“For clarity, we have a recording of that meeting,” they said. “It reflects that no offer was made to review the church’s actual financial books, only the specific document related to the house. Again, a topic raised by him, not by us.”
Regarding what was communicated during the two-hour meeting and whether or not reconciliation occurred, the Greenwells said, “We did not leave that meeting with the understanding that there had been reconciliation in the sense of remaining in ministry or restoring working relationships.”
“During the meeting, many issues regarding the church were addressed openly and directly,” they continued. “However, Pastor Locke was fully aware that we were stepping away from the ministry.”
“We stated clearly in that meeting that we would be submitting our resignation and that we intended to communicate that resignation to the online congregation,” they said.
The Greenwells said it was important to them to communicate quickly and publicly about why they were leaving in order to prevent misinformation and because of their relationships as online pastors to their “online family.”
“In the past, multiple staff members who resigned had been publicly degraded, humiliated, or subjected to false accusations after leaving,” they said. “Out of a desire for transparency and protection; for ourselves and for the people we had pastored. We told him that we felt it was necessary for everyone to understand exactly why we were leaving, in our own words.”
ChurchLeaders also reached out to Greg Locke for comment, seeking further clarification about how Locke perceived the two-hour meeting, specifically whether he had thought he and the Greenwells were reconciled. He said:
It’s not that I thought we had reconciled. I had plainly added context, clarity and even repentance to the things they had been stating. They agreed. [They] acknowledged the truth as we laid it out. I verbally and in text message told them they were going to do what they decided but I warned them [that] publishing that letter would only cause division, confusion and it would be totally one sided because the issues were already discussed and dealt with face to face.
ChurchLeaders noted that in his public comments, Locke had said that his house was purchased by himself, his wife, and some businessmen but that later he had said the church’s name was on the house. ChurchLeaders asked, “Does that mean you and the others bought the house and, even though you’re living in it, donated it to the church?”
“All of the monies were run totally through the church for accountability and bookkeeping,” he replied.
Regarding the Greenwells’ allegations of spiritual abuse and of a “culture of hierarchy and emotional manipulation,” Locke said:
Again, poor decisions or hurt feelings from a previous experience had already been dealt with both publicly and privately. It’s sad that when you’re receiving a good salary and benefits, you say nothing of the sort. There was no “abuse”. That’s literally the most insulting thing that could be said. They were given complete control over the online community, Bible studies and the volunteers. They created their own environment. Getting your feelings hurt is not spiritual abuse. Attacking people with nonsense claims is spiritual immaturity.
ChurchLeaders also sought clarification of what Locke meant when he said he had repented for his behavior during the “tent days,” asking, “Is it correct that ‘tent era’ means when Global Vision used to meet under the white tent in Mt. Juliet? When you say you already repented for everything mentioned in the letter, were you referring to your comments in this sermon and/or something else?”
“Yes, those phrases are used in reference to the 4 years we were in a tent,” he answered.
