"It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule".
The Lord of the Rings Gandalf, Chapter 'The Last Debate'.
Recently, we received the following comment: “While I do not disagree with many of your assumptions, I think many of them are just "spiritual whining" by people who are not, and never will be, in a position of leadership”. We believe that this statement is an excellent example of a phenomenon known as cognitive dissonance. Wikipedia offers a thoughtful definition of this term. See below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
“Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. Cognitive dissonance theory is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
Dissonance normally occurs when a person perceives a logical inconsistency among his or her cognitions. This happens when one idea implies the opposite of another. For example, a belief in animal rights could be interpreted as inconsistent with eating meat or wearing fur. Noticing the contradiction would lead to dissonance, which could be experienced as anxiety, guilt, shame, anger, embarrassment, stress, and other negative emotional states. When people's ideas are consistent with each other, they are in a state of harmony, or consonance.
A powerful cause of dissonance is an idea in conflict with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as "I am a good person" or "I made the right decision." The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person who just spent too much money on a new car might decide that the new vehicle is much less likely to break down than his or her old car. This belief may or may not be true, but it would likely reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms”.
That’s a whole lot of words that might seem a bit confusing. However, it will become increasingly clear as we deal with specific examples.
One of my pastors is currently teaching a series on dissonance in our Christian life. He believes that dissonance is built into the Bible and that this tension, when viewed positively, can lead to significant change in how we deal with our Christian walk. For example, the Bible says, “Be perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect.” Yet, we know that we are sinners and have no hope of being perfect in and of ourselves.
Some, without thinking this through, will run themselves into the ground trying to be perfect. If left unchecked, this thought process can lead to despair. Others throw their hands up and walk away from the faith or just live a hedonistic lifestyle because they cannot possibly “measure up” so why try? Others close their eyes to their sin and develop what is known as a “holier than thou” lifestyle.
But, as my pastor cleverly pointed out, there is the fourth option. He proceeded to have an imaginary conversation with Satan that went something like this.
Satan: “Do you realize that you sinned when you did this thing and that thing today? What a loser.”
Pastor: “You don’t know the half of it. I did those things along with all of these other things. In fact, I probably sinned in ways that neither you nor I realize. So, get lost.”
He went on to say that we are covered by the grace of Jesus Christ. He made the point that as many of us walk through our lives, we find that the more we deal with various sins, the more of our own sins we uncover. In other words, we take three steps forward, then six steps back. One of his favorite sayings is, “Even on my best days, my motives are mixed.”
This tension, when viewed through the lens of the New Testament, forces us into the arms of our perfect Savior in whom we find no condemnation. It is in this realization that we find ourselves truly free and at peace with our estate. Martin Luther has been credited by some as saying: “Go and sin boldly.” There is such freedom in that statement. It recognizes our inability to do anything but praise our Savior.
Let’s bring this back to the former pastor of Two Rivers Baptist Church, Jerry Sutton. Now we'll introduce a hot topic, the priesthood of the believers, into the mix and look at the 1988 annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention and the resolution brought to the floor by Sutton. The resolution is as follows:
“We affirm the priesthood of all believers. Laypersons have the same right as ordained ministers to communicate with God, interpret Scripture, and minister in Christ's name. That is why the Convention requires strong lay involvement on its boards”.
http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/pspriesthood.asp
Are any of you scratching your heads as I am? For it seems that authoritarian pastors give this idea only lip service. Why is that? It's important to read the rest of the story.
Here is Part B:
“WHEREAS, The doctrine of the priesthood of the believer can be used to justify the undermining of pastoral authority in the local church. …Be it further RESOLVED, That the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer in no way contradicts the biblical understanding of the role, responsibility, and authority of the pastor which is seen in the command to the local church in Hebrews 13:17, “Obey your leaders, and submit to them; for they keep watch over your souls, as those who will give an account;”
http://www.thebigdaddyweave.com/2008/05/two-rivers-baptist-fails-to-oust-members.html
The SBC had a big problem with the doctrine of the priesthood of the believers. They had to admit that it is clearly stated in the Bible; however, the consequences of that belief are evident to a first year convert to the faith. If, indeed, the Holy Spirit indwells a believer at the time of conversion, what happens if that pesky Spirit happens to convict member(s) of the priesthood about sin in church leadership?
God was in the habit of sending prophets in the Old Testament who really knew how to shake things up for those in "authority"! The Holy Spirit can now have this same effect through” just average nobodies”.
So, dissonance is now present. The priesthood of the believer versus the pastor… I'm sure that Sutton was well aware that the “lowlifes” might get a bit uppity. Since the SBC could not reconcile these two possibilities in a way that would suit their view of authority, they came up with a solution. In doing so, they gave us a prime example of rationalization: “The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices”.
So, Sutton throws in a zinger: “The doctrine of the priesthood of the believer in no way contradicts the biblical understanding of the role, responsibility, and authority of the pastor which is seen in the command to the local church in Hebrews 13:17, “Obey your leaders, and submit to them; for they keep watch over your souls, as those who will give an account”
Now return to the site which states that core belief of the priesthood and you will see a little caveat. “This doctrine is first and foremost a matter of responsibility and servanthood, not privilege and license. It is of course, a perversion of this doctrine to say that all views are equally valid, that you can believe anything and still be a Baptist, or that the pastor has no unique leadership role.”
Here are several things in these statements that I have noticed. Perhaps our readers will see even more.
They quote the Bible directly when it comes to obeying your leaders but fail to do the same regarding the priesthood of the believers.
– They use strong language “perversion” to make their next point.
– Not all views are equally valid – TA DA! This is the zinger… They have created a hierarchy, with no scriptural proof that such a hierarchy exists.
Then, they demote the priesthood of the believer to a lesser position than the “pastor/boss” role. Problem solved!!! Right? Wrong!
The SBC has created a big headache. What happens when the inevitable occurs? A “second class citizen” becomes convicted by the Holy Spirit that his/her pastor is wrong. This is inevitable because, believe it or not, pastors are sinners!!! I believe that this is the core problem within the church today. The dissonance has been solved by using rationalization that will not stand up to close scrutiny. Therefore, many SBC believers will become uncomfortable as they attempt to deal with this. Eventually, conflict will arise.
How should a pastor resolve the dissonance? Well, that part is a bit messy. It means spending time with the priesthood which means giving up something else like nice conventions, speaking cruises, etc. It means the pastor admitting, from time to time, that he is wrong. Yet it is in the mess that the real work of Jesus occurs. When a pastor states we must be unified, this assumes that unity is already present. However, due to the rationalization that the SBC uses to “harmonize” the problem, there really is no unity at the core. Yet the pastor is determined to pretend that peace exists in his church. If he doesn’t, he will be forced to deal with the underlying dissonance and that is extremely threatening to his position.
Yet, growth, change, and love blossoms in the presence of conflict as we treat one another as equal in the sight of God. This means listening to the words of the “second class citizens” who now achieve first class status because there is recognition of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in ALL believers.
Here are several real life examples of dissonance:
A pastor does a sermon series on Galatians and emphasizes grace over legalism. He then institutes church membership requirements. One of the requirements states that members must join a community group and attend regularly or be subject to church discipline.
A pastor affirms that his church is pastor-driven and that the elders exist to carry out his agenda. He states the elders have only disagreed with him twice in 28 years. He later claims that he employs a servant/leader role model for his church. Yet his church is clearly ruled by fiat.
A pastor states that anyone using pornography must leave the pastorate. After making the statement, his son (also a pastor) is found to be viewing pornography on a church computer. The pastor has him apologize to the man who found the pornography and does not make him resign his position. A short time later, another pastor is found to be involved with pornography and is made to resign immediately – apology or no apology.
A pastor lives a wealthy lifestyle and willingly accepts very large gifts such as a $325,000 parcel of land in a tony community. Yet, he serves a God whose Son regularly condemned the pursuit of wealth. In fact, Jesus led what might be considered an impoverished lifestyle. So, said pastor, when confronted about his choice, turns the table and calls the person confronting him a troublemaker, and involves the law for good measure. He then does not deal with his lifestyle because he is busy “protecting” the unity of the church.
Let’s look back to our opening example. Yesterday, we published a list of problems that we have observed in today’s churches. One of those problems is sexual misconduct, which includes pedophilia. This commenter is known for his strong defense of pastors. Obviously, even our commenter would not condone such behavior. In fact, it is our guess that he would believe such behavior should result in some sort of censure. However, he is a” pastoral authority “ kind of guy. So the solution to his dissonance is to say he agrees with our assumptions but that the assumptions are mostly “spiritual whining.”
Whining diminishes the importance of the stated problems and now becomes the focus. “You are a whiner” allows him to turn the problem away from the pastor who admits to molesting his own son. He then can fuss about the whiners who are not at all threatening to his worldview. Also, he claims that our comments were not made by leaders and therefore, invalid. Once gain, we see another claim that is not backed up by Scripture. However, this comment will give our friend the peace he seeks because he rationalizes that he does not need to listen to people who are not “leaders” as defined by his criteria. So, his problem is solved, at least for a while. However, only time will reveal if his rationalization is enough to carry him through other inconsistencies that he will likely encounter along his path.(Tune into our Bellevue series next week).
Those of us who acknowledge that even pastors can be guilty of horrendous acts can easily accept the disharmony between a pastor leader and a pastor who falls hard. In the case of pedophilia, the pastor must resign, undergo psychological counseling, and submit to Biblical discipline and support.
We look forward to your input into this area of cognitive dissonance. In the meantime, we dedicate the following video to our new friend, Jim. We hope it makes you smile. Video note: Deb is the hippo; however, she is far prettier and thinner than he. Dee is the dog. Unfortunately, she is quite a bit like said dog.