I’ve learned that they actually sent their statement as a press release to the local newspaper, intending to get this on the front page last Saturday, though after I told my side of the story their communication apparatus has completely stalled.

Although the staff on every campus have been told they may not visit this site, there must at least be someone who has taken a peek at my rebuttal of their statement. Their official blog is still displaying exactly the same text as it did on Friday. Here, in order of ease of correction, is what I’m waiting for them to fix.

1. The meeting was in April, not February. This is a no-brainer, and anyone who goes back to my February posts can see that NewSpring wasn’t even on my radar. You can also see Brad Cooper’s comment from March 7 inviting me to meet him for coffee. This is such an insubstantial change, why wouldn’t they make it, unless they want to pretend that my rebuttal doesn’t exist.
2. There were four active harassers. I really don’t understand why they repeatedly refer to three rather than four harassers. Was this just a mistake? Is there one they dare not talk about? If they really believe there were three, perhaps they’d have been smart to have asked me for a few more details on the day they fired Maxwell.
3. I didn’t seek to denounce the church from the pulpit. Their insistence that I did could only have been arrived at through a torturous process of misinterpretation. I challenged their attorney on this point on Friday night and told him that I expected them to correct this. The longer they leave this unfounded accusation on their site, the more it appears they really want the world to believe this about me.
4. I didn’t email Wilson about the adoption. A search through their email archives will make this obvious. They probably understand how that error puts their claim of noninvolvement in question, so they might be reluctant to acknowledge their mistake by being seen to correct it.

I don’t expect to agree with every aspect of their statement, but these are four points that they already have enough evidence on hand to fix.

It’s been six days since they asked everyone to read it.

How many more days will we need to wait until they bother to get it right?

This is the Paranoid Pastors post that promoted Duffey’s “love the rage” conversation.

Duffey suggests that running over critics is a useful tactic. Now you know why I believed him.

From July 16, this post about how pastors interpret challenges against them as rejection of God. An excerpt:

What are you communicating to your own followers about the worth and dignity of Christians who are outside of your movement and, based on their own commitment to the Word of God, question the beliefs and methods of these charismatic leaders? When you call us sons and daughters of the Devil, what kinds of passions do you unleash and endorse among your true believers?

The weekend that Maxwell was fired prompted this announcement from Noble.

Here’s an excerpt from that post:

Perry’s warning against fighting isn’t terribly persuasive, especially given what else he said. He starts the illustration by asking God if he could fight a young woman at a fast-food restaurant who wasn’t even talking to Perry. The only reason that he didn’t is because God told him, after Noble sent up a quick prayer request, that he couldn’t. He then claims that his critics are sons of Satan, then he tops off the whole performance by wanting to hurl food at the young woman after hearing the testimony another young lady.

If this man were your boss, what kind of response to critics do you think would impress him most?

This came in from Albert Lance on Friday night, after NewSpring’s announcement, though I’ve blanked out a few of the details for obvious reasons.

The owner of this blog:

JAMES DUNCAN
999 Xxxxx Xxx
Anderson, South Carolina 29621

(864)-999-9999

Such friendly folk.

This was one of the first responses to my argument that Noble has created a culture of hate that tolerates attacks on people like me.

You are truly a psychopath. You claim to be a Christian. I don’t believe it says anywhere in the Bible that you are to spend all your time and energy trying to destroy others. Do you not ever tell anyone about the Gospel? It’s idiots like you who give Christians a bad name and cause nonbelievers to stay far away from church. I attend NewSpring. We are obviously doing God work. Otherise, we would not be experiencing such a strong attack from Satan (James Duncan). God will deal with you for trying to crucify His people. You are a pitiful excuse for a human being. I do have to say, though, the more people who read your blog, the more people find Jesus by way of NewSpring.

I’m not sure that really helps your church, Candy, though Maxwell and friends might be encouraged to know that they weren’t alone.

This one I might just frame somewhere.

JD. I’m praying for you. I have been out in the wastelands with my Christianity until a month or so ago when I found your blog. Since then I have had a thirst for the word that is unparalleled (just so that I can provide an argument to what I believe and voice my opinions here.)!!!!!!

Thanks, Simon. That’s what this site is all about, so it’s encouraging to hear reports like yours.

Finally, for all the commentators who preface their comments with “if this is true,” it might help you to read this comment from my wife’s best friend, which she submitted unsolicited by us.

I want to post on here but I’m a single mother and I’m not sure if it’s safe to add my two cents for fear of what NS might do to me! You think I’m joking? Those thoughts went through my mind – however Dr. Duncan’s wife is my best friend. I have known her since we were teenagers – and I have known James from their first date – I was in their wedding and his wife and I were roommates. I have known about this terrible thing that has been taking place since this summer.

James’ account is completely accurate – our heart broke when they were not able to bring their son home from the hospital and he was adopted to the NS pastor instead. I live in another state and came to stay with James’ wife when he went to New Zealand – this account is real and truthful. All along James and especially his wife have examined their motives, and have meticulously tried to follow God’s wisdom in dealing with conflict. They have been treated shamefully by the staff of NS – but still have forgiven them.

When James’ wife realized that the information about the adoption would be public – she worried about the adopted parents of the child and wanted to make sure that they were not afraid that they had any ill will towards them. She especially wanted to make sure that this child knew how much they were loved and wanted and never would have to feel any shame or pain from this situation. These are real people – If anyone from NS ever reads this post – I wish they would understand the full gravity of what they have done. James may disagree with your doctrine, but he would never attack your family or threaten you children.

Because I can attest that these events are completely accurate, it is unbelievable to me that Perry Noble and his staff would further victimize this family in their misleading press release. It’s a bit like saying, ya – the guy shouldn’t have raped that women – but did you she what she was wearing? Blaming the victim is never a smart move. I hope that people at NS will lovingly and rightly so demand transparency from their leaders and will consider anything less a breech of covenant relationship. In regards to the money – it was never about money – James wanted nothing more than to meet with these guys and work it out. Now they have to move houses, upgrade security (have you seen some of the responses to this post?) and wait to be able to adopt again. They have lost financially, a sense of security, and their child.

But more importantly unless this type of behavior has a consequence to it, it will continue – they are right to agree with the lawyer to discuss compensation – I know that lawyers can be down and dirty, but to turn that around and for Perry Noble to act like they are greedily seeking compensation is deceitful and disgusting – especially after all that they’ve been through. Since NS people keep on pointing to the fruit of all the people who are changed as proof of their legitimacy – how come no one is concerned about the bad fruit that has been produced? From the hateful posts here and the people who perpetrated this harrassment and the leaders who encouraged and took part – THAT is the fruit of the leadership as well – it goes both ways.

In February an employee of the church met with this individual

I didn’t start blogging about NewSpring until March, and this meeting was April 1. If they start their post with such an easily refutable error, how much confidence can you have in what else they write?

The “employee of the church” was Brad Cooper, who had asked me to meet with him. Brad is a senior leader in the church; he’s a little more than an employee. Why hide his name? Is it shameful to have met me?

“This individual” is me. J-A-M-E-S-D-U-N-C-A-N. It’s not that difficult.

in an attempt to resolve any misunderstandings and listen to his concerns.

That’s news to me. We met for coffee for almost two hours to chew the fat. Afterwards, Cooper said he enjoyed the meeting and wanted to do it again.

Since that meeting, the frequency and intensity of the critical blogs have increased.

Is someone keeping statistics? I thought they didn’t read this.

Why would this be a surprise? Do they assume that meeting a person means that the meetee will no longer have any reason to disagree with their ideas?

In the summer of 2009, one NewSpring employee and two volunteers,

It was three volunteers (Elgin, Milstead, Dickson). Who aren’t they counting?

acting on their own accord and unbeknownst to the Church

Except that it was widely known within the church. Two full-time leaders subscribed to it.

began a wholly inappropriate campaign directed at the author of the blog site.

I agree, but do Duffey and Moorehead? They seem to have had a very high tolerance for the inappropriate.

None of their actions were known to,

Except for Moorehead and their communications director.

or condoned by,

Except by Duffey and Moorehead.

the Church or its leadership in any way.

Wilson knew about it in enough of a way to prompt him (or someone) to call their attorney.

When the Church’s leadership was contacted by the author of the blog site regarding the activities of these three individuals,

I have four signed confessions. Who are they not counting?

A NewSpring executive pastor and his wife adopted a child that, coincidentally,

There are a lot of coincidences in this story.

the author of the blog site and his wife were also seeking to adopt.

A bit more than seeking. We’d been selected months earlier and drove to the hospital with a car seat to pick the baby up to bring him home.

Adoption is a legal process and it is a matter of public record that the Church was not a party to this adoption

Of course it’s a legal process. That’s what adoption is. How does that help their argument?

They have a public record of their non-involvement. Can we see it? I thought that, when done properly, there are no public records of adoptions. They’re sealed and are very definitely private records.

Do churches regularly adopt children? How are churches parties to adoptions?

nor did the Church attempt to influence its outcome in any way.

Who knows? Maxwell seemed pretty confident that the outcome had been influenced. Milstead did a little victory dance to celebrate some sort of influence.

On October 31st, the author of the blog site emailed the Church broadly outlining complaints of harassment and interference with his adoption efforts,

Oops. Someone didn’t check this out. On October 31, I emailed Wilson, pointing out that the leadership couldn’t just dismiss Maxwell as a loose canon. I didn’t mention the adoption at all in this email; at this point I didn’t even know that Wilson was involved in the adoption.

I did email Julie Dixon on October 26 to ask if she’d meet with me to help me understand why Milstead seemed to have implicated her in the parent switch. Three days later she replied to me and told me that she was withdrawing a verbal agreement she’d made by phone earlier in the day (at which point she hadn’t read my email) to meet with me the next week.

Curiously, the subject line of the email had changed from “We need to talk” to “Re: note from Julie Dixon.” Why would Dixon change the subject line to remind herself that this was her note? NewSpring seems to have an email forwarding protocol where staffers change the subject line of an email to tell the recipient whose message they’re forwarding. For example, my message to Cooper on June 29 was titled, “Request for a meeting.” When I got the response from Wilson a week later, it was titled, “Re: Fwd: Request for a meeting – from James Duncan.” Cooper or his assistant apparently altered the subject line to tell Wilson that the message was coming from me.

I’m speculating, but see if this makes sense: On the 29th Dixon forwards Wilson my email from the 26th about Milstead’s statement because she knows Wilson is a player. Wilson’s assistant filters his emails and alters the subject line to “Re: note from Julie Dixon” and sends it on to Wilson. Wilson responds to Dixon, who has told him that we’re going to be meeting the next week, and suggests that she cancel it.

On the 31st, Wilson has two messages from me in his in box. One directly from me, and the other forwarded to him from Dixon. He seems to have conflated the two complaints into one. Remember, I did not talk to Wilson about adoption on October 31. In fact, I have never mentioned the word adoption in my messages to Wilson, just in case he really didn’t know what had happened that day in July.

For the church not being a party to the adoption or influencing it in any way, it is interesting that my email to Dixon was interpreted as if it were directed to the church.

Back to the message:

Those grievances also included his belief that the church knowingly and willingly allowed this harassment and even encouraged it.

Except that Duffey had encouraged it, and Moorehead did allow it. At least, he didn’t stop it.

a demand for payment of one and a half million dollars ($1,500,000.00) if he was allowed to share the pulpit with Pastor Perry during the Church’s weekend services or through various other “public options” in order to denounce the Church, its leadership, and its “culture of hatred.”

Here’s what I actually wrote:

1. Perry Noble acknowledges (in a sermon, at a press conference, or on a blog post that links to a coordinated statement on my blog) that a significant culture of hate existed within his church, and that Maxwell, Moorehead and the other volunteers acted consistently with the expectations of that culture, which he rejects and apologizes for.
2. Noble and I together outline the general contours of the harassment campaign, including the targeting of my family, and the racist, homosexual and generally vile content of Maxwell’s writings.
3. Noble and I announce the emotional distress that Maxwell and Milstead intended to inflict on my wife and me after the failed adoption.
4. Noble and I announce that the church has generously compensated my family for our trouble, though not the amount of compensation.

If can find “denounce” or “share the pulpit” in this list, please let me know.

In my conversation with the attorney, I told him that I assumed that coordinated blog posts was the easiest and most likely way that this might be done, so when you read the “together” in the last three options, that’s the assumption that I’m working with.

You might be curious why I didn’t want the amount of the compensation revealed. The whole idea of this option was reconciliation and peace. We wanted the church to be happy that they were compensating us, and we didn’t want to have to keep defending ourselves or the church for the settlement, be it large or small.

The Church, of course, rejected both offers.

They rejected it, but not “of course.” They flew their attorney in from Texas to listen to my offers. They took more than two weeks to decide on how they’d respond to the offers, and they came back to me two more times to clarify the shape of the offers. For an “of course” decision, they wasted a lot of money on their attorney’s travel and hours.

On the follow-up phone call the day after our meeting, the attorney asked me for a script for what Noble would say in his announcement. The whole concept behind the proposal was that Noble would own the statement himself and would be saying it because he actually believed it, so I told him that it wouldn’t work unless Noble wrote the script himself. I gave him some ideas for what he could say, but I left the rest up to Noble.

On close examination, this statement falls apart. Nobody checked dates or emails, making telling and avoidable errors. If rejecting the offers was so “of course,” they had more than two weeks to prepare this statement. In the life of the church, it’s obviously an important one; they made its dissemination their top priority yesterday afternoon.

Who wrote this? Who checked it? Did the attorney look over it? Someone goofed.

To me, this looks like something that was put together at the last minute. Why wait so long to say no, unless you had been thinking about saying yes?

NewSpring Church will not be subjected to hollow and exaggerated threats

They voluntarily subjected themselves to the “threats” when they asked their attorney to meet with me. If you don’t want to be subjected to threats, don’t meet with me. Continue to ignore me.

I’m waiting for them to explain what is hollow and exaggerated. Did their liability insurance company think the same thing?

The Church is offering ministerial counseling to its former employee and two volunteers

Again, who aren’t they counting? I don’t know.

Pastor Perry and NewSpring continue to pray for all involved in this unfortunate situation.

Cool.