Prayingheart received the below factual refinement on the previous post. It has been verified…and the ensuing observations suggest severe partiality in the trial process. PH’s Bible distinctly prohibits this kind of partiality…
Pastor Bent was accused and found guilty of “distrust” not disrespect.
Pastor Paul was found guilty of “disrespect” and violating elder protocol in that he contact the church attorney without “permission” and shared confidential information (the proposed by-laws) with a single member of the church.
Both pastors freely and open;y stated in their concerns about the new by-laws that they had talked to the church attorney. This action was amongst the charges that both men faced. Neither man – both of who were directors of Mars Hill Church with every right to contact the church attorney and who did so regularly due to the nature of their duties – did so covertly or saw anything abnormal about this act. Furthermore the other elders have not been able to tell inquiring members exactly what the much acclaimed “elder protocol” is. It turns out that such protocol is presumed and arbitrary.
So here is a stunning fact. Both Pastor Paul and Pastor Bent were fired because of their contacting the church attorney. Both men were charged with this as a charge levied against them by the executive elders. BUT. The charge against Paul was found to be credible while the charge against Bent was found NOT to be credible.
So why was Pastor Paul found guilty of violating elder protocol by contacting the church attorney while the exact same charge was found to be not credible against Pastor Bent when both men did contact the attorney?
Sounds like the elders at best were inconsistent and worst had no idea what they were doing except rubber stamping what is clear partiality.
Would YOU want to be subject to this kind of trial? And, are the men involved in this kind of behavior qualified to be elders??? -PH