My wife and I were part of the Vineyard for over 30 years and I served on the board of Anaheim Vineyard for 12 years while Lance was senior pastor. We have also known the Scotts since the 1990s and watched with much concern their descent into their current version of theology and reality. When we found out they were the leading candidates to become senior pastors, we were dumbfounded and wondered if they--the search committee--had actually done any substantive background investigation. If they had it wouldn't have been hard to get a picture of the dysfunction and trouble they were inviting upon themselves. Through our contacts and relationships we were told that during the so-called vetting process it became obvious that a few specific persons on the search committee were blindly and obsessively committed to the Scotts coming and were unwilling to hear anything negative about them. The sad thing about what has happened at Anaheim/the dwelling is that it was so easily avoidable with proper due diligence.
Sir, my love and value for you and your wife, from afar, is deep and lasting. Many mutual friend has made me appreciate you two more than you could both know!
You're welcome and thank you for fighting the good fight. Sorry about the typos. I attempted to edit my comment but couldn't quite get it done (technology vs 63 yo brain 🤷♂️)
Hi Luke, I have a hard time understanding some things. It sounds as though Alan's behaviour has a history. both in the uk and in the usa. -my question is, if so many people knew of his theology, behavior and abuse, why wouldn't you or the others share with the search committee? also, why would so many Vineyard leaders write stellar letters of support for Alan? -including Phil Strout and Bubba J and so many others - why would jay pathak go into a meeting with alan asking him to step into more leadership with VUSA if he was all those things people are saying? -i get you may not have the answers but would love to hear your wisdom on how vineyard structure has failed us? thanks mate for your time.
Hey Fran. That's such an important set of questions and I think there are probably numerous ways to get about addressing it... but as you noted, the structure has surely had some sort of failure. Yet that doesn't mean that leadership doesn't bare some of the responsibility on the matter.
I was / am shocked about any recommendations that were written. If that's true (and I haven't read any of them or heard about them), I'm just as concerned as you. I can confirm that I had explained my concerns to several national leaders, both here in the US and elsewhere, over the years but in many ways there hasn't really been a mechanism to do much to address things like that. I still think this is due in large part to our organizational "failure of nerve" method of operation but also can't quite ignore the reality of a structure that makes it really challenging to deal with these sorts of things. I've also gotten the impression that those theological concerns that I had got filtered into the "it's not that big of a deal" category at times. After all, I had NO idea about the actual spiritual abuse and unethical issues prior to the recent allegations. I just knew his theology was problematic and his practices in relation to preaching / teaching and reporting stories didn't quite line up with Vineyard values / praxis.
That he was asked to be involved in national leadership on the day he announced leaving is probably something everyone wishes hadn't happened now, but at the time it was really... well... disappointing. I'm not sure what it meant and I was told that it was a miscommunication... but the statement still exists and it still raises questions. Who knows.
I don't know how long the hiring process took place and I am not privy to all of the folks who are in that group, so I can't really speak on that. But if there were letters of recommendation, I'm assuming there are some regrets on that now :(
they may reget the letters written and jay may regret asking alan to take more leadership, but to me it would confrim that vusa and the uk all didn't question alan's integrity, leadership or theology but only wanted more of it.
you have some good points on the structure within the vusa. maybe you should take the directors position and turn vusa around. my suggestion is Jay P be relieved from duties.
for me personally, if the search committee, including Lance and Penny fulton had not mentioned anything during the search about bad theology, past abuse or - manipulation - i believe them.
I do recommend evreyone reading the letters, would love to know your thoughts.
thanks luke, value your insight and forum for us to learn, think and pray.
Thanks for that link. I had only read some of it. Very troubling. Very troubling indeed. I don’t know anything additionally about the search committee or their questions other than what they have stated.
See my previous observation about “failure of nerve” in regard to leadership deficiencies. It’s the only way I can make sense of the craziness.
No matter what, I cannot in the slightest, agree that what Alan has done. Far too many issues. If any movement(s) desire more of that, it’s a problem. And needs to be addressed. Altho I doubt it will be… it’s now just in the legal world.
Jeff, thanks brother! I'm "back" to the writing game after... well... taking three years off, ha ha!
I'm planning on trying to slowly move all of the articles I actually agree with that I wrote (or update them, ha). Slowly but surely... the import function apparently exists. :)
thanks for your support, brother. I appreciate it.
Thank you Luke - well analyzed and written! The line between cultism (which I think you correctly define by controlling autocracy supported by claims of inerrancy) and occultism ("I can hear what you say about me in your lounge") has been crossed by Scott, a long time ago.
When I first heard of what they had done God gave me this scripture.
"therefore thus says the Lord God: “Surely I have spoken in My burning jealousy against the rest of the nations and against all Edom, who gave My land to themselves as a possession, with wholehearted joy and spiteful minds, in order to plunder its open country.” ’ Ezekiel 36:5 NKJV
If Alan Scott is all you say, and so many people knew it, THE conversation you should be having is how the Anaheim leadership, area leaders, and national leaders allowed it to happen. After all, VUSA has to sign off on all senior pastor hires, right? So write about that.
If Alan Scott (and the governing board of the church) had not taken Anaheim out of the Vineyard everyone who now despises him would still love him, Vineyardites would be talking about what wonderful things are happening at Anaheim, and he'd be speaking at Vineyard conferences. He could be the exact person he is now and would have been celebrated. The only thing that changed is removing the church from VUSA.
When I was part of Vineyard there was a point when our area churches were informed that going forward Vineyard would have to sign off on the hiring of senior pastors. Either way, Scott didn't appoint himself pastor at Anaheim.
The more important articles needing written would be about an organization that either lets a wolf have leadership over the "flagship church" or disingenuously labels someone a wolf just because they don't like him anymore. I'm very confident Scott would not be concerning anyone in Vineyard (at least not enough to write articles about it, accuse him of spiritual abuse, etc) if Anaheim was still a Vineyard church.
That’s where I would beg to differ. I’ve been pretty vocal about my issues with Scott for over 8 years… long before Anaheim. The platonic dualism drove me nuts and the lack of discipleship in the evangelism model just couldn’t but draw concerns.
Can’t speak for the rest of the Vineyard and as noted in the OP, his hiring was/is a major problem. Definitely raises questions. And issues. And concerns (as expressed).
But having spoken to numerous victims, I would say I’d speak up regardless of whether they were in the Vineyard or not.
This is not true. I left at the 2 year mark after Alan took over. Alan made it quite clear that he did not like older people and that is what started me to think about leaving. There were a lot of us grumbling about his teachings and the mantra that he and the staff would repeat over and over again. Some people that I know tried to talk to Alan and he wasn't interested in talking to them. I wasn't close enough to know anything about the spiritual abuse. I did grow really tired of how Alan would take passages of scripture and regurgitate them into a prophecy about the future of the church. I am not aware of one of those "so called" prophesies coming true! Then there was the steady parade of people being introduced from the pulpit that were either radically converted or miraculously healed. No one that I know had ever seen any these people before and in most cases we never saw them again. I found myself wondering if Alan was hiring actors to perform on Sunday mornings. I think that the reason that Alan got away with his antics is because people like myself didn't see anyway to stop it so we left the church.
Steve, I'm so sorry for your experience. I think it's a really good question you raise... and I'm inclined to ask some questions about our local church setting and how we need to be more clear about processes that exist to keep leaders (myself!) accountable. Our board is great and I'm very blessed and trust them, but we probably need to be more clear about how they can be contacted with concerns.
I had some of the same thoughts. Why would the National Director of the Vineyard, Phil Strout give a glowing letter of recommendation and support for Alan to be pastor at Vineyard Anaheim.- That letter is public, but not many want it to be true.
I think i agree with you - the issue is with VUSA and its leaders. Poor structures and poor leadership.
VUSA’s structural weaknesses are not, in my opinion, an excuse for what Alan has done. If anything, he took advantage of it.
As stated above, I have concerns / questions about the issues that exist within the movement I know and love, but none of those are more concerning than the leadership, theology, and spiritual abuse found within Alan.
I spent the first 10 years of my Christian life at Anaheim with John and I would never trade it for anything. Alan's whole game is self evident. The Riddle's are a bit more curious since they grew up under John. I'm guessing their years at Bethel (having personally experienced Bethel's toxic culture first hand) prepared them for the ultimate deceit. What is most disturbing is this whole idea of submission to abusive authority and twisted desire to experience God that blinds people to characterological issues: i.e. chasing the anointing. Spiritual abuse is rampant, as is abuse by authorities in every position of power in the country. We need God to raise up a Dietrich Bonhoeffer to teach us about honoring God rather than men.
Great job in writing this up Luke, thank you for doing it and putting the time and research into it that you have. Quick question/comment, where do we balance as preachers/pastors not making ourselves the hero in our sermons with the power of sharing testimonies? I have shared testimonies where Jesus did amazing things and I have shared where I tried to step out and missed it, would you say just balance the two in our sermons versus only sharing testimonies where everything worked out perfectly? Thanks again, great stuff and so needed!!
Great question, Brian! I definitely tried to thread that needle, which is why I didn’t say, “preachers should NEVER be the hero of their stories.” It’s not that preachers can’t share stories from their life; they can and they should. It’s probably more about frequency and what you are trying to communicate.
If one is telling a story of “victory,” I think it’s important to really work hard to communicate that GOD is the hero though, even if you or I made the right decision and were faithful and… you know… did it right. But as you noted, we need to also share stories where we miss the mark and it’s a learning opportunity. So balancing the two is a great idea! It’ll definitely curb the personality cult thing if you aren’t always perfect ;)
Here’s another reason why I like to share stories about other people though: a huge value in the Vineyard is “everyone gets to play.” Telling stories about other people’s wins helps communicate that value and helps others understand that regular / normal / average / non-pastors can also “do the stuff.”
Also, and this is an aside, for me, I think one of the reasons why I’ll sometimes fail to share a story about someone else is because, quite frankly, I didn’t spend enough time preparing during the week. The biblical theology stuff comes a bit more naturally for me, so finding good connecting stories / testimonies is often my big challenge. If I’m spending the week thinking about the topic more, and preparing, and maybe even LOOKING for some stories, I often find them. If I’m doing that Sunday morning at 7am, might be more difficult and it’s then easier to just go with my own story.
I think I’ll write a post on this in the near future. It’s a great question and a number of people text me or messaged me about this in the last day. So apparently a lot of us are trying to figure it out… I know I am!
My wife and I were part of the Vineyard for over 30 years and I served on the board of Anaheim Vineyard for 12 years while Lance was senior pastor. We have also known the Scotts since the 1990s and watched with much concern their descent into their current version of theology and reality. When we found out they were the leading candidates to become senior pastors, we were dumbfounded and wondered if they--the search committee--had actually done any substantive background investigation. If they had it wouldn't have been hard to get a picture of the dysfunction and trouble they were inviting upon themselves. Through our contacts and relationships we were told that during the so-called vetting process it became obvious that a few specific persons on the search committee were blindly and obsessively committed to the Scotts coming and were unwilling to hear anything negative about them. The sad thing about what has happened at Anaheim/the dwelling is that it was so easily avoidable with proper due diligence.
Sir, my love and value for you and your wife, from afar, is deep and lasting. Many mutual friend has made me appreciate you two more than you could both know!
Thanks for sharing!
You're welcome and thank you for fighting the good fight. Sorry about the typos. I attempted to edit my comment but couldn't quite get it done (technology vs 63 yo brain 🤷♂️)
Hi Luke, I have a hard time understanding some things. It sounds as though Alan's behaviour has a history. both in the uk and in the usa. -my question is, if so many people knew of his theology, behavior and abuse, why wouldn't you or the others share with the search committee? also, why would so many Vineyard leaders write stellar letters of support for Alan? -including Phil Strout and Bubba J and so many others - why would jay pathak go into a meeting with alan asking him to step into more leadership with VUSA if he was all those things people are saying? -i get you may not have the answers but would love to hear your wisdom on how vineyard structure has failed us? thanks mate for your time.
Hey Fran. That's such an important set of questions and I think there are probably numerous ways to get about addressing it... but as you noted, the structure has surely had some sort of failure. Yet that doesn't mean that leadership doesn't bare some of the responsibility on the matter.
I was / am shocked about any recommendations that were written. If that's true (and I haven't read any of them or heard about them), I'm just as concerned as you. I can confirm that I had explained my concerns to several national leaders, both here in the US and elsewhere, over the years but in many ways there hasn't really been a mechanism to do much to address things like that. I still think this is due in large part to our organizational "failure of nerve" method of operation but also can't quite ignore the reality of a structure that makes it really challenging to deal with these sorts of things. I've also gotten the impression that those theological concerns that I had got filtered into the "it's not that big of a deal" category at times. After all, I had NO idea about the actual spiritual abuse and unethical issues prior to the recent allegations. I just knew his theology was problematic and his practices in relation to preaching / teaching and reporting stories didn't quite line up with Vineyard values / praxis.
That he was asked to be involved in national leadership on the day he announced leaving is probably something everyone wishes hadn't happened now, but at the time it was really... well... disappointing. I'm not sure what it meant and I was told that it was a miscommunication... but the statement still exists and it still raises questions. Who knows.
I don't know how long the hiring process took place and I am not privy to all of the folks who are in that group, so I can't really speak on that. But if there were letters of recommendation, I'm assuming there are some regrets on that now :(
What are your thoughts? I'd love to hear them!
have your read any of the update on dwelling place website? It has a couple of the letters you should read, also lots of info on the lawsuit. https://dwellingplaceanaheim.com/familyupdatemar23
they may reget the letters written and jay may regret asking alan to take more leadership, but to me it would confrim that vusa and the uk all didn't question alan's integrity, leadership or theology but only wanted more of it.
you have some good points on the structure within the vusa. maybe you should take the directors position and turn vusa around. my suggestion is Jay P be relieved from duties.
for me personally, if the search committee, including Lance and Penny fulton had not mentioned anything during the search about bad theology, past abuse or - manipulation - i believe them.
I do recommend evreyone reading the letters, would love to know your thoughts.
thanks luke, value your insight and forum for us to learn, think and pray.
-Fran
Thanks for that link. I had only read some of it. Very troubling. Very troubling indeed. I don’t know anything additionally about the search committee or their questions other than what they have stated.
See my previous observation about “failure of nerve” in regard to leadership deficiencies. It’s the only way I can make sense of the craziness.
No matter what, I cannot in the slightest, agree that what Alan has done. Far too many issues. If any movement(s) desire more of that, it’s a problem. And needs to be addressed. Altho I doubt it will be… it’s now just in the legal world.
You make a valid point for all vineyards to take to heart -
Any movement that has structures that allow this kind of mess, you should run from. Vineyard movement is a mess -
Speaking of legal world, not many have touched on this…
Is Christian’s taking Christian’s to court biblical?
I guess i was really shocked to see Lance and Carol - suing
Keep the insightful posts coming, please upload some of your previous writings!
Jeff, thanks brother! I'm "back" to the writing game after... well... taking three years off, ha ha!
I'm planning on trying to slowly move all of the articles I actually agree with that I wrote (or update them, ha). Slowly but surely... the import function apparently exists. :)
thanks for your support, brother. I appreciate it.
Thank you Luke - well analyzed and written! The line between cultism (which I think you correctly define by controlling autocracy supported by claims of inerrancy) and occultism ("I can hear what you say about me in your lounge") has been crossed by Scott, a long time ago.
Ditto to what Costa wrote!
Nicely parsed Luke
Thanks!
When I first heard of what they had done God gave me this scripture.
"therefore thus says the Lord God: “Surely I have spoken in My burning jealousy against the rest of the nations and against all Edom, who gave My land to themselves as a possession, with wholehearted joy and spiteful minds, in order to plunder its open country.” ’ Ezekiel 36:5 NKJV
Seems very appropriate. I’ll be meditating on that passage tonight.
If Alan Scott is all you say, and so many people knew it, THE conversation you should be having is how the Anaheim leadership, area leaders, and national leaders allowed it to happen. After all, VUSA has to sign off on all senior pastor hires, right? So write about that.
If Alan Scott (and the governing board of the church) had not taken Anaheim out of the Vineyard everyone who now despises him would still love him, Vineyardites would be talking about what wonderful things are happening at Anaheim, and he'd be speaking at Vineyard conferences. He could be the exact person he is now and would have been celebrated. The only thing that changed is removing the church from VUSA.
Definitely a lot to wrestle with that. That being said, currently VUSA does not have to approve the hire of a local church’s new pastor.
But your concerns, observations, and issues raised are shared by me, as I noted above.
When I was part of Vineyard there was a point when our area churches were informed that going forward Vineyard would have to sign off on the hiring of senior pastors. Either way, Scott didn't appoint himself pastor at Anaheim.
The more important articles needing written would be about an organization that either lets a wolf have leadership over the "flagship church" or disingenuously labels someone a wolf just because they don't like him anymore. I'm very confident Scott would not be concerning anyone in Vineyard (at least not enough to write articles about it, accuse him of spiritual abuse, etc) if Anaheim was still a Vineyard church.
That’s where I would beg to differ. I’ve been pretty vocal about my issues with Scott for over 8 years… long before Anaheim. The platonic dualism drove me nuts and the lack of discipleship in the evangelism model just couldn’t but draw concerns.
Can’t speak for the rest of the Vineyard and as noted in the OP, his hiring was/is a major problem. Definitely raises questions. And issues. And concerns (as expressed).
But having spoken to numerous victims, I would say I’d speak up regardless of whether they were in the Vineyard or not.
This is not true. I left at the 2 year mark after Alan took over. Alan made it quite clear that he did not like older people and that is what started me to think about leaving. There were a lot of us grumbling about his teachings and the mantra that he and the staff would repeat over and over again. Some people that I know tried to talk to Alan and he wasn't interested in talking to them. I wasn't close enough to know anything about the spiritual abuse. I did grow really tired of how Alan would take passages of scripture and regurgitate them into a prophecy about the future of the church. I am not aware of one of those "so called" prophesies coming true! Then there was the steady parade of people being introduced from the pulpit that were either radically converted or miraculously healed. No one that I know had ever seen any these people before and in most cases we never saw them again. I found myself wondering if Alan was hiring actors to perform on Sunday mornings. I think that the reason that Alan got away with his antics is because people like myself didn't see anyway to stop it so we left the church.
Steve, I'm so sorry for your experience. I think it's a really good question you raise... and I'm inclined to ask some questions about our local church setting and how we need to be more clear about processes that exist to keep leaders (myself!) accountable. Our board is great and I'm very blessed and trust them, but we probably need to be more clear about how they can be contacted with concerns.
You are in my prayers, brother.
I had some of the same thoughts. Why would the National Director of the Vineyard, Phil Strout give a glowing letter of recommendation and support for Alan to be pastor at Vineyard Anaheim.- That letter is public, but not many want it to be true.
I think i agree with you - the issue is with VUSA and its leaders. Poor structures and poor leadership.
VUSA’s structural weaknesses are not, in my opinion, an excuse for what Alan has done. If anything, he took advantage of it.
As stated above, I have concerns / questions about the issues that exist within the movement I know and love, but none of those are more concerning than the leadership, theology, and spiritual abuse found within Alan.
I spent the first 10 years of my Christian life at Anaheim with John and I would never trade it for anything. Alan's whole game is self evident. The Riddle's are a bit more curious since they grew up under John. I'm guessing their years at Bethel (having personally experienced Bethel's toxic culture first hand) prepared them for the ultimate deceit. What is most disturbing is this whole idea of submission to abusive authority and twisted desire to experience God that blinds people to characterological issues: i.e. chasing the anointing. Spiritual abuse is rampant, as is abuse by authorities in every position of power in the country. We need God to raise up a Dietrich Bonhoeffer to teach us about honoring God rather than men.
Thank you, Luke, super article.
Thanks, Steve. Our numerous evening discussions around this topic have obviously shaped my opinion! And the wine. :)
I don't recall any wine (is this microphone on?).
Great job in writing this up Luke, thank you for doing it and putting the time and research into it that you have. Quick question/comment, where do we balance as preachers/pastors not making ourselves the hero in our sermons with the power of sharing testimonies? I have shared testimonies where Jesus did amazing things and I have shared where I tried to step out and missed it, would you say just balance the two in our sermons versus only sharing testimonies where everything worked out perfectly? Thanks again, great stuff and so needed!!
Great question, Brian! I definitely tried to thread that needle, which is why I didn’t say, “preachers should NEVER be the hero of their stories.” It’s not that preachers can’t share stories from their life; they can and they should. It’s probably more about frequency and what you are trying to communicate.
If one is telling a story of “victory,” I think it’s important to really work hard to communicate that GOD is the hero though, even if you or I made the right decision and were faithful and… you know… did it right. But as you noted, we need to also share stories where we miss the mark and it’s a learning opportunity. So balancing the two is a great idea! It’ll definitely curb the personality cult thing if you aren’t always perfect ;)
Here’s another reason why I like to share stories about other people though: a huge value in the Vineyard is “everyone gets to play.” Telling stories about other people’s wins helps communicate that value and helps others understand that regular / normal / average / non-pastors can also “do the stuff.”
Also, and this is an aside, for me, I think one of the reasons why I’ll sometimes fail to share a story about someone else is because, quite frankly, I didn’t spend enough time preparing during the week. The biblical theology stuff comes a bit more naturally for me, so finding good connecting stories / testimonies is often my big challenge. If I’m spending the week thinking about the topic more, and preparing, and maybe even LOOKING for some stories, I often find them. If I’m doing that Sunday morning at 7am, might be more difficult and it’s then easier to just go with my own story.
I think I’ll write a post on this in the near future. It’s a great question and a number of people text me or messaged me about this in the last day. So apparently a lot of us are trying to figure it out… I know I am!
Thanks for reading, Brian!