Upsetting The ‘Church Ladies’(Blog Series)—Part 3: Todd The Politician Did Me Great Harm

Addressing the secretive, underhanded tactics of a quintessential ‘church lady.’

Introduction

In January of last year (2025), I began a new ministry as the teaching pastor for Immanuel Baptist Church—a Reformed Baptist (previously SBC) Church in Rossville, Georgia. I joined a team of two acting lay elders—both of whom had stepped in, unofficially, after the previous pastor resigned. As is often the case in churches with a leadership vacuum—Immanuel had attracted a couple of unscrupulous men, each with their own competing agendas—of which I found myself caught in the middle.

Over the course of the year, one of these men worked tirelessly to discredit me and oppose my ministry—while the other seemed to think he could buy my loyalty to his cause. In the end, they both defrauded me of my reputation, my livelihood, and my housing—and defrauded Immanuel Baptist Church of their pastor.

There are times when it’s appropriate to name names, and to issue public warnings. In 2 Timothy 4:14, the Apostle tells us that, “Alexander the metalworker did me great harm; the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. Beware of him yourself, for he strongly opposed our message.”

Matthew Henry calls Alexander the metalworker a ‘false brother,’ and warns that, “There is as much danger from false brethren, as from open enemies…” John Gill tells us that Alexander caused, “great injury to the apostle’s character, and had reproached and reviled him as a man of bad principles and practices…” According to another commentator, Paul calls out his adversary, by name, for two reasons—“to prevent the contagion of his bad example from spreading in the church, and to bring him to repentance and reformation, that so he might be preserved from final destruction.”

Like Paul—this past year, I encountered a false brother—a self-serving elder named Todd, who, so far as I can tell, is attempting to use the church as a platform for political aspirations. (This, of course, is my personal observation and opinion—but time will tell.) When I say that Todd is a ‘false brother,’ I do not speak in regards to his salvation, but rather to the fact that he has acted deceitfully towards me, and towards Immanuel, in every way. I hope and pray that Todd *is* a believer—but that only adds to the shame of his behavior.

In the next post, I’ll address the second elder and his wife, and show how they led the charge—out of personal malice, and under false pretense—to have me fired. In all of this, I am mindful of Paul’s charge to not “entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.” In the course of this post and next, I’ll take pains to demonstrate that there *are* two to three witnesses, including first-hand evidence, testimony, and matters of record—to substantiate my claims.

In this post, I turn my attention to addressing the secretive, underhanded tactics of Todd, the politician—a quintessential ‘church lady’ who made it his mission to sabotage my ministry. As Helen Andrews noted in her article, ‘The Great Feminization’—“…men wage conflict openly while women covertly undermine or ostracize their enemies.”

The Lady Doth Protest, Too Much

Despite a unanimous vote to call me as Immanuel’s new teaching pastor—within the first month—Todd and his wife began to passive-aggressively protest my ministry. Much like the ‘church-ladies’ in the first church that fired me (here), this elder could not even bring himself to look at me while I stood behind the pulpit. Week after week, he stared down at his feet, or out the window, as I preached the Word of God.

He and his wife adopted the habit of leaving abruptly after Sunday and Wednesday services—without so much as a ‘good-bye’ to anyone. During Wednesday services, they began sitting in the back of the sanctuary, segregated from the group. In our first two elders’ meetings, this elder immediately took an adversarial posture towards me, making unprovoked hostile comments that, in hindsight, were reactionary to things he was reading about me on the internet.

On a personal note, Todd and his wife went out of their way to avoid Amanda and I, leaving us to feel about as welcome at Immanuel as two stray dogs. Amanda was sick every day and facing her sixth surgery in seven years—yet, despite serving as an elder, Todd and his wife couldn’t be bothered to show a modicum of concern for her. To put matters bluntly—they withheld love from us—which is deeply sinful and also a classic ‘church-lady’ move. This went on for nearly six months!

The other elder and I both clearly witnessed these patterns of protest. At the other elder’s suggestion, I scheduled a lunch with Todd, where I asked him, point blank— “Have I done something to offend you?” It was painful to watch Todd’s facial fidgets, as the question clearly triggered a stress-response—but he assured me, in no uncertain terms, that, no, I had *not* done anything to offend him.

The dishonesty of Todd’s answer was readily apparent, even as he divulged, with his next breath, that he had been “researching” me. The last time a church leader informed me he was ‘researching’ me, I was fired soon after—so naturally, I probed further, with two direct and unambiguous follow-up questions—“Is your behavior towards me related to your research? Do you have any concerns about me?” Once again, Todd flatly denied having any concerns, and, as for his behavior, he assured me he was not protesting me.

Unfortunately, for Todd, he tipped his hand yet again when he explained his reason for sitting in the back of the sanctuary, passively disengaged—as he put it: “to make sure the church isn’t being taken in a wrong direction.” To which, he added, “No one should be given a blank check to do whatever they want.”

Despite Todd’s flimsy protests to the contrary, I left that lunch meeting more certain than ever that my fellow-elder was, in fact, protesting my ministry. Todd had shown himself to be a consummate politician—skilled at talking out of both sides of his mouth. I began to wonder what else he was doing, behind the scenes, and I knew it was just a matter of time before the other shoe dropped.

Roughly three weeks later, on the eve of an elder’s meeting—with Todd continuing in his same patterns of protest—I sent a text to both elders: “Hi Mike and Todd, Tomorrow in our Elder’s mtg, I need to address two issues pertaining to Todd. One is a leadership matter concerning a pattern of behavior unbecoming of an elder. Second is a Matthew 18 personal matter regarding a persistent sinful attitude and behavior towards me. I wanted to give you a heads up so you wouldn’t be caught off guard.”

Todd promptly responded by text: “Thanks for the heads up. I have already spoken to you personally but agree it is necessary to move forward with my concerns regarding a history of behaviors unbecoming of an elder. I will not have time to prepare a full address but pray that God will give me clarity in how to proceed!”

In true political fashion—despite nearly six months of underhanded and duplicitious behavior—Todd had the audacity to reach for the moral high ground. Yet, we can see—with our own eyes—that Todd—by his own words—has caught himself in a boldface lie. When confronted directly, Todd had flatly denied having any concerns about me—not once, but twice. Yet days later, Todd clearly states that he did, in fact, have serious concerns about me—concerns he would soon argue disqualified me from serving as a pastor. These concerns were clearly driving his passive-aggressive ‘church-lady-like’ protests.

The Other Shoe Drops & It’s The Boot

The next day, as we convened our elders’ meeting, Todd unloaded a mountain of accusations against me. For a guy who didn’t “have time to prepare a full address,” it was apparent he’d read every single one of my blog posts going back four years—and had gathered up every speck of internet “dirt” he could find hoping to frame me as a fraudulent trouble-maker.

In other words, Todd had been preparing for this moment for months—for as long as he’d been protesting. He’d been lying in wait—and lying while he waited—for this very moment. It was déjà vu—the second church in a year where a disingenuous church-leader had dug up “dirt,” so as to bury me—only to dig himself into a hole. Long story short—the other elder didn’t find Todd’s attempted character assassination to be credible, and neither did the majority of our members.

Over the course of several meetings, the other elder and I confronted Todd over his sinful behavior and repeatedly urged him to repent. When he refused, we brought Todd before the church in a formal disciplinary hearing. Todd was afforded 20 minutes to defend himself against very clear and specific charges, but, instead, he used the bulk of his allotted time to put me on trial, once again airing out a laundry-list of slanderous accusations. He was entirely out of order, but he didn’t care—his intentions were to bury my reputation beneath a pile of manure and cast a dark cloud of suspicion over me on his way out the door. He was subsequently voted out of office, and placed under church discipline—by majority vote. The other shoe had dropped—and, unfortunately, for Todd, he got the boot.

The Back-Alley Affair of ‘Respectable’ Christianity

The next day, Todd’s wife spitefully deleted all my recorded sermons and deactivated the church Facebook page, preventing us from streaming our services moving forward. These two spent the next four months maligning me in local Reformed Baptist circles. I know this because one of Todd’s preacher friends made some very antagonistic comments on our new Facebook page, while another preacher cancelled coffee with me (never heard from him again), and yet another of his pastor friends denied my request for pulpit supply after receiving a phone call from Todd.

Additionally, this pastor was led (by Todd) to believe that Todd and I had simply had “a falling out.” He was not aware that Todd had been formally voted out of leadership and had subsequently fled church discipline. Of course, even after I made him aware, he still hid behind a flimsy excuse and refused to help me. Who needs confessionalism when you can have tribalism?

As for Todd’s relationship to Immanuel during this time—he appears to have played the part of Tobiah or Sanballat—lurking in the shadows and whispering in the ears of one or two ‘church-ladies,’ who had unmistakably taken his place in protesting me, even as they patiently waited to catch me in a “sin” and “give me a bad name to discredit me.” (Nehemiah 6:13).

In the end, they did catch me in a “sin”—I transgressed the church-ladies’ temperance movement by enjoying beer and cigars with a few Christian brothers in the privacy of my own home. It was a bit like Al Capone getting caught for tax evasion—not what they were after me for, but it got the job done. As the saying goes, “Unhappy Church-Ladies, Unemployed Pastor.” Days after I was fired, Todd the politician was reinstated as an elder—sans any repentance—and subsequently presided over our eviction from the parsonage.

So goes the sordid, back-alley affair that has come to be known as ‘Respectable Christianity.’ As Joe Rigney so astutely observed, “…[It] happens by passive-aggressive pressure, tone-policing, and piles of angst and “concern” expressed in private, all in service of maintaining that ‘carefully cultivated personality and image’ of Respectability.”

The Hypocrisy Of It All

I’ll never know all the things Todd has accused me of behind my back, but I want to address five of the main accusations leveled against me in the elders’ meeting and in Todd’s disciplinary hearing—and then demonstrate the hypocrisy of it all.

One: Wild West Gun-Slinger

Towards the end of my first month as pastor of Immanuel Baptist, I was involved in a dog shooting incident in my neighborhood. Long story, short, I encountered a massive pitbull lunging at a terrified woman as she walked down the street behind our house. In my estimation, the woman was at imminent risk of attack, so, after yelling at the dog and being charged at myself, I fired a single pistol shot at the dog. I missed, but the dog ran away, and the threat was neutralized.

Given the neighborhood context, I immediately called the Sheriff’s office, and they dispatched a deputy who came out and talked to me, to the woman involved, and to multiple neighbors. All the neighbors testified that this dog had been roaming and terrorizing the neighborhood for some time. After a thorough investigation, his (off the record) comment to me was: “I would have shot the dog, too. I’m surprised that dog hadn’t been shot already.” He and I then rode together, located the dog, followed it to its apparent home, and called Animal Control to handle the matter from there.

Todd got wind of the incident, and called me. I gave him a full report, and he told me he had no issues with how I handled the matter. On two other occasions, including once with the other elder present, we discussed the matter, and all three times Todd stated that he had no issue with how I handled the matter.

However, in his disciplinary hearing Todd made my shooting incident a major point of deflection. Despite all evidence to the contrary, he maliciously painted me as a wild-west gun-slinger who was out shooting up the neighborhood. He called me “reckless” and “hotheaded,” and told everyone I “ruined the reputation of the church in the neighborhood.”

The fact is, the woman involved became a regular attender at our church after that, and she testified to everyone in the church (including Todd), and to many people in the neighborhood, that Immanuel’s preacher protected her from a bad dog. If anything, my decisive action, for the good of a neighbor, improved our reputation. In fact, someone from the neighborhood later called me to come put a sick raccoon out of its misery. (With my poor aim, I guess they wanted me to scare it to death.)

The hypocrisy of it all—is that, in 2022, Todd ran for Georgia State Senator on a platform of protecting the Second Amendment right to bear arms—yet, he tried to get me fired for doing exactly that; using my firearm to protect a woman from a vicious dog. Furthermore, in a day when churches are increasingly targeted for violence, Todd literally argued that pastors shouldn’t carry a gun. The only thing Todd appears to be concerned about protecting is his carefully manicured political persona.

Two: Guilt By Association

Todd also smeared me for my association with right-wing Christianity—specifically for my appreciation of prominent (often demonized) pastor, Doug Wilson. Multiple times, in the aforementioned elder’s meeting, he brought up Doug Wilson’s name, and linked him/me to Christian Nationalism, as he enumerated his laundry-list of reasons for why I wasn’t qualified to be a pastor.

The hypocrisy of it all—is that, Todd’s mentor in ministry; the man he says he looks up to more than anyone, is himself a reader and appreciator of Pastor Doug Wilson. In fact, at a pastors’ lunch, Todd was sitting right next to me as his mentor and I casually discussed our mutual appreciation for Doug Wilson. Todd later used that information to try and get me fired.

Three: Match-Making Trouble-Maker

During that same elders’ meeting, Todd also brought up the Christian Matchmaking service I co-founded—Helpmeet Singles (formerly called “Dominion Dating.”) Todd insinuated that it was something nefarious and sought to portray me as a trouble-maker on account of my matchmaking efforts causing a stir back in 2021 when it was covered by the New York Post and Relevant Magazine.

The hypocrisy of it all—is that Todd claims to adhere to traditional, Biblical headship in marriage—yet, in order to smear me, he sought to demonized a Christian matchmaking ministry built around the same traditional views he claims to hold. Furthermore, Todd was pushing for Immanuel Baptist to join the G3 network—yet, he tried to get me fired, in part, for starting a matchmaking network that is used by multiple churches in the G3 network (whose names I’d never disclose).

Our generation is facing an existential threat as marriage and birth rates plummet to historic lows that are well below replacement levels. Some men are on the frontlines trying to do something about the marriage crisis. Others, for fear of bad press, are resigned to shooting us in the back.

Helpmeet Singles is a matchmaking network for godly single men looking for a helpmeet & for godly single women looking to be a helpmeet. It’s free for a limited time! Apply today: helpmeetsingles.com

Four: “Christ-Centered” Jesus Juke

Once again, in his disciplinary hearing—Todd sought to deflect attention onto me by accusing me of “fixating” on feminism and biblical sexuality. In a phone conversation, Todd told me he didn’t want to be associated with a “Masculine” Church, but rather with a “Christ-Centered” church.

As I explained to him, over the phone, I was in no way “centering” my ministry at Immanuel on “feminism” or “biblical sexuality.” All the evidence shows that I kept those important cultural issues on the periphery, and not in the center. Over the course of my ten month’s as pastor, I didn’t preach a single Sunday morning sermon focused on feminism or biblical sexuality, nor did I “fixate” on it at any other time. Rather, I preached four expositional series, verse by verse, through Philippians, James, Ruth, and Psalm 51. My entire ministry, at Immanuel Baptist, was driven by the text of Scripture, and by the needs of the flock with whom I was entrusted.

The hypocrisy of it all—is that Todd testified, during his disciplinary hearing, that he found no issue with my pastoral ministry or preaching at Immanuel Baptist. Rather, his concerns were related to my addressing those issues outside of Immanuel Baptist Church. To understand Todd’s duplicity here, consider that he and his wife routinely share content—on Immanuel’s Facebook page—from good men like Pastors Tom Aschol and John MacAarthur; men who hold and espouse the same views as me on feminism and biblical sexuality, and who have addressed these same issues with great frequency (arguably, more so than me).

For example—a quick search for “manhood” on the Founder’s Ministry (Tom Aschol’s) website turns up more than 100 articles or videos on the subject. A quick search for “feminism” shows 21 articles or videos on the subject. Founder’s President, Pastor Tom Aschol, has said, “[Our age], as John Stott put it, an “anti-authority” age that has been permeated in every sphere by demonically inspired feminism. While rightly rejecting this ideology some have rediscovered biblical patriarchy—the teaching that God has purposefully made men and women to be different and has assigned to men the primary responsibility and authority to exercise leadership in the home, church, and world.”

Or consider the late John MacAarthur’s ministry—a quick search for “feminism” on his website—Grace To You—shows some 30 sermons, articles, or teaching series on the subject. In 2019, John MacAruthur was smeared by Relevant Magazine—the same publication that smeared me in 2021. Relevant quotes Macarthur as saying, “If women are in charge, we’re in trouble…When women take over a culture, men become weak; …When men become weak, they can be conquered, when all the men have been slaughtered, you [women] can sit there with all your jewelry and junk. You’ve been conquered, because you overpowered your protector.”

Far too often, in our day, claiming to be “Christ-Centered” is nothing but a cowardly and sanctimonious ‘Jesus Juke.’ There are many churches, pastors, and elders today—like Todd—who hide behind the pretense of being “Christ-Centered” in order to avoid the cost of confronting the cultural idols and ideologies of the day which exalt themselves against the centrality of Christ. To be truly ‘Christ-Centered’ you must preach ‘All of Christ, For All of Life.”

Five: Accused of Concealing My Past

Finally, Todd accused me of concealing things about my past—including a name change and past ministry positions. I recognize that this last accusation is not like the previous four accusations—and I also want to acknowledge that there is some truth to the matter, though it has been greatly distorted. Let me first dispel what is false, and then I will address the kernel of truth in Todd’s claim.

Todd and his Reformed Baptist preacher friends have circulated, far and wide, a false and misleading rumor that I lied about my name and my resume. First of all, I did not change or conceal my name in any legal (or illegal) sense. My full name—exactly as it appears on my driver’s license and on my birth certificate—is clearly printed (six times) on the contract I signed with Immanuel, as well as on the background check I underwent.

To give you an idea of the level of dishonesty we’re dealing with—Cody, above, claims he knows me. I’m not aware of ever meeting Cody—not even in passing. I do know he made some juvenile comments on the church Facebook page, and has freely spewed his ignorance, concerning me, all over social media. If I was guessing, I’d say the highly esteemed Pastor York is getting his gossip from a guy like Cody. Consider the source.

Update: Cody appears to have deleted/deactivated his X account & scrubbed his Facebook.

Additionally, during his hearing, Todd claimed I was fired by three different churches, and that I omitted those churches from my resume. Since I’ve already addressed my past terminations in the previous post, I’ll simply restate, here, that I was actually fired from two churches (not three) and the first church that fired me later reversed their decision and offered me my job back. Additionally, the leaders of the second church said they found no fault for firing me (other than upsetting the church ladies) and told me I could count on them for future job references.

As to the kernel of truth in Todd’s claim—it is true that, after going by my middle name for nearly 44 years, I made a deliberate decision, before coming to Immanuel, to adopt my first name moving forward—a fact I did not disclose to Immanuel. It’s also true that I left off of my resume the last two ministry positions in which I served—the first being a church where I resigned (was not fired), and the second being a church where I was fired.

The hypocrisy of it all—is that my fellow elder postured himself as a faithful shepherd who was “exposing” me as a ‘wolf’ in order to protect the flock—yet, all the evidence points to Todd sitting on this information for nearly six months, and only coming forward with it when it was politically expedient—namely, in order to deflect attention during his own disciplinary hearing.

In Defense of Concealing My Identity

I don’t expect everyone to agree with my ethics or reasons for concealing my identity—but I would, at least, like to explain my rationale. As I told the members of Immanuel, at the time all of this was brought to light—I was not trying to hide something sinful that *I* had done. Rather, I was trying to hide something sinful done to me. I was defamed in the national press—maliciously and falsely accused of being a sexist, a racist, and an alt-right extremist. Unless you’ve gone through something like that, it’s hard to fully appreciate how it forever alters your ability to earn a livelihood. There’s a reason Nick Sandman was awarded hundreds of millions of dollars after being libeled in the press.

In my case, it decimated my ministry at the church I was pastoring, which led to my resignation, and it led to my being fired at the next church. In the four months after I was fired, I interviewed with four different churches—in each case, they passed on me after reading internet slander. In two of those churches, I was scheduled to ‘preach in view of a call’ which is the final step in hiring for pastors. Both churches rescinded their invitation at the last minute. Likewise, Todd the politician testified publicly that, had Immanuel known of my past controversy, they never would have called me.

As it turns out, there aren’t many evangelical churches today willing to be associated with bad press—and, in a day where everyone is a ‘reporter,’ there are fewer and fewer faithful pastors who have managed to avoid bad press. The first thing that pops up when you google “Pastor Brandon Durham” is “blackface.”

At age 43, after devoting nearly 25 years to vocational ministry, I found myself unemployed, broke, homeless—and unemployable in the one vocation where I had the requisite credentials, training, and experience to earn a living. On top of that, we were facing Amanda’s chronic illness, cancer, and crippling medical debt. Simply put, we were desperate—and desperate times call for desperate measures. I realize most of my readers don’t know me from Adam, but I have always strived to live with honesty and integrity. I found myself in a situation that stretched my ethics to the brink.

For quotes from four of the top life-insurance companies, contact J.B. Durham - licensed, independent broker. - jb.durham80@gmail.com

As I shared in my last post, the defamation was so bad that, after I resigned, the 150-year-old church changed their name, too. Are they required to disclose that to every future guest who walks through their doors? I refuse to be saddled with a Scarlet Letter for someone else’s sin.

My rationale for what I did is fairly straightforward—I looked to the pages of church history, where I found historical precedent for concealing one’s identity. Luther concealed his identity for a season, using an alias to evade a corrupt Roman Catholic church. The London Baptist Confession was first published anonymously to conceal and protect the drafters from persecution by a corrupt Church of England. Even C.S. Lewis published under pseudonym in order to maintain a degree of separation between his personal and professional life. These men weren’t hiding anything sinful they had done—rather, they were responding to and safeguarding against the sinfulness and corruption of those looking to persecute them.

In our day, the modern evangelical church has been inundated by wokeness and cancel-culture—and, as Helen Andrews noted, in her aforementioned article—“Cancel culture is simply what women do whenever there are enough of them in a given organization or field…Everything you think of as “wokeness” is simply an epiphenomenon of demographic feminization.”

Simply put, toxic ‘church-lady’ culture is the ecclesial manifestation of cancel-culture. So long as the ‘Canonical Karens’ are running roughshod over the church, anyone who offends their sovereign feelings will be forced out, or forced into hiding—and nothing offends them more than the Word of God confronting their sin. That’s the point of this series—I am testifying, with my life and words, that today’s effeminized church is actively persecuting faithful pastors and parishioners (mostly men)—in order to appease fretful ‘church-ladies.’