A cast of many players, but no independent third parties on this playbill: A review
where did all the forerunners go?
Most of us mired in the middle of this mess will never forget the Sunday in early November when we were chastised from the pulpit of the very place that had crushed us. The first finger wag came from Forerunner Christian Fellowship’s Pastor, Isaac Bennett, which was not especially harsh, but wagged nonetheless. Isaac is generally thought of as kind, (though lately he has taken to blocking so many who disagree with him on X that this view may be shifting). It was an admonition to “stay off social media due to numerous reasons”(Bennett, 2:15) And while it was not harsh, it seemed he was offered up as tribute by the other ELT members as the least threatening to deliver this message; it was still not appropriate, given the circumstances. Likewise, it reeked of internal control.
But that wasn’t the end of it.
If you know IHOPKC, you know all messages from there come in, at least, duplicate form—and if they are made-up prophecies, they come in multitudinous iterations.
The Second Scolding
The second scolding was the worst, that from Michael Brown, fellow PhD, apologist for revival and IHOPKC eschatology, who stood on stage, acting like he was some sort of father to all, and told everyone to “grow up!”
Indeed, sir. Take a gander at thy X account and let’s talk.
Don’t post. Take screenshots if you defend Mike, he said. Take screenshots if you think he’s guilty, he said. Later we can say you were right. But take them down.
My dude. No. That’s not how we do this. That’s not how we cover important news.
You see, it had only been a bit earlier that we had learned that, in fact, no reliable third party would be engaged to hear the voices of those with concerns. Nope. Instead, the party engaged was a high-dollar multi-city corporate law firm, Stinson LLC, which specialized in defending taxes, business liabilities, insurance litigation, and other exciting endeavors. The buzzwords around the base, from everyone other than the leaders themselves, were “minimizing risk.”
Stinson didn’t stay long, in part, it seems, thanks to the mass outcry. But Stinson was not a stranger to IHOPKC either.
In a bizarre coincidence, it further appears that the initially-hired Stinson LLC was not unfamiliar because back when IHOPKC was only going by “IHOP,” and was often confused with the pancake restaurant, it was “Stinson” who was responsible for helping to litigate the trademark infringement and dilution lawsuit. Stinson was retained by the International House of Pancakes to sue the International House of Prayer, Friends of the Bridegroom, Inc. (also d/b/a IHOP, IHOP Missions Base, IHOP-KC, International House of Prayer University, and IHOPU), and Shiloh Ministries, as well as the International House of Prayer East Bay, and Mike Bickle himself for “commit[ting] acts of dilution, trademark infringement, or unfair competition, and [the lawsuit further posited that they] contributed to or induced acts of dilution, trademark infringement, or unfair competition by others in this judicial district (or elsewhere in Missouri and in the United States)” (p. 2, No. 8).
That’s right: Stinson helped sue IHOPKC a decade ago, as you can read about here. A significant catalyst for these suits was that these HOPs all serve food, as the real IHOP does, thus diluting the IHOP name. (Anyone affiliated with the house of prayer can tell you that the pancake jokes are beyond done, burned up, and wouldn’t taste good with maple syrup fresh out of a good Canadian maple tree, so I suppose that means the name is, indeed, diluted).
All those details aside, you can imagine my shock when I happened upon a familiar signature line as I was searching for other information on IHOPKC lawsuits. I did a double-take, likely resembling a bad cartoon character’s head spin. Did that say “for the plaintiff?” Indeed, it did.
While I doubt trademark infringement attorneys were the ones poised to fight for IHOPKC’s leaders in a sex abuse case, two of the three pancake fighters remain at Stinson:
Mark D. Hinderks and Mark M. Iba remain. Elizabeth Anne Tassi appears to still be in Kansas City, but is Assistant General Counsel for Hallmark.
Whether initially hiring Stinson was a deliberate attempt for IHOPKC to go for what they saw as the best and most aggressive firm, or purely coincidental, it was striking to find, since I happened to be working at IHOPKC when we had all our names and emails change over from IHOP to IHOPKC because of this trademark dilution case. (If you are interested in the background of this, here are the pertinent case documents.) The case was finally dismissed with prejudice on June 13, 2012.
Many readers know the Stinson hire/dismiss details, but seeing the Stinson name crop up, I just had to include this tidbit.
Now fact-finding from that fun notwithstanding, let’s return our focus to the first Sunday in November, which I will dub the first Sunday after the (terrible) advent of Mike’s accusation as Michael Brown attempted to assuage a congregation that was not his, beginning with an unmerited finger-pointing scolding—while three fingers pointed back at him.
That “grow up!” line was by far the lowest blow. Brown posits that it “does no good to show how prophetic you are [that we’re] figuring it out. Grow up. This is not the time to be thinking about my name or my reputation. There’s a process in place and leaders have said if the process is insufficient…” (Brown, approx. 23:30+) emphasis added. The gall of many charismatic leaders to assume a role of father or mother over a swath of people is a problematic element of church functions that is finally undergoing scrutiny. Brown’s edict that morning was met with frustrating chatter because people who felt distrust of a man—nay men—who had heretofore appeared trustworthy and loving men of God suddenly and obviously were not.
Some might argue, “No, no! That’s not what he was doing at all.” But see, in a moment like that, it was exactly what it sounded and felt like. This was partly hastened by Brown’s piece in The Stream on 1 November where he justified his place to speak as Mike Bickle’s friend, but as an elder and “father” to the rest of us:
As for everyone else affected, let me speak as a father and elder, knowing how much mercy the Lord has had on me and knowing that none of us can boast in our own righteousness. All of us stand by grace, and none of us are [sic] too big to fall. (Brown, The Stream, 2023)
While ordinarily that claim wouldn’t sound as negative, to many of us feeling frustrated and confused, Brown’s “I’m a father” and “here’s what to do” takes were digging stings in the midst of pain and unanswered questions.
First, a legal firm—who is likely on the high end of the expense round—average billing rates in 2023 for Kansas City attorneys are $475 an hour—was announced as a third-party “investigator,” and then Brown stood up and praised IHOP’s ELT leaders as trustworthy enough that the entire base should close its collective mouth, “grow up,” and just save those screenshots for another day. (I saved them, all right.)
Shortly after that service, Brown faced outspoken social media criticism (because really, did he or Isaac think that idea was going to fly?). Brown tried to clarify on X, where he frequently opines, often several times a day, and often with unfettered emotion on myriad topics: Republicans, Democrats, modern universities, censorship, Jews and Muslims (little on Palestinian Christians, sadly), LGBTQ issues, and more. His audience was not especially forgiving, and on 16 November, he included this disclaimer, essentially saying he could not participate much more in the IHOPKC issue.
However, a month later, apparently he was doing just that:
The next “third party”:
This post was not intended to focus quite so much on Brown—or Stinson, quite honestly. And Stinson didn’t make it long anyway. By 10 November, IHOPKC had announced Stinson was out, and a new local firm was in. That went over like a flat soda on a summer day. The insult added to the injury was secrecy. IHOP refused to tell who the new attorney was. One IHOP sleuth figured it out.
This was later verified by IHOPKC, and now for some reason Manito and Rosalee McNamara, an attorney from Lathrop LLP, are both representing IHOPKC now. McNamara is serving as the “unbiased third party investigator,” according to IHOPKC, and the organization says she has no ties to them, but understandably, the victims don’t trust her because her firm brags about its success—in obtaining dismissals for accused abusers:
The Whippersnapper PR Guy
All of the “third-party-not-so-objective investigator” information was upstaged, however, when IHOPKC brought in “The Whippersnapper.” That’s my nickname for the latest player in this wild drama, Eric Volz, who runs the David House Agency. Volz, formerly wrongfully imprisoned in Latin America (for which I have genuine compassion), seemingly well-educated since he graduated from a UC school, is otherwise, not terribly noteworthy. One day he appeared on stage and announced he might look like a newbie, but really guys, he has been around before, he liked IHOPKC, yep, sure thing, buddy boy! He was one of us!
Allrightythen, Whippersnapper.
TW soon became known for sounding like a dead fish, if a dead fish could talk, and wearing the same shirt in each video. Presumably TW was being paid heftily, so no one was making fun of his socioeconomic status. We assumed he had pre-recorded all his videos, meaning the announcements themselves had been pre-planned, which, of course, made everything coming out of the back offices feel as if they lacked sincerity.
The most disturbing part of his hiring, though, might be contained in this 2016 story in Focus on the Family’s Daily Citizen magazine. The story itself, entitled “Slaying the Giants,” is inspiring, sharing Volz’s resolve to help others falsely imprisoned overseas.
But the story shares something that vibes too much with a concern shared by many who stand with the numerous Jane Does seeking their own justice:
Despite being named for the Old Testament shepherd boy who slew Goliath, “the David House Agency is not a religious organization at all,” Volz says. “We just happen to be followers of Jesus who are really good at what we do. We don’t accept cases based on someone’s faith. The only requirement we have is that the person is innocent.” (Volz, Daily Citizen).
Assuming that Volz did not make an exception to his agency’s policy in IHOPKC’s case, can we then assume that Volz took this case not to seek justice and truth no matter what it is, but only to get Mike Bickle exonerated and see the name of IHOPKC resurrected to whatever glory it thinks it should have? And further, is IHOPKC, who is infamous for its food bank—not for others, but for its own missionaries who are too poor to afford food sometimes and struggling to raise any sort of support, lucky if they receive a paltry stipend despite working 50 hours a week—paying Volz’s fees, in addition to the fees for McNamara and Manito?
While Volz surely doesn’t have any attorney fees or extra legal fees for which he will need to bill IHOPKC, as with other clients, apparently he is able to command some speaking fees with a top agency, though no direct amount posts for him. Maybe no one currently needed his services overseas. Maybe he wanted to have a cold winter in the Midwest. Maybe whatever IHOPKC is paying him is more than he was making at home. No one knows. But we do know that plenty of folks are doing some investigative work into IHOPKC’s finances, and I have a pile o’files on that myself. One of them is particularly fascinating in a troubling cultish sort of viewfinder.
Background for days…
Hang with me if you will. It’s important to me as a writer, as a storyteller, that I tell all the story there is to tell from a certain vantage point. This season surrounding this time, is important. So much of it is connected with the idea of the impulsivity of the entire situation. It shows reaction. Whether it is Brown’s reaction, attorneys reactions, TW’s reactions, the ELT’s reactions (the few left, as I understand a lesser-known member has also resigned recently), or our reactions as former or current IHOPers, it’s the element of emotions that drives us.
So to return to 5 November, the first Sunday after the accusations had been released the week prior, to expect people who use Facebook, X, Instagram, and other modes like this not to react is not realistic. The best that we can hope for is measured reaction.
As this dismal morning of 5 November wound down, the earlier announcements prior to Brown’s not so rooty-tooty-fresh-n-fruity-breakfast message, Stuart Greaves, who is no longer officially with the ELT either, if you recall, launched into a media message of his own.
In a thinly-veiled allusion to the many social media posts preceding the morning drama, Greaves informed everyone that “some of the women who were named in the allegations have publicly refuted that they were ever victims of abuse and even denounced the representatives of the alleged victim group” and besides that, darnit (!) one allegation that maybe might, could, possibly, sort of be real, goes all the way back 26 years, thus, predating IHOPKC (apparently minimizing risk, you see). Never mind that means the entire concept and foundation of the house of prayer is built on sexual assault and abuse if it predates it, my friend!) You can read the statement at this link, but I am also including the picture because I don’t know if it will stay at this link.
Meanwhile, as this vaudeville show continued with its attempt at casting doubt, the fact I was sitting 500 miles away with personal knowledge of victims greater in number than the sum Greaves was discounting/excusing made me wonder: was the man purposefully lying or genuinely ignorant?
Of course, I was not allowed to post on social media.
Just kidding!
Until our next episode…
Wonderful read ! TYSM !