E-mails - sorted by "conversation", then chronologically

E-mails - sorted by "conversation", then chronologically.

Clark Gallager, Dr. Bob Morey, 1

From: Clark Gallagher
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 1:13 PM
To: 'Robert Morey'
Cc: Cindy Ortiz
Subject: formal resignation

Dr. Morey,

Please accept this email as my formal resignation from the ministry of Faith Defenders. I thank God for the many wonderful things He has done in my life through this ministry, and I am grateful for the opportunities given to me through Faith Defenders. It is with sadness that I tender this resignation but trust that whatever Christ ordains is right. I pray that God may bless Faith Defenders in this New Year.

Sincerely,

Clark Gallagher

From: Robert Morey
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:56 AM
To: Clark Gallagher
Cc: maxhamfamily@cox.net; markziebold@gmail.com; Cindy Ortiz
Subject: RE: formal resignation

Dear Clark,

Given the extreme financial crisis that the ministry is presently going through, it was with great sorrow that I informed all the staff that we would have to lay off more staff members once my equity loan is exhausted. I suggested that any staff member who could take a job elsewhere and lessen the expenses of the ministry until the building be sold would be deeply appreciated for sacrifing for the ministry in its hour of need. We will pray that God provides good employment for you and the other staff members who are seeking work elsewhere at this time. You are to be commended for "seeking first the kingdom of God" and thus putting the good of the church first in your life. Let us pray that God will bring us through this crisis and we will be able to bring back staff members who left during the crisis.

Jude 3,

Dr. Bob Morey

Clark Gallager, Dr. Bob Morey, 2

From:  "clark gallagher"
To:  cindy@faithdefenders.com, maxhamfamily@cox.net, Dr. Bob
Subject:  membership
Date:  Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:55:46 -0800
Effectively immediately I hereby resign the Gallagher family from
membership in Faith Community Church. Thank you.

Clark Gallagher

Clark Gallagher, Dr. Robert Morey, 3

From: Robert Morey
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 6:58 AM
To: clarkcg7@hotmail.com; dustin@exigentsystems.com
Cc: Cindy@faithdefenders.com; tom@faithdefenders.com; Mark@faithdefenders.com
Subject: RE: membership

I turned off my phone yesterday. Having listened this morning to your phone messages, that you wanted to discuss my sermon, I will have Tim send you a copy of it so you can hear it first hand. Once you hear it, I am open to you coming down and sitting down with Tom and the Board to discuss it.

You called me as I was at the airport- no place to discuss things- I told you that you were not ordained as a pastor or elder, I tired to get you to see that you were not ready to pastor your own church. But once I got back I found that you were trying to split FC and steal sheep to make up your church!

Clark, if you went off on your own and converted unsaved people or Arminians to attend your church that is one thing. But to split people off FCC when we are barely surviving, it not ethical.

Mediate on the following passage and you will see that I am bound by Scripture to deal with anyone who draws people away from the church. Put yourself in my shoes. If someone within your church decided to split your church to start his own church, you would have to do what I did.

"Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood... and from among your own selves men will arise ...to draw away the disciples after them."

People have reported to me things you have said that have shocked and sickened me. I feel betrayed. That you would tell people that there is no biblical basis for me to have an assistant, or that I fired you because you wanted to provide for your family, or that FCC should cut CBUS before it fired "pastors," etc. have made me ill. How could you say these things?

What is the real shame is that none of this was necessary. As I said at the staff meeting, IF we do not get the trip money and IF the tax refund does not come by March, THEN we will be in trouble because I will be out of money. In March we would have to do things to reduce the expenses.

Clark, when I got back, I heard that the trip money was received Friday. The rest will come in thirty days. Half of the tax money came in as well. THIS MEANS THAT THE CRISIS WILL NOT HAPPEN IN MARCH. But you jumped to the wrong conclusion, panicked, and made some bad decisions based on fear. The crisis has been averted. You could have continued as my assistant.

Think about it.

All the pain-

All the suffering-

All the hurt that you have caused-

None of this was necessary.

Now for you to split FCC and harm the ministry is to cause even more pain and suffering.

But none of this was necessary.

Remember that I called you to speak at Brea.

I trusted God to provide enough money for you to continue as my assistant and to move with me to Brea. But you refused to preach or teach.

If you were advised to do what you did, then you listened to poor advice that destroyed your hopes of ministry.

It would be more honorable for you to get a secular job, and repair the damage you have done with a view, that like Mark, you can be received back.

Dr. Bob

Dustin Hoffman, Dr. Robert Morey

From: Dustin Hoffman
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 11:22 PM
To: 'Dr. Bob'
Cc: 'Cindy Ortiz'
Subject: letter of resignation

Dear Dr. Bob:

Please consider this the formal resignation of myself and Krista from Faith Community Church.

Thank you very much for your ministry to us. We hope and pray that God will bless Faith Community Church.

From: Robert Morey
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 7:05 AM
To: Dustin Hoffman
Subject: RE: letter of resignation

Dustin,

All of this pain was unecessary.

For you to resign BEFORE talking with me, Tom, Cindy, Mark is not wise. What does Proverbs say about making decisions having only heard one side? I really expected better of you. Please read my response to Clark and to meet with us to hear all sides.

From: Dustin Hoffman
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 11:39 AM
To: 'Robert Morey'
Subject: RE: letter of resignation

Hello Dr. Bob! I don't think I've ever gotten so much back in response to such a short email. :)

> All of this pain was unecessary.

I think I might be "out of the loop" on some things. What pain?

> For you to resign BEFORE talking with me, Tom, Cindy, Mark is not wise

I'm worried you've perhaps assumed too much: I'd intended to resign my membership prior to yesterday, but with the new house and preparations for Kya to come home from the hospital, it slipped my mind. Whatever transpired yesterday was not the cause of my resignation.

And, respectfully, there's no cause for me to speak with Tom, Cindy, or Mark about my resignation: they un-elected, not theological authorities in FCC, and Cindy & Mark aren't ordained.

> I really expected better of you

I think there's a misunderstanding. I've given you no cause to think poorly of me or any of my decisions. I've done nothing other than what I think you'd have thought highly of.

> Please read my response to Clark and to meet with us to hear all sides.

I think it would be most profitable to do this. I think getting together and hearing both sides could solve

allot of issues. When can this be arranged? I think sooner would be better than later, and am willing to re-arrange my schedule and drive to Irvine to make it happen.

Thanks, Dr. Bob! I hope to hear from you soon.

From: Robert Morey
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 9:58 AM
To: dustin@exigentsystems.com
Cc: Cindy@faithdefenders.com; Mark@faithdefenders.com; tom@faithdefenders.com
Subject: RE: letter of resignation

Dear Dustin,

Your email was clear that you were already planning to resign from membership and that you were only making it official at this time. Why meet if you have already resigned? I accepted your resignation.

But if you sincerely want to know how and under what circumstances FCC would receive you back into membership, we would be glad to meet with you.

If you can sincerely say from the heart, before God and Christ, that you want to rejoin FCC and that you will immediately stop any financial support for Clark's church split, then we are willing to meet with you.

If, as a sign of good faith, you have put a stop to Clark and Lewis harassing people at FCC, sometimes calling them several times a day, then we will meet with you.

Dustin, they are calling people day and night trying to steal as many FCC people as they can. Ask them if they are calling people. If they deny that they are doing so, then they are lying to you. If they admit they are calling people, then they are guilty of schism.

Dustin, do you really think hate, gossip, and slander is a good foundation for a new church? Shouldn't love be the foundation? If you become involved in starting a "church" that is based on the sins of gossip and slander, it will not last.

If you have any love of Christ and his church, put a stop to Clark's and Lewis' gossip and slander phone campaign.

Lastly, put yourself in my shoes. Do I know things about Clark that are so serious in nature that they disqualified him from being a pastor? Yes. That is why I have not ordained him as an elder.

Did these personal failures in his life force me to require him to go to Tom for counseling? Yes.

But would I be breaking pastoral confidentiality if I revealed them to you? Yes. Thus I cannot reveal to you or anyone what Clark has confessed to me in private counseling.

While it is true that Clark signed a confidentiality statement in which he promised not to talk about ministry business and he has clearly broken that promise, does this give me the right to do what he has done? No.

Things said to me in private as his pastor will go with me to the grave. I know that Clark understands that I am a man of honor and thus bound not to reveal what has prevented me from ordaining him as an elder/pastor. Thus he is safe to attack me all he wants without fear that I will reveal things about him that would empty his church next week.

All I can say is that he does not meet the list of qualifications to be an elder/pastor found in Titus and Timothy, and that his present actions totally justify why he is not qualified to pastor any church anywhere.

If you decide to meet with us, then:

1. Come with your Bible and your brains and be prepared, chapter and verse, to justify your support of schism, slander, and gossip;

2. Bring a list of all those who have joined Clark in the sin of schism.

3. Assure us before God that you have done all in your power to stop Clark, Lewis, and anyone else from calling/visiting people in FCC to steal them away from the church.

In obedience to Tit. 3:10, I have been forced to "reject" any further contact with Clark. If he continues to harass the sheep at FCC, then he will force us to take the next step outlined in Rom. 16:17-18.

For the sake of your wife and children, for you and your family to attend a "church" run by a self-ordained “pastor” who has been publicly "delivered over to Satan" by his previous church is serious business. If such church discipline means nothing to you, then you deserve the consequences.

Anne and I love and care for you and are deeply disappointed that you have fallen into such an obvious device of Satan. But we hope and pray that you come to your senses and deliver yourself before it is too late.

Jude 3,

Dr. Robert Morey

From: Dustin Hoffman
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 10:28 PM
To: 'Robert Morey'
Cc: 'tom@faithdefenders.com'; 'Mark Ziebold'; 'Cindy Ortiz'; 'maxhamfamily@cox.net'
Subject: RE: letter of resignation

Hello Dr. Bob. Thank your for taking the time to write back.

> Why meet if you have already resigned

I wanted to meet after taking your suggestion to do so. I agree with your assertion that I ought to hear both sides in accordance with Proverbs 18:17. I saw no reason to meet prior to your suggestion and Sunday's events, as there were no accusations of wrong doing prior to then.

As I asserted originally, I'm ignorant of any wrong doing and thus, for me, it would be profitable to hear your side in light of the accusations that have been made.

> as a sign of good faith, you have put a stop to Clark and Lewis harassing people at FCC

Lewis is not the issue, so who has Clark been calling? And, respectfully, if he is doing these things, how would I stop him? If he is guilty, I can plead with him, but if you insist that I stop him, you ask more than I can promise; I tried to stop Javier & Lisa from their course but couldn't. What power do I have over him?

> Clark signed a confidentiality statement in which he promised not to talk about ministry business and he has clearly broken that promise

That would certainly be a problem if he did that. But, I'm also not certain how it's relevant to the charges of church splitting.

However, please provide the evidence for your claims.

Note: I've personally read Schedule A of the Non-disclosure Agreement when I agreed to volunteer for the ministry, so I'm aware of the elements that comprise it.

> Lastly, put yourself in my shoes. Do I know things about Clark that are so serious in nature that they disqualified him from being a pastor? Yes. That is why I have not ordained him as an elder

> Did these personal failures in his life force me to require him to go to Tom for counseling? Yes

> But would I be breaking pastoral confidentiality if I revealed them to you? Yes. Thus I cannot reveal to you or anyone what Clark has confessed to me in private counseling

Clark has indicated that he's never been in counseling with Tom or you.

It's my understanding that the counseling ministry at FCC, and especially Tom, keeps records/notes of every counseling session and that papers must be signed before entering into a counseling series.

Please substantiate your claims and provide the documentation that certainly must exist. Of course, you can redact anything that must remain confidential from the documents, so there's no cause for not providing this evidence.

Again, though, I must note that this claim is not relevant to your assertion of church splitting.

Also, I find the very notion of disclosing moral failures discussed in counseling, even if they're not explicitly named, to be despicable. I hope this is not the level of integrity that people should expect from the counseling ministry at FCC. Would it be OK for Tom to say something like "Wow, Dustin, you wouldn't believe the terrible things Betsy's told me in counseling! I can't tell you what they are, but they're VERY serious."?

> Ask them if they are calling people. If they deny that they are doing so, then they are lying to you. If they admit they are calling people, then they are guilty of schism.

Respectfully, that is the fallacy of the Excluded Middle (a.k.a, the False Dilemma). Even if they are calling people, they aren't necessarily guilty of schism. Even if they aren't calling people, they aren't necessarily lying. You taught me that principle.

I have asked and it's my understanding that Clark's not told anyone they should leave FCC.

But, I'm open to hearing both sides. Let's bring forth the witnesses that say they've been contacted and told they should leave FCC.

The issue at hand is not what Lewis has or has not done. The issue is the claims relating to Clark.

> In obedience to Tit. 3:10, I have been forced to "reject" any further contact with Clark.

You taught me that Titus 3:10 is referencing factions due to heresy. Is there heresy going on too? According to witnesses present on Sunday 01/14/2007, you indicated that Clark was not guilty of any moral or theological apostasy. Are you retracting that statement now?

How do you reconcile your comments on Sunday regarding his lack of moral apostasy and your references to "serious" personal failures? Which is it?

> If you decide to meet with us, then

So, in order for me to meet with you, I have to accept your claims?

I'm not aware of 2 or 3 witnesses that can substantiate your charges, and I've not witnessed any offensive behavior.

How could I in good conscience accept what you're claiming, when you will not provide the witnesses? Just because you're a pastor/elder does not meant that your claims do not require substantiation. Paul was not above examination (Acts 17:11). Are you?

I cannot simply accept such serious charges made against Clark with just an assertion, any more than I would've accepted Javier & Lisa's claims against you without proof. Is this not Godly and right?

First, your claims must be established.

Thus, would you please demonstrate that:

1) Clark is guilty of schism and your other accusations. Who are the witnesses? Let them be brought forth and examined in accordance with Scripture. There is simply no cause or excuse for not doing this.

2) Matthew 18 has been followed in regards to Clark. If it has not, then any proceedings against Clark are illegitimate and hypocritical, since Javier & Lisa were put under church discipline for not following Matthew 18.

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and providing you the opportunity to establish your claims. There's no reason not to.

Clark's indicated that you were not aware that he'd accepted my idea to start a church until Friday 01/12/2007. How could Matthew 18 have been followed in the short time between your return from New York and your Sunday comments? If you followed Matthew 18, who are the 2 or 3 witnesses that you took with you to confront Clark regarding his intentions to split FCC?

> who has been publicly "delivered over to Satan"

When did this occur?

Dr. Bob, before God I only want to do what is right. If anyone is sinning, it ought to be stopped. If someone is guilty of schism or slander, they ought to be exhorted in accordance with Matthew 18 in hopes of bringing them to repentance.

In accordance with 1 Timothy 5:1 I plead with you, as you've been a spiritual father to me. You've taught me over and over again that "if you sinned, wouldn't you want grace?". Tom, Clark, and your wife counseled Krista and I just like this years ago. Do you not believe that this can be resolved? I do. Whatever has happened, I've seen enough goodness come from your life and Clark's life to expect that you'll both seek to honor Christ. Have all roads to repentance and restoration been exhausted? Isn't there a chance that this is all less than it appears to be? Why shouldn't we all meet in hopes of healing whatever rifts there are now and stopping the pain that the church is suffering due to this? Have you treated Clark as you would want to be treated? Have you gone to great lengths to avoid having to say the things that were said on Sunday? If so, how was that possible between Friday and Sunday?

Dr. Bob, won't you please be above reproach (1 Timothy 1:6) and bring forth the proof of your claims?

Clark Gallagher, Dr. Robert Morey, 4

From: Robert Morey
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 8:40 AM
To: clarkcg7@hotmail.com
Cc: Cindy@faithdefenders.com; Mark@faithdefenders.com; tom@faithdefenders.com
Subject: RE: membership

Dear Clark,

On the basis of Tit. 3:10, I am bound by the Word of God to officially refrain from any further contact with you. It is better for both of us to go our different ways before we destroy any hope of future friendship. In this light I am no longer going to meet with you, take your phone calls or response to letters or emails. The issue is over.

I am afraid that if we let this situation spin out of control, your health will be endangered. You don't believe me, but Anne and I love you, Dana, and the boys and feel that it will be better for you that you concentrate on things that are not stressful.

Just as Paul and Mark went their separate ways and years later reconciled, let us pray that the same will happen to us. The day will come when we will be friends.

Pastor Bob Morey

Joe Flores, Dr. Robert Morey

----- Original Message -----

From: Dr. Bob

To: jflores75@msn.com

Cc: Cindy Ortiz ; Tom Maxham ; Mark Ziebold

Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 7:26 PM

Subject: Satan's devices

Dear Joe,

1. Were you in church last Sunday? We handed out Clark's resignation statement and the official Board response. If you did not pick up a copy of these, call Joe and ask him for a copy.

2. Clark and those have left with him have assured me that they are not contacting anyone to draw them away from FCC. So, I must ask you:

Has anyone contacted you about Clark starting a "church"?

Has anyone invited you to leave FCC and join his "church"?

Has anyone accused FCC, me or the staff of anything?

Who?

I am afraid that they are lying to me that they are not calling people. Too many people are telling me that they are being called, even three or four times a day! Somebody is lying.

3. Some things I cannot tell you because I will not break pastoral confidences. Clark knows that I am a man of integrity and will not divulge what he confessed to me in private counseling. But what I heard was so serious that I put a hold on Clark's application to be ordained an elder/pastor. I cannot in good conscience ordain him as he is not biblically qualified to pastor any church.

3. His decision to start his own church by ordaining himself, concerns me. Doesn't the Bible tell us that preachers must be "sent," i.e. authorized? Since no one "sent" Clark, this concerns me.

How then shall they call upon Him in whom

they have not believed?

And how shall they believe in Him whom they

have not heard?

And how shall they hear without a preacher?

And how shall they preach unless they are sent?

Just as it is written, "How beautiful are the feet

of those who bring glad tidings of good things!"

Romans 10:14-15

Jesus sent out disciples when they were ready. The church at Antioch sent out Paul and Barnabas. What church sent Clark? No church has ever sent him! He sent himself!

4. Having ordained and sent himself, he has decided to build his church by stealing sheep from another pastor's flock. Instead of winning the lost, he has spent his time stealing people from FCC. He should have concentrated on converting goats instead of rustling sheep!

5. How has he managed to steal sheep from FCC? By showing more love for Christ and preaching the Gospel? No, by spreading hate, gossip, slander, and anger.

6. Since he and his stooges are slandering me and the staff in order to build their church, have they found any moral or doctrinal issues to point to? Not that we have heard of.

7. What accusations are they spreading? Groundless and silly accusations! The following is an imaginary conversation.

Gossiper: Hi! I am calling to tell you not to go to FCC but to come and join us at Clark's church.

FCC: Why should I leave FCC and move over to his church?

Gossiper: Dr. Bob secretly sold the church and has millions of dollars in a hidden account! He is a thief!

FCC: Do you have any proof that the building has been sold? Wouldn't the new owners move in? Have you asked the real estate agent if the building has been sold?

Gossiper: I don't need proof. I refuse to call Dr. Bob or the real estate agent. They are all liars. Clark knows all about it. The building has been sold.

FCC: The Bible tells me not to listen to any accusations against my pastor unless they are based on the Bible and there are two or three eyewitnesses to confirm it. Do you have two or three witnesses to verify that he has sold the building?

Gossiper: You are being silly.

FCC: I think I am going to call Cindy.

Gossiper: No! Cindy is a wicked woman. Tom is a fool. April and James are behind it all. And as for Joe, TJ, Tim, Susie etc., they are all evil people. Clark was the only godly staff member. Don't call them!

FCC: I am sorry but I will not listen to such stupid accusations. You do not have two or three witnesses. You have not given me a single verse from the Bible. Get thee behind me, Satan!

As I will point out this Sunday, this is the same old stupid satanic device used last year. Those who are dumb enough to believe that I have sold the building or some other stupid accusation and refuse to call the staff to ask for the truth, deserve to go with Clark, who is a self-ordained "pastor" with a so-called "church" based upon hatred, gossip, slander and lies. It will not last long. I feel sorry for those deceived by him.

If you have any questions that are (1.) based on clear Scripture (chapter and verse) and (2.) that have two or three eye witnesses, I will answer them. I am forbidden by Scripture to entertain or listen to any accusations that are unbiblical and without two or three witnesses.

1 Timothy 5:19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.

Jude 3

Dr. Bob Morey

----- Original Message -----

From: Jose Flores

To: Dr. Bob

Cc: Cindy Ortiz ; Tom Maxham ; Mark Ziebold

Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 10:55 PM

Subject: Re: Satan's devices

Dear Dr. Bob,

We respect and love you as our spiritual father. This has NOTHING to do with any slander, rumor, or gossip we heard about you; please do not be upset. I was genuinely shocked that you supposed this had something to do with a rumor we heard about you. We are not bringing any accusation against you. Clark NEVER, EVER said anything that was malicious, evil, or presumptuous about you. NO ONE contacted me about Clark starting a church. NO ONE invited me to leave FCC and join his "church"; NO ONE has accused FCC, you, or the staff of anything. I called him; he did not call me. If he ever was to say anything evil about you, I would be prompt to hang up the phone. (as was the case with Joey and Lourdes.) In fact, he said that he loved you and told us NOT to leave. I believe that the incident with Lenny and Javier (which WAS gossip and evil) so shook you up that you are quick to assume that Clark is doing the same thing. What I am about to ask you is regarding what you told the congregation on Sunday--- which was in the presence of more than two or three witnesses. You said you would answer me if my questions were based on the presence of two or three eyewitnesses and if they were scripturally based. They are, so please answer me. I am not going to ask you to disclose anything that would be remotely personal concerning Clark's life. And yes, I was in church last Sunday.

1. You told the congregation that Clark told you, "I am going to take as many people with me" when he resigned. Clark said that he never said such a thing. Other people suggested to him that he should start a church, but, according to Clark, he never told you that his intent was to "steal" people. Did Clark really say that he was going to "take as many people as he could"? It is a genuine question. If he never said that, by you telling the congregation that he did, wouldn't that be defaming his character? He was made to look like an evil fool.

2. You said that Clark was not "ordained". But, in fact, he has papers and pictures proving that you ordained him in January, 2005. Again, as a genuine question, why would you say he was not "ordained" if in fact he was?

3. You are telling me that Clark "gossiped and slandered." Dr. Bob, you taught us to go to the person that committed a supposed offense in accordance to Matthew 18. However, Clark says that you never confronted him on a one-on-one basis but rather are announcing to everyone that he gossiped and slandered. In addition, in your encyclopedia in your section, "How to respond to gossip", you said in accordance to Galatians 6:1 "to "restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness." Please don't be upset with me for asking, but have you confronted Clark on a one-on-one basis regarding this slander that you say he committed? Clark says that you never did.

4. You announced to the congregation that Clark committed no spiritual or moral offense. But you sent an e-mail to Clark stating that you will not speak to him in accordance to Titus 3:10. You taught that this scripture, in the Greek, refers to a heretic that is divisive through heresy. If Clark is a heretic, how come you told the congregation that he did no wrong?

5. If the burden of proof lays on you that Clark gossiped and slandered, why are you unwilling to meet with Clark to produce his accusers? Please do not be upset, but another genuine question: is not Clark entitled to be given the evidence that so damns him? In the case with the slander that Javier committed, you let everyone know who spread the gossip. So Clark and myself are asking: who did Clark gossip to? Is it not only right that you tell us who Clark blabbed to?

6. I agree with you that you are not to disclose anything personal about Clark. Why, then, did you tell the congregation that he suffered from panic attacks? Is that not something personal that we had no business knowing?

Again, Dr. Bob, we have no intent to defame your character or bring an accusation against you. We have no intent of leaving the church. We are, however, thoroughly confused about this situation and would appreciate your answers. By bringing these concerns to your attention, we are only doing what you told us to do...you said your door is "always open" to ask questions. In addition, in your last e-mail, you alluded that it was foolish if anyone "refused to call the staff to ask for the truth" but instead resorted to their own thoughts. So here we are, taking you up on your advice. Please do not write us off. Please do not shame us for the very reason that you were kicked out of your bible college--- for the sin of asking genuine questions.

Thank you,

Joe Flores

Chase Richardson, Dr. Robert Morey

From: Chase Richardson <chasehrichardson@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 17, 2007 11:07 PM
Subject: About Recent Issues At Hand.
To: Robert Morey

Hi Dr. Bob,

It is hard for me to write an email questioning my pastor, but I pursue truth, and as of now, I do not know what is true about the whole issue between Clark, you, and the congregation (the issue was discussed publicly in front of the congregation on Sunday, 1/14/2007). As of now, I am under the impression that you MIGHT have done some things out of accordance with scripture. Dr. Bob, it shocks me to see such division within the best of Christendom (reformed in theology). I know from your teachings that God is in control of everything and that he will use this whole mess to glorify Himself.

On Sunday I heard you say some things about Clark that he denies.
I must ask did you follow the method of approach given in Matthew 18 below when you heard about Clark creating division and trying to steal sheep from FCC?

Mat 18:15 "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
Mat 18:16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
Mat 18:17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
Mat 18:18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Mat 18:19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.
Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them."

Clark told me that he had no intent of taking anyone away from Faith Defenders. Did Clark tell you this? And if not, who did? If someone else told you this, are they willing to testify hearing or reading Clark's words? Do you know of anyone that Clark called to influence to come to his church prior to or after Sunday? If so, who?

Why will you not speak with or meet Clark anymore? What justification do you have for this? From what I can tell, Clark would like to meet with his accusers and deal with the issues at hand. What scripture gives you warrant to reject Clark further attention regarding this?

Can you and the board meet with Clark? (Clark did not ask me to ask this question, I honestly want to see reconciliation.)
Can I meet with you to discuss these things?
I was greatly saddened to hear that the relationship between you and Luis has been ruined. I makes me sick to see such divisions between brethren in the body of Christ. I have a hard time getting my mind of this issue because you are both brothers to me.

Dr. Bob, I appreciate all that you have done for me in the past, directly and indirectly. Praise God for the blessings He has given some of His children through you. I have enjoyed disciplining under you, and I hope this turns out: first however God wills it to turn out, and second for the mortification of sin.

I don't know who is deceiving the flock, you or Clark. I pray that all the men of God involved in this will be able to gird up their loins like manly men, be humble, admit to their sin, and pursue holiness. If Clark is in the wrong, I hope and pray the Holy Spirit gives him repentance. If you are in the wrong, I hope and pray the Holy Spirit gives you repentance.

I look forward to your response, and thanks.
'Chase Richardson

From: Robert Morey
Date: Jan 18, 2007 9:29 AM
Subject: RE: About Recent Issues At Hand.
To: chasehrichardson@gmail.com
Cc: Cindy@faithdefenders.com, Mark@faithdefenders.com, tom@faithdefenders.com

Dear Dale and Chase,

As I have always said, church experience is the good, the bad, and the ugly. Paul faced many ugly situations in the churches he started. He directly dealt with people who split people off from his churches and started their own churches. He faced accusations against him and the men he ordained to pastor his churches. Heresies came and went. The pastoral epistles comprise the bulk of the NT and they mainly deal with crisis after crisis in the churches he founded.

The first thing you must understand is that what we experience today is not new or a surprise. Paul warned the elders of the church at Ephesus that they had a duty to protect the flock from attacks from outside and from attacks within.

Their responsibility: Acts 20:28 "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.

Attacks from outside: Acts 20:29 "I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;

Attacks from within: Acts 20:30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them.

He had experienced people in his church that decided that they did not like him or his ways and that they could do a better job pastoring, So, they started their own church by stealing as many people out of his church as they could. But the pastors he had place over those churches had the responsibility to protect the sheep from those who ordain themselves and set up churches when they were never sent or commissioned to do so. Self-ordained men who start churches out of self-will have always been a problem.

Not only did Paul have to deal with people who run off and start churches without any authorization to do so, but he had to deal with accusation against him and against the men who were authorized to pastor their churches.

1 and 2 Cor. are a long defense of Paul against him. If you study those two books you will find him defending himself from those who attacked his character, motives, policies, and teachings. The church at Corinth was being split by people who hated him. But he did warn other pastors that often it is foolish to defend yourself or your ministry. People will believe whatever they want and they often refuse to follow the Bible.

Stop right now and read 2 Cor. 11 and then begin to read my letter to you.

Now that you have read the passage, you found that he struggled with all kinds of accusations. You can feel his pain.

Now, Paul not only had to deal with people who attacked him, but he had to help the pastors who had been appointed over his churches. He had ordained Timothy and Titus with his own hands and placed them over their churches.

Just as the OT had "schools of the prophets" in which men were trained by a prophet and then "sent" out to do ministry, Paul had assistants that he trained and then "sent" out fully authorized. The NT concept of being "sent" i.e. authorized and ordained to pastor a church is standard Reformed teaching.

How then shall they call upon Him in whom

they have not believed?

And how shall they believe in Him whom they

have not heard?

And how shall they hear without a preacher?

And how shall they preach unless they are sent?

Just as it is written, "How beautiful are the feet

of those who bring glad tidings of good things!"

Romans 10:14-15

Jesus "sent" out 70 and then 12 disciples when they were ready. The church at Antioch "sent" out Paul and Barnabas. For someone to go out and start his own church without being sent out to do so is very serious indeed. Joseph Smith and the cults all started that way.

Timothy had been trained and ordained by Paul. He then sent Timothy to pastor the church. Timothy did not run out and do his own thing. He was "sent" to pastor his church. He was authorized to do so by his pastor and church.

In 1 Tim. 5:19 Paul tells him how to handled accusations made against him and the elders he ordains. This passage is very important in this situation.

1 Timothy 5:19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.

The Greek word translated "receive" means to pay attention to, investigate, think about, entertain, ask about, etc. Paul tells Timothy that if an accusation is made against him or one of the pastors he has ordained after they had qualified for eldership according to the lists of qualifications given by Paul to him, he was to ignore any accusation that did not have several eyewitnesses.

For example, someone accuses one of Timothy's elder of being a liar. The accuser bases his accusation on a private conversation that someone else claimed that he had with the elder. The accusation is second hand. He did not hear the conversation himself. He was taking up offense for a friend. But even if he was the one who claimed to have talked with the elder, their private conversation was not witnessed, i.e. overheard by two or three witnesses. Thus Paul tells Timothy not to bother with single witness accusations. Don't investigate them or ask the elder to bother with then at all. Ignore them.

Now, Scripture also teaches that any accusation that sin has taken place must concern a biblically defined sin. Accusations that are based on you own feelings or ideas mean nothing. If you accuse someone of committing a sin, you better have chapter and verse in the Bible that says that it is a sin to do that.

What the facts that all can agree upon?

Clark was my assistant that I was training to be a pastor one day in the future.
Things happened in his life that made me postpone ordaining him as an elder or pastor. I cannot break pastoral confidentiality and reveal what he fell into but it was serious enough for me to require him to go for counseling and to stop any movement toward ordaining him.
Clark has decided to go out and start his own church without waiting to be ordained or sent out to do so.
He will have to ordain himself because I cannot in good conscience do so because I know he is not qualified to be a pastor according to the requirements given in Timothy and Titus.
Clark has not been "sent" by any pastor or church to pastor any church anywhere.

In order to start his "church,"

Did he go out and win the lost to Christ by preaching the Gospel and build his church by solid teaching?

Or did he decide to steal as many sheep as he could from FCC?

How is trying to steal people out of FCC?

Attacking the character and motives of the pastor and staff?

Is he generating love or hate, patience or anger?

Is he doing things "unto edification"?

Are his words creating more faith, hope and love among the saints?

Did Paul have to deal with people who ordained themselves and started churches by stealing people from his church? Yes. Were they "sent" out to start those churches? No. Some passages that apply to this situation are as follows: Notice how people commanded to deal with church splitters.

Romans 16:17 Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them.

Romans 16:18 For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting.

Titus 3:10 Reject a factious man after a first and second warning,

What does this mean?

I will obey Scripture and not entertain, pay attention to, or answer any accusations based upon supposed private conversations. "He said-She said" arguments are a waste of time.

This is why I refused to talk with Clark except in front of Tom and the Board of the church so we would have many witnesses to what who said what. I asked we write all issues in emails or letters to have a written record.

Chase, for you to entertain or pay attention to single witness accusations against me and the staff is sin on your part.

I have written various emails to him to try and bring him to his senses. We met with him to try and help him.

Reconciliation was possible until he decided to run off and start a church without being sent or ordained, and by taking people out of FCC. If people from FCC are sitting in his church, how did they get there? FCC did not send them.

Take poor Luis as an example. I left a message on his phone that if he has any questions for me, call me. Instead of coming to us, he has called and attacked us to other people based solely on what Clark has said. Since he has not come to me to seek answers, he has fallen into the sins of gossip and slander.

In order to document what he is doing, I need your help:

Did he talk to you why you should leave FCC and join Clark?

What are his accusations?

Since he has not bothered to contact me, I don't know what he saying.

Has anyone else tried to get you and your dad to believe that I and other staff members are sinful and wicked and that Clark is totally innocent?

I did not find any accusations that you brought up that were biblically qualified for an answer. They are hearsay accusations and unbiblical. The only things that people have to consider without getting into the mud pits of slander and gossip is that Clark has not been ordained or recognized by any church to be an elder or pastor or to start a church. He has filled his "church" with people from FCC. They got there somehow. Something has been said by him of such a serious nature that they have left their church.

Just listen to the people at Clark's "church" when you ask them what they now think of Dr. Bob, Cindy, Tom, etc. Ask Luis.

If they have come to hate us, ask them how they went from loving us to hating us. Who told them things that changed their attitude? Listen to what they say.

Lastly, write out a report of said what to you about whom. Make a record of what they say and who they say told them the gossip or slander.

Those who want Clark to be their self-ordained pastor who was not "sent" out by any church to start a church, are free to join him. Those who join him in the sin of schism by stealing people out of FCC are not worthy of attending FCC. They can go into the night as did Judas.

Jude 3

Dr. Bob

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Chase Richardson <chasehrichardson@gmail.com>

Date: Jan 23, 2007 12:48 PM

Subject: Regarding the issues at hand.

To: Robert Morey

Hi Dr. Bob,

Your son announced at Becky's birthday party on Sunday that College group would be at your house and that you would be answering questions regarding the issue with Clark.

I will not be able to come on Wednesday night because I have class, so I am curios if you can answer my questions in email. Thanks. Note: the following is honest and straight to the point. I do not intend to unnecessarily offend you, however, if I does it's because I and others in the congregation have not received sufficient evidence according to the biblical model to support your claims regarding Clark.

In your first response to me, you wrote:

"Chase, for you to entertain or pay attention to single witness accusations against me and the staff is sin on your part."

I would like to inform you that I did not entertain any accusations against you in my first email. What I did do in the first email is question your accusations about Clark and your method of approach. This is not sin on my part, and to avoid the mess of hearsay, I have gone straight to the sources of the two opposing sides in this issue who are you and Clark. (I understand my other questions to be valid as well but I would not like to take the time to address them.)

Here are reasons why the two main questions in my first email are valid questions worthy of response. First, whether or not Clark is in the wrong, according to scripture you were under obligation to follow the method of approach in Matthew 18 when confronting this issue. Clark's actions do not affect your responsibilities when it comes to this. Secondly, "every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses." Even though you are an elder in the church, you are not exempt from following and obeying this passage.

In addition to the reason for response given above, the reasons you gave me for turning from the issue at hand were not sufficient. You emailed me a poor translation from the Greek of Titus 3:10 in your last response. This verse, according to my research blatantly refers to a rejecting a heretic. You stated 1-14-07 that Clark was not a heretic. Thus, this verse gives you no defense in this issue. You also quoted Romans 16:17-18 as reason to ignore Clark. I must ask: is Clark creating division and snares or traps contrary to the teachings (doctrine) that have been taught at your church? If so, what faulty doctrines is Clark teaching to people that are contrary to biblical doctrine that necessitate the rejection of him on your part? Is Clark teaching heresy? If Clark is not teaching heresy or false doctrine, than these verses you have quoted to me have suffered from serious eisegesis.

With the above statements in mind, I will re-ask some questions. When dealing with the accusation that Clark was trying to break up your church. Did Clark tell you that he was going to split your church and steal sheep from you? If not, did others tell you about this? If others told you about this, did Clark tell them this, or try to steal them from your church? If two to three people told you this, who are they, and are they willing to testify about this sin of schism? If the people who informed you about this were not witnesses, did they refer you to witnesses, and are they willing to testify that Clark tried to split your church? Who is the source of these accusations? If there are no testifying witnesses to Clark engaging in the sin of schism, then your accusations are "He said-She said" accusations, and have no biblical foundation. According to the biblical model of approaching this issue, I must reject it and not "pay attention to single witness accusations against" him. According to your last email, if you do not have witnesses to verify the accusations made about Clark, then not only I, but the entire congregation would be in sin for paying attention to the accusations you made about Clark on Sunday 1-14-07.

The other question I have regarding this issue that was in the last email is: Did you follow the method of approach found in Matthew 18 when dealing with Clark? Did you first confront him alone and question him about committing the sin of schism? If so, what was his response? Did he repent of his sin or ignore you? If he did not listen to you, did you take one to two others with you to confront him about the sin of schism? If so, who are these people, and will they testify to joining you? If there are witnesses to Clark creating schism, and if they are not willing to, or do not testify to this, then either your accusations are not valid or the Matthew 18 is not "profitable for teaching (doctrine), for reproof (proof, conviction, evidence) for correction, and for training (education) in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work," in this issue.

Dr. Bob, if you have followed the biblical model (Matthew 18) in this unfortunate mess of chaos and division, will you please demonstrate to me that you have by showing me your method of approach and your witnesses? To deny me this is a) unfortunate, b) to not use the method of approach found in scripture, and c) imply that you don't need the method of approach found in Matthew 18. Since God has given us means by which to deal with this issue in His Holy Word, if you do not show us any witnesses or testimonies to this, then your accusation is of equal value to a one person accusation without witnesses. If you would please reveal the witnesses of this sin of schism, then all of this email correspondence that we have had - that most likely negatively affects our relationship - would be quite unnecessary.

I have noticed no hatred toward you in Clark when I spoke with him regarding this issue. This is what I did notice: thankfulness for how God has blessed him in the past through your work and teachings, and frustration that accusations of schism are now being made against him without witnesses. Through this entire process, I am striving to make my allegiance to Christ and the Word of God. I have no loyalty to any man, you or Clark that would supersede truth and what God's words say regarding it. You have taught me not to focus on men, but the Word of God, thank you for that.

I have talked to four people, of which three were members that testify to the statement that Clark was not in any way trying to create division in your church. Dustin Hoffman and Luis Espinoza can testify that Clark was no stealing your sheep. Dustin came to Clark with the idea of starting a church in the first place. Luis Espinoza, Joel Hughes and Manual Lopez were with Clark the night before you publicly announced Clark's sin of schism. All three of them told me that they are willing to testify that Clark made it clear that he did not want to take sheep away from your church. According to these witnesses, Clark was actively making sure that these men knew that that was not his intent. Notice, I have been upfront about providing witnesses for the statement above.

The reason I stress the necessity of witnesses is that it has been multiple people's requests that you tell them who they are for about a week. If Clark is not guilty of engaging in the sin of schism, contacting people without rest to build his own church at the expense and destruction of yours – as you have indicated – then you are the one guilty of the sin of schism, for dividing the church with false accusations and an unbiblical approach to this issue. You are at fault if you do not present testifying witnesses Dr. Bob. Because this is so serious, please align your actions with those found in scripture so that reconciliation may be found as much as possible.

Thank you for all that you have taught me, including how to approach this issue and I look forward to your response. Sorry I can not make it to your house on Wednesday evening.

2 Tim. 3:16,

Chase Richardson

From: Robert Morey
Date: Jan 23, 2007 9:41 PM
Subject: RE: Regarding the issues at hand.
To: chasehrichardson@gmail.com
Cc: Cindy@faithdefenders.com, markziebold@gmail.com, tom@faithdefenders.com

Dear Chase,

I announced at church that I was not going to deal with the church split any
more. John misunderstood me. I will only deal with BIBLICAL questions.

I am very busy getting ready to do the class on Eastern Orthodoxy and I am
back working on my book. The pastoral letter is the last time I will deal
with the "back door revival."

But your letter did touch upon the proper understanding of several
Scriptures that will be the focus of our study Wed. night. Since you cannot
be there for our Bible study, I will share the biblical material with you
via email. No reference to the situation is implied. I am only talking about
what the Bible teaches.

1. You first asked about Tit. 3:10.
Whereas the KJV has "heretic," the NASV and most modern translations have
"factious man."  Why?

The Greek word means "the one who is causing a schism or church split." Dr.
A. T. Robertson stated that it referred to those who are guilty of the sin
of "schism."  Thus after I have admonished someone once or twice, I am bound
by Scripture to reject any further contact with him. I have no choice in
this regard. I must obey Scripture.

Paul told Pastor Titus to stop trying to correct fractious people after the
second admonition. The verse does not deal with heretics per se, but with
those who cause division in the church.

The next time you are in my library, you can look in my commentaries and you
will find that I am 100% correct. Anyone who claims that the verse applies
only to heretics is ignorant of the Bible.

2. You asked about Matt. 18.
It is often abused by people. Let us begin with the OT background.

a. The context of Deut. 19:15 is the state. It deals with the evidence
admitted in a civil courtroom trial. The government could put someone to
death as a result of this trial. Moses says that evidence given by "a single
witness" is not valid. For example, person A says that person B said this or
that in a phone call or in a private conversation. Of course, single witness
accusations are invalid because there is no way the judge can tell who is
lying. Both A and B could both be lying! Thus any accusation based on "He
told me...No he did not" is a worthless waste of time.

b. The context of 1 Timothy is the church, not the state. It deals directly
with official church business (1 Tim. 3:15). Pastors are often the target of
single witness accusation. They are misquoted, taken out of context, lied
about, etc.

When a pastor is to be put on trial, then the rules of evidence must be
followed. This is why in 1 Tim. 5:19 Paul tells Timothy not to bother with
single witness accusations against him or any pastor in the church.

During the official trial, a pastor is to answer only accusations that have
two or three eyewitnesses who at the same time all saw and heard the same
sin. No evidence from supposed private conversations is allowed. It has to
be a biblically defined sin. Not your opinion or feelings.

c. The context of Matt. 18 has to do with personal relationships among
members of the same church, not state or church trials. It has in view
personal conflicts between members of the church sitting in the pew.

Person A and person B are members of the same church. Person A sees that B
has fallen into sin. He goes to him in private and exhorts him. If B will
not listen, then A takes one or two other members with him. If B rejects
them, then they "tell it to the Church," i.e. then they go tell the
pastor(s) of the church. If B will not repent when confronted by the pastor,
then he is put under discipline. This can end in excommunication.

3. Peter warns us that "ignorant and unstable" people "twist" Scripture (2
Pet. 3:16). These people often confuse Deut. 19 (state trials), 1 Tim 5:19
(church trials) with Mat. 18 (personal conflicts). They have committed a
categorical fallacy and have ended up misinterpreting and misapplying
Scripture.

4. Now, what if a pastor is not on trial in his church or in the state?
Since he is not on trial, he has no responsibility before God to answer
groundless accusations. Slander and gossip are stupid and silly games best
ignored as a waste of time. The pastor of FCC has not been and is now on
trial.

5. Now, what if a member of a church was told by his pastor that he was not
ready to be ordained a pastor or elder because, in his pastor's opinion, the
member failed the tests given in Titus and 1Timothy? Does the pastor have
divine authority to make this judgment?  Yes.  (Tit. 1:5f)
Are members told to "submit to and obey" their pastor? Yes.  (Heb. 13:17)

But - what if he rebelled against his pastor, resigned his membership, and
went out and started his own church? How would Scripture judge that
situation?

That is the question that needs to be answered. Only by studying the Word of
God can anyone answer that question.

How would you answer that question? What Scripture would guide you?

Jude 3,

Dr. Bob

From: Chase Richardson <chasehrichardson@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 1, 2007 8:49 PM
Subject: Letter of Resignation
To: Robert Morey

Hi Dr. Bob,

After much time, prayer, and evaluation of recent events at Faith Community Church, I am grieved to inform you that this letter is my official resignation from membership at Faith Community Church. God has used you to bless my family and especially me tremendously both directly and indirectly in the past though your ministry. Thank you for your labors in Christ.

With much thanks and sincerity,

Chase Richardson