A Tale

Part One: The Fellowship of the Disenfranchised

This will be a longer than average post. To make it as readable as possible, I am dividing it -in a Tolkienesque fashion - into a trilogy. It’s a response of sorts to both questions I’ve been asked by other pastors and friends and former friends in my denomination and statements that have been made about me and some of my posts that have focused on ongoing events in my denomination.

All three parts will involve email exchanges that have not been edited other than to have been cut and pasted into this article. Links to PDFs of the original correspondence are available on request.

For readability – successfully or unsuccessfully – email correspondence is italicized so readers can more easily distinguish them.

My tale begins with part one: The Fellowship of the Disenfranchised

---------

I became “internet famous” in a very small pond. As the Three Amigos might say, “I became so famous I am infamous.” In my case this meant getting dishonorably mentioned, as I said in my previous post, for allegedly spreading misinformation. Among my denominational colleagues a question I’ve been asked is whether I ever approached denominational leadership with my concerns before posting them on-line. This article is meant to answer that question as well as to respond to the “official timeline” published by my denomination about how things have been handled or mishandled by them and their involvement with the tragic events reportedly perpetrated by Michael, Brenda and Jackson Gatlin at the Duluth Vineyard, as prominent, platformed and paid leaders for Vineyard USA.

I hope this is a helpful article and brings some clarity to this conversation.

Here’s what Vineyard USA has recently asked for by email:

1. To review the information in light of what Brian has shared online - both in content and tone. As we assume Brian remains under your governing authority, we would expect he would review the information in its entirety as well. To help, I've added a few screenshots to help the process along. We'll provide more information after we receive your response.

2. To require a revision or retraction and commitment to repair the relational damage in cooperation with and under the review of Vineyard USA. The added information will inform and/or correct your perspective such that Brian's posts no longer seem wise, accurate, correct and misrepresent the work ascribed to Vineyard USA. As such, we would expect an honest revision, public apology and relational repair.

3. To provide a list of any Vineyard pastors that Brian has talked with in relation to his allegations. It is our understanding that at least eight pastors have engaged Brian at his invitation to process the misinformation. We would like that list by Friday 1/31 as well.

Vineyard USA references my Substack articles. Most of my Substack articles review the Guidepost report from Vineyard USA, emails from Duluth Vineyard, and the published report from GRACE. I reflect on the content of these reports and pose questions and observations based on their content. I also reference a paper published by Reagan Waggoner about an investigation into allegations Reagan made against Jay Pathak that was conducted by Michael Gatlin and another Trustee.

Having read over the online “Transparency Update” VUSA posted and clicked through some links that are provided there, I am still unclear on what they feel I have misrepresented in my posts. As Donnell Wyche has already pointed out, VUSA’s own “official timeline” confirms the most concerning and egregious details I have highlighted in my articles on Substack. The original allegations against Michael and Brenda Gatlin in 2014 were largely ignored by Vineyard USA, despite their roles within Vineyard USA. The details of the original complaint directly foreshadow the findings in the Guidepost report. There was a financial payout from Vineyard USA to the Gatlins despite the seriousness of the allegations made against them when facts were still being investigated and gathered. And Vineyard USA favored keeping Michael Gatlin engaged in the leadership at Duluth Vineyard despite the seriousness of the allegations against him.

In their email to the board that I am accountable to, Vineyard USA specifically question my use of “Due Diligence” and suggest that I asked no questions of Vineyard USA about the situation in Duluth. It would be accurate to say that I didn’t KEEP asking Vineyard USA about the situation in Duluth but it would be disingenuous, even misleading to say I never asked them direct questions about how they were managing the situation with the Gatlins. My “due diligence” about Duluth involved thoroughly reviewing everything VUSA published and posted about Duluth and the Gatlins. It also involved over 2 years of email exchanges, and a Zoom meeting with Robb Morgan in an attempt to engage Vineyard USA on this matter.

In case the following communications don’t make it onto the “official timeline” that Vineyard USA offers, in which I am mentioned, I share them here for those who are following this story.

On February 28, 2023, I emailed Robb Morgan, Managing Director of Vineyard USA, after watching Jay’s long form video announcement (no longer available on the site) about the Gatlins and Duluth Vineyard. Here’s what I wrote:

Hi Robb,

Thank you for fielding questions about the information that VUSA has provided about the situation with the Gatlins and the points that Jay raises in his videos.

Here are some of my questions and I would appreciate a response on these. Thank you.

1) right out of the gate, Jay telegraphs that this situation is the proof and push VUSA needs to make systemic changes. Did it seem appropriate to everyone that Jay's communication about this tragic situation would be used as a tool for justifying the changes to our ecclesiology, including ordination, that go all the way back to the Regional Leaders meeting in which these points first appeared, years ago now, as a solution to our shrinkage problems? Did anyone suggest the focus should be on the victims rather than on an agenda already established by Jay and the ReOrg? I'm troubled by the priorities this implies. Did anyone do a gut check on this and suggest separating these two announcements?

2) had ordination been in place and had we had a different ecclesiology in place, how would that have prevented Jackson from abusing the girls he abused? Further, how would a different system have prevented Michael and Brenda from covering up for Jackson? Since the RC church has a rather robust ecclesiology and ordination process and neither prevented abuse by their clergy, is it possible that a different system would not prevent such things from occurring? Further to this point, knowing that neither ecclesiology or ordination have prevented abuse in denominations in which they are historic, is this just opportunism to push this agenda forward as a "cure" that we already know is ineffectual in treating the disease?

3) Why were the victims the 3rd audience that Jay addresses in this video and not the first? And why were the Gatlins the first? Was that under someone's advice or was that Jay's choice? It does not appear very victim centric to speak sympathetically to people accused of compounding abuse through cover up and then working your way down the list to the victims, who are mentioned only briefly at that point in the video.

4) Since many of us already know that complaints have historically been made about both Michael and Brenda's leadership (which Jay alludes to), especially Brenda's, can we assume that GRACE or Guideposts is looking into how those allegations have been handled and whether or not VUSA is responsible for empowering people to do harm through their national appointments and perceived endorsement?

5) Jay explains towards the end that because of our ecclesiology, VUSA is only explaining or informing us. Up until this video, I have received all the information I knew about this situation from the Duluth church, from public news outlets from Duluth, from abuse-watch websites and very little from and "much after the rest" VUSA posts. I can literally name some of the reporting victims because it's out in the open. The only thing I didn't know until this announcement was the timeline that indicates Michael and Brenda resigned from VUSA and when they resigned. Given that VUSA has been exceedingly slow to actually do this one thing of informing us, and that information is still given in part not the whole of what you know (for reasons enumerated in this video) other than providing this directly to pastors who may have been in the dark about what has happened so far, are we still promoting our current processes as transparent and accountable?

6) Why were the Gatlins allowed to resign and why have they not been fired?

7) In the recent past, Michael Gatlin investigated allegations of misconduct or inappropriate behavior against Jay that had been made by Reagan Waggoner. He communicated via email that he had investigated the claim and found no evidence of wrongdoing. Knowing what we know now about Michael and his willingness to cover up for others, will that and any other investigations (or those done by Brenda as SRL or RL) conducted and determined "no wrongdoing" be reinvestigated by an arm's length third party that will look not only into the original accusations but also the manner in which they were investigated and those results made known?

8) This is simply a statement. I did a lot of work around ordination for my Masters. I have previously sent Caleb some of my work, at his request. Jay makes a comment that is alarming to me if he is leading this conversation. In the video he says that "historically the Church has frameworks for what is a pastor." It does not. I have books from the early church fathers, the Patristics, and so on, right up to the present day. The Church has never had a unified vision for what a pastor is/does. This has literally been called a "crisis" in books written about pastoring. That lack has to be understood fundamentally before you move forward. For a new ecclesiology to work, what a pastor is/does cannot be assumed and must be spelled out to create a commonly accepted definition within our movement. The historical record indicates this is vital for any movement or denomination. Please don't let them skip this step. Everything else will unravel from this one loose thread.

Again, thanks for fielding these questions. I understand that it might take you quite some time to provide any answers. Please do not stress over getting back to me. I'm in no hurry.

Praying for all of the victims in Duluth, for the church there and for all of you as you navigate this dark valley.

Brian

On March 2, 2023 I added another question via email:

One last question. Has VUSA or any subsidiary of VUSA or organization connected to VUSA provided a financial severance, settlement or benefit to Michael or Brenda Gatlin?

----

On Friday, March 10, 2023, having received no response, I wrote the following email to Robbd Jay:

Robb,
(I’ve included Jay in this email because it seemed to me like the right thing to do.)

I recently emailed you with questions about the situation in Duluth and what we have and haven’t been told about it. Since then I’ve learned about a previous investigation done by GRACE at another Vineyard church that also included a look into the ways in which VUSA was involved in that situation. I’ve read over the documents involved, at least the documents I am aware of, and I would like to ask you some questions and make some observations.

I’m writing this as a pastor of a Vineyard church but I’m also writing as a father and grandfather.

I’ve only just this week learned about the situation involving a young woman from Ohio who experienced alleged sexual misconduct by another youth, the pastor’s son, at a Vineyard in Columbus. You’re aware of the situation and have been in contact with the reporting victim’s family. I’ve spent hours going over the GRACE report from that investigation and some of the follow up communication between you, LVC and the reporting victim and her family.

As a pastor, father, and grandfather, I was heartbroken by the details of her story. Unlike the situation in Duluth, these were not acts perpetrated by an adult against a minor, but they were, reportedly, traumatic and emotionally damaging. And any time something like this happens in the context of the Church where relationships, power, God, and our identity are all enmeshed, the slightest misstep can cause the gravest of consequences.

My questions pertain to the recommendations that were made to VUSA and LVC by GRACE, what has or has not been done about them and the tone of the communications that I am aware of have taken place.

I would appreciate your feedback in helping me to understand what I have read.

First, you indicate that you believe the GRACE report was inconclusive. Robb, what was your expectation of what GRACE would be able to tell you? As they indicate, guilt and innocence are not part of their scope. They also indicate that it was, as the consistent story of the reporting victim made clear, her word against his word. This is almost always the case with situations of sexual abuse, and sexual interference. What was surprising to me is that you and the others on your list read the same report I read but seemed to conclude that GRACE had no opinions. The GRACE report, particularly their recommendations, makes it abundantly clear that 1) they found the reporting victim credible and her story credible, 2) the leverage of personal gain and loss favored her as the person with the most to lose and least to gain, and 3) very specific and egregious mistakes made in the handling of this situation by almost everyone on the Vineyard side of the story.

A disinterested third party would not read this document and conclude that GRACE had ended with the scales evenly balanced between the reporting victim and the reported offender. This isn’t just conjecture on my part. When I shared this report and information with a recognized authority in cases of church abuse who has been quoted in numerous publications, on-line articles and on news reports, she saw the same thing I saw. She wrote, “It appears the church is purposefully focusing on GRACE not being a judge/jury when they knew going into this that was not the case. They seem to be minimizing the credibility portion, which is what GRACE was hired to find out about. So, why did they hire GRACE if they knew GRACE wasn't a court of law but then only focused on the small portion pointing out GRACE is not a court of law instead of the detailed findings that was the point of the investigation? Seem sketchy to me.”

It seems sketchy to me as well.

I’m wondering how many people who didn’t have something invested and who aren’t connected to VUSA and LVC’s pastor in some way were allowed to read over this report and share their reflections? It seems pertinent given that GRACE repeatedly refers to the inherent conflicts of interest involved in this situation.

Can you tell me who read this from outside the Vineyard and was “arm’s length” enough to offer their impressions of what it said? Not a “legal opinion” but a Christ centered kingdom perspective.

The report says, “GRACE did not find that L1 and L2 sought to cover up the allegation. However,” However is such a big word in this context, isn’t it? “However, L1 and L2 appeared to use their position to control the content and the context of the information that was presented to VUSA, and they delayed the report to VUSA until allegations became public rather than responding when informed of the extent of possible harm to RV. While not conduct amounting to cover-up of the allegations, the failure to timely seek outside, independent counsel and involvement inhibited RV’s opportunity to discuss the allegations openly with an unbiased leader and elevated RO’s protection over necessary care and respect of RV.” That’s called “an abuse of power” and leveraging their position for the RO to have the advantage of their protection. This is pastoral malpractice.

Was it your expectation that GRACE would tell you what to do with this information and you would just carry out their directions? Or did you and VUSA think that GRACE would simply give you their findings and you would have to determine what to do about a Vineyard pastor who had committed malpractice? Your response reads as if GRACE’s report exonerates the RO and LV1 and it does not.

Here’s something I hope we can agree is very clear.

“GRACE recommends that VUSA and/or LVC provide generous funding to assist RV. GRACE recommends that this also include any past therapy costs that a reported victim paid.”

Have VUSA or LVC sent any money to assist RV with therapy costs? If not, why not? Please don’t insist to me that the hundreds of thousands of dollars VUSA is spending on GRACE and Guideposts meets this recommendation. Objectively, it does not. This seems like the barest of minimums we could do given that our local and national organization made a painful, traumatic situation many, many times worse for RV and her family – as documented by GRACE. It is not an overstatement to say that the subsequent treatment of RV and her family by LVC and VUSA were more traumatizing than the initial event (and I am not downplaying the initial event in saying that). The beneficiary of the GRACE report and whatever Guideposts is working on now is clearly NOT RV but rather, and exclusively, VUSA.

I would very much like to see RV receive financial compensation to assist with expenses incurred from past, present and future therapy connected to this event. Listening to lawyers about what this may or may not lead to is not a very Jesusy approach or a kingdom way of relating to people.

In the report recommendations I was disheartened to read, “GRACE recommends Vineyard USA, or other entity as appropriate within Vineyard’s governance structure, contract with an independent third party to investigate allegations of sexual assault that were made to GRACE and reported to Vineyard USA leadership. The allegations involved alleged victims and alleged perpetrators who were not a part of this investigation.” Robb, that’s plural. Victims. Perpetrators.

When was Vineyard USA going to tell us about this? It doesn’t seem very transparent to keep this shocking news secret. It seems like a systemic problem we should all be talking about and doing something about right now. How many names are on the list you received? Was Jackson Gatlin on that list? Did the investigation into Duluth start because of this list? What additional information has GRACE provided to VUSA about these allegations? As a pastor, a father and grandfather I find this information disturbing, that it was kept from me, I find unconscionable.

And definitely not transparent.

Jay recently said, “…everything has to come out, everything has to come into the light…It’s important that everything comes out into the light.” – Jay Pathak, National Director of VUSA. (https://vineyardusa.org/update-regarding-brenda-and-michael-gatlin/) but it seems like we didn’t include this GRACE report in that “everything.” Perhaps we just want “everything” at Duluth to come out. But it seems like that “everything” should include this GRACE report too so we can see how things have been handled and how we don’t want them to be handled. It seems like “everything” should include the disclosure that in light of what was happening at LVC, somehow a whole list of perpetrators and victims at other Vineyard churches was developed.

At least this GRACE report seemed to think it was important.

They recommended “…that VUSA and LVC develop a plan to assure this incident remains in its institutional memory, which may help decrease the likelihood of a similar incident.” Not “incidents like this” or “case studies about bad behaviors” but this very incident would be something that we pastors of VUSA – we who hold the collective memory of our institution – we pastors who are on the front line of everyday life where incidents like this actually occur (when was the last time the VUSA offices had a game of sardines on site?) – clearly we are the ones who should know this story so that we never repeat what happened to this young woman after she told her story.

Finally, I was struck by the consistency of the ask from the Reporting Victim. She never wavered in the report or in anything I read from her singular request that would have given her closure and perhaps the beginnings of healing and reconciliation. She asked for an acknowledgement of the wrong that had been done and an apology. That’s a very low bar for us to respond to. In the GRACE report it even states that LV1 and LV2 had their son write an apology letter, the RO says that he wrote the letter but then the letter was never delivered because the RV wasn’t at their church anymore. The RO says the letter is lost now.

How much effort would you assess that it would have taken to get that letter – given every other ounce of energy that was put into this by LV1, LV2, the area leaders, church board members, the regional leader, etc. – why did no one – apparently – say, “hey, sit down and re-write the apology letter”? Such a simple request from the RV, just a simple human thing to do, but no one followed up on it? VUSA does not need ecclesiastical powers to say to LV1, “hey, can’t you just ask your son to re-write the letter?” or to even say to RO, now that they are an adult, “hey, can’t you just rewrite the letter? We’ll help you get it written and deliver it for you?” If we really are a relational movement, what if we tried actually sitting down and having this conversation with RO and see where that gets us?

Instead, the requests, the much harder requests, all flow toward the Reporting Victim. She was repeatedly asked to tell her story – an action that outside of a safe, therapeutic context just retraumatizes the victim. She was repeatedly asked to forgive far more times than the RO was asked to write an apology. She was asked to maintain confidentiality which can only be interpreted by a victim as a demand to keep your secret. While all parties are advised to refrain from public communication via social media, you single out the RV by name and not the RO or others, re-enforcing the impression that she has done something wrong and that telling her story, the story of what she believes happened to her, is also wrong.

And it’s not. It’s never wrong to tell the story of what happened to you. That’s called a testimony. People will choose to believe your story or not, as this situation at LVC demonstrates. So this just seems like more protection through the use of power and authority meant to protect the RO. While I believe that there is a degree to which the RO has been victimized by the adults handling this, it does not justify the ongoing misuse of power. When did the kingdom become a matter of circling the wagons rather than laying down our lives and reputations for one another?

What I wonder is if you can see that?

Here’s the deal, as a father and grandfather, if you wrote this response to me or my daughter or granddaughter, I would be crushed, I would feel abandoned, I would feel like every previous expression of apology or condolences amounted to the now cliché “thoughts and prayers.”

I would be livid. I would lament.

And I would tell everyone I knew.

As a Vineyard pastor, I’m very upset that I had to stumble on this information. Perhaps there was an email I missed in which you shared the link to the GRACE report and, just as importantly, a link to the information about GRACE providing you with a list of perpetrators and victims elsewhere in the Vineyard. I invite you to please correct me if you have.

Here's what I hope for. That someone will take 15 minutes and reach out to the RO and say, something like, “hey, you’re a man now and it’s time to be an adult. Please re-write the apology and send it to us in a sealed envelope and we will deliver it to the RV unread.” It would probably be useful for a therapist to be enlisted in giving the RO some guidance on what an authentic apology would include. But it should be something like this,

“RV, I hurt you and touched you in a way that you did not welcome or want. I was wrong. I made you feel confused, betrayed, and shamed. As your friend, I should have known better and treated you with respect. As an adult now I understand better how hurtful this experience was and I can see it left you with a tremendous amount of weight to carry around on your soul. For all of that, I am truly sorry. I promise you that this would never happen today, I am not that 14-year-old boy, and I promise you it will never happen again. I ask for your forgiveness but hold no expectation over you that you must give it to me.”

Robb, thank you for letting me share some of my thoughts about this situation with you. I find it deeply troubling. If I can be of any help beyond sharing these thoughts, I am very interested in being a part of a solution and not just a critic. As a Vineyard church pastor and a father and grandfather, I want us to do better, I need us to do better, and I will contribute to our getting better however I can and however you will allow me to. Personally, I believe this begins with our responsibility to make things right with this young woman.

-----

On March 13, Robb Morgan replied:

Brian,

Thanks for your email. As noted, this is the third correspondence related to the various matters cited.

I am sure we've met, but I'm not sure we've ever had a conversation. If you're willing, I would welcome the chance to talk on the phone or over Zoom in order to avoid potential misunderstanding - email really can't provide the tone and relational connection that conversations like this require.

Let me know if you'd be willing to connect OR you can just grab time on my calendar - the live link in my email signature.

--

Gratefully,

R

---

In the Zoom conversation that followed, we talked about these two situations. I hope I was clear that there was nothing satisfying about our conversation. Even in our Zoom conversation you took me to task for saying something I didn’t say in my printed email. Nevertheless, I appreciated the gift of your time and after the conversation I emailed:

Robb,

Thank you for our conversation today. I appreciate your active listening and willingness to push back and engage with me. I appreciate the desire of your heart to help us all be better and do better.

I will be praying for you and all the things in the swirl around you, may you experience God’s peace in the midst of it all.

Brian

--

And Robb Morgan replied on March 18, 2023:

Brian,

Agreed! Thanks for the time yesterday. I hope you experienced our discussion as I did - warm in tone, collegial in disagreement and hopeful in a desired future for the sake of all who are impacted by the ministry of Vineyard churches and the Vineyard movement.

I'll loop back in 6 weeks to revisit this discussion and see what our shared next steps may be.

--

Gratefully,

R

-----

The “loop” didn’t happen. Robb did not get back to me in 6 weeks. He did, however, email condolences about my dad passing away in late October of 2023, which was very kind.

This ends part one, The Fellowship of the Disenfranchised. Coming soon will be part two of the trilogy, The Two Powers, in which several months have passed before I reached out again to engage in this conversation.