melee can identify areas of their own conduct that were incorrect, it would be beneficial to acknowledge that. Again, we start with our own log (Matthew 7:3). Even if your conduct was not maliciously, intentionally sinful, if you can see now how it was incorrect it may warrant an apology.

This is true in the same way as this true story from my own marriage experience: when I first got married, I was legalistic. Not doctrinally – in application. I would never have said listening to the Gaither Vocal Band was sinful. But I did see it as being… not really the most Christian way. True Christians™️ have higher standards. Again, I would not have articulated this. I was not intentionally malicious. But I didn't want my wife to listen to the Gaither Vocal Band while pregnant, because I didn't want it to affect my babies' mental development. Which was stupid.

As I have grown, I have come to a place where I have apologized to my wife for many things like this – not an "I was a terrible sinful malicious person, please forgive me" apology, but rather a "yes, that was not right or Biblical, I'm sorry, please forgive me" apology. These are apologies of growth, and not apologies of turning from malice aforethought. But they are necessary apologies, nonetheless.

Somebody's gotta chance their arm if this door is ever gonna open.

On Playing Chess With Pigeons

I would like to thank those who gave of their time to help me in my research. I have named none of them, but given the weirdly espionage-like morass that this discussion has turned into, I wouldn't be surprised if some people try to identify and harass my sources. To such folks I say thus: any harassment toward people who contributed their opinions, views, and testimonies to this post will not be tolerated. Of course, I can't stop you… But I can publish anything that you say to them, and if they pass it on to me, I am prepared to do so. So make sure that whatever you say, it's nothing that you would not be ashamed to have up on this blog and shared around on social media to all generations.

If you wanna come after someone, come after me. You know where to find me. I wrote this, I did it myself, nobody put me up to it or approved it, nobody else is to blame for it. And if you come after me with enough vitriol, then understand that there may be a blog post featuring screenshots in your honor. This is not because I need some way to get back at people for hurting my feelings, but because light has a way of exposing and disinfecting things.

One of the issues that I have run up against in endeavoring to investigate these claims is that many of the alleged victims ("alleged" is not intended sarcastically) are unwilling to discuss their experiences with me. But if there is no offended party willing to come to the table, then nothing can be done, and the offense should not continue to be talked about, since progress is impossible. If HBC eldership does pursue conversation with the victims/TKA, and that desire for conversation is not reciprocated, "we are afraid of being hurt more" does not cut the mustard. If you aren't willing to deal with it, then you shouldn't be trying to halfway-deal with it.

If the victims are afraid to talk because they’re afraid that they will be slandered and attacked, I would like to make the following offer – and this goes both directions. If anyone from TKA receives malicious, aggressive, threatening, or otherwise evil communications from people at HBC, I invite them to give it to me so that I can publish it here. And if anyone at HBC receives such content from TKA, I also invite them to submit it to me so that I can publish it here. (None of this is a promise to publish whatever I am sent indiscriminately. Please understand what I am driving at here.) If people are ashamed of what they say being stated in the light, then they should stop saying it. I am not talking about publishing intimate conversations about sensitive situations. I’m talking about vitriol and hate mail and verbal acid. We should be able to talk about this like adults, and if you’re not going to… let me tell you a story about pigeons.

Over the course of my research I talked to one of my closest and longest-running brothers in arms about what I was doing. He gave me a caution that this endeavor might prove to be as fruitful as playing chess with a pigeon. The man who plays chess with the pigeon may be a brilliant tactician, but his strategies will prove ineffective; the pigeon will stomp all over the board, knock over the pieces, cover the table with droppings, and fly off triumphant.

And... my friend is not wrong. I don't consider this a chess match, and I have no desire to be on "a side." But this post is not primarily for the benefit of the pigeon. I am under no delusions that the fallout from this post is going to be harmonious and calm and loving (though God has done greater things), and I am fully prepared to chronicle and publish the trail of droppings; it is helpful in identifying who the pigeons are.

So, while I welcome people giving their thoughts in the comments or in communication with me on social media or by contacting me directly, please be advised that anything you say on this topic may wind up deleted – or published on this blog. I’m not doing this to scare anyone away from talking to me. I am doing this because it is high time we were done with the cloak-and-dagger stuff. If you are ashamed of what you’re saying being published for the world to read, then maybe you shouldn’t be saying it in the first place. I have only waded into this conversation because it was already a public issue, and I am going to continue treating it as such. I have done my covert research. I am now an open book. (This, of course, does not include breaking the confidence of those who spoke with me on condition of privacy or anonymity.)

Given that Jesus said we will know people by their fruits, consider this an advance notice that I am prepared to use this blog as a fruit catalog.

In Conclusion

I know that these are many words. They are written with prayer. They are written with love. They are written with the hope that God will use them to bring about healing, the beautification of His Bride, and the glory of the Name of Jesus Christ. I would ask all parties concerned to proceed with those things as their aim as well. I love you all. There is not a single person in this dispute that I would not happily break bread with. My wife and kids will continue to enjoy the books written by Tyler's wife, and I'm looking forward to seeing my HBC family in a few weeks so they can shake my hand and see that I have not grown another head. I know that some of you probably dislike me now (or perhaps dislike me more than you already did). But please know that I am just as happy to talk with you as I ever was. My door is always open. (Not literally. We do close our doors sometimes, guys.)

I'm praying for God to do great things.

I want to sit beside you at the feast, my friends.