Just another day at the office! Nasa style
“Backdropped by New Zealand and Cook Strait in the Pacific Ocean, astronaut Robert L. Curbeam Jr. (left) and European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Christer Fuglesang, both STS-116 mission specialists, participate in the mission’s first of three planned sessions of extravehicular activity (EVA) as construction continues on the ISS.”
The disappearance of a sense of responsibility is the most far-reaching consequence of submission to authority. –Stanley Milgram
The failure of elders to do their job
Given the implosions of Harvest Bible Church/James MacDonald and Willow Creek, much discussion has occurred on why the elders of those churches allowed this nonsense to continue through the years. They were obviously ineffective, shirking their God-given responsibility to be overseers of the church.
Years ago, in my former Reformed SBC church, the senior pastor said to me:
My elders have only disagreed with me twice in 28 years.
Herein lies the problem. There should not be any pastor who has not gotten regular pushback from the elders. Why is that not happening? Here are some things I’ve observed in my decades of membership in churches.
- Pastors choose *yes* men.
- Many elders are *honored* to be chosen by the celebrity pastor.
- Elders who are enthralled with the pastor are likely to give a pass to problems that all people, including pastors, have.
- Current elders often choose future elders. So the process repeats itself. They choose men like themselves.
- 9 Marks would say the congregation gave their approval for these elders. When was the last time you heard of a congregation refusing to vote for the slate?
- Why are elders usually men of position in the community: businessmen, trustees of foundations, lawyers, doctors, etc.? Why don’t we see more blue collar workers become elders? Are they not as *spiritual* as well-known professionals?
- Why do the elders hide the salaries and benefits of the celebrity pastor?
- Why do these elders rubber stamp all activities of pastors, including paying them full salaries when they are involved in money-making on sabbaticals and at conferences?
I’m sure TWW readers could add more ideas to this list. Unfortunately, the elder system does not work in today’s celebrity *our pastor is famous* churches. The system has failed miserably and that is because the elders refuse to do the job that they were supposedly *called* to do. I am not the only one who feels this way
The problems with elder rule.
Recently, Paul K posted The Problems with Elder-Rule Church Government on Medium. He said there are two principles that govern healthy authority structures,
“The first is that any position of authority must be given to a person by an independent higher authority. The second is that in order to retain a position of authority, one must be held accountable by an independent higher authority through an ongoing process of evaluration.
Stop and think about this.
- Are elders in churches appointed by an independent higher authority? Not that I’ve seen and I’ve been in some good churches.
- Are these elders held accountable by an independent authority structure? Can’t say I’ve seen it.
- Have you ever seen any evaluation of the elders in your church? Never, ever …
Christ was the independent higher authority who appointed the disciples, in spite of their problems.
At the beginning of the Church, Christ appointed his Eleven disciples to be his authoritative witnesses and church leaders
…(Peter) was corrected by Paul for once again excluding Gentiles in a way inconsistent with the gospel. Was God’s position of authority threatened by correcting Peter?
…Paul later appointed Titus and Timothy to serve him and instructed both to appoint elders in the towns in which they ministered. Both Titus and Timothy, appointed by Paul and accountable to him.and accountable to him, appointed elders accountable to them. Had Titus and Timothy needed to correct and remove elders would their positions of authority be in jeopardy? No — their positions were dependent on Paul’s evaluation of them, not on the evaluation of the elders they had appointed.
Are your elders appointed by God?
The author goes onto to explain why the process does not work in today’s churches. Let’s say a church was formed and voted to appoint some initial elders and they go onto appoint future elders. Who or what is the higher authority that appointed them? Many would say that they were appointed by God. But, are your elders appointed like the early elders (think Paul or Peter?) Of course not. They answered directly to God or Christ, depending on the circumstances.
Elders have a system in which they are dependent on one another for their positions.
This means that there is no higher authority than themselves when it comes to appointing or dismissing an elder from their position.
Elder-Rule church governments, elders appoint additional elders not to positions of lower authority than themselves but to positions of equal authority. Then, these elders give themselves the authority (often working as a group) to remove their fellow elders from their positions. This creates a dynamic in which elders are dependent of each other, not independent of each other, for their positions.
…This dynamic of elder interdependence creates an environment in which any attempts at accountability among the elders are dysfunctional
…If the need arises to remove a sinning elder, the other elders must work together to force the sinning elder out. And what if the “sinning” elder is not actually sinning at all? To whom can he appeal?
How can an elder be evaluated?
The system does not allow for an independent evaluation of the work of an elder. Think about elders in your church at the moment. Pick one that you don’t know which should be easy for those of you in a celebrity, pastor-driven megachurch. How do you know if he’s doing what he’s supposed to do? Who would you ask about it? How would your question be received by any of the elders?
To add to this problem, in some Elder-Rule churches, elders’ ministerial responsibilities are so poorly defined (or undefined) that there is no standard by which to evaluate their work..
What if your elder can’t actually do his job (whatever that might be in your church?
elders may find themselves in positions or with responsibilities that do not suit them or their strengths and nobody to recognize this and act to train these elders
In many churches, elders are in a position of unaccountable authority.
Herein lies the problem.
I will leave the reader to imagine what effect being in a position of unaccountable authority may have on someone. For members, they have to live under the absolute authority of their elders.
What happens if you know that an elder or the overall church has a problem? Should you report it? To whom?
should a member notice an area of ministry in the church that may need some attention and bring this concern to the elders, the elders are under no obligation to the member to address this issue.
I think most people at TWW know what will happen if one brings a concern to the elders. My own church experience is a reflection of many churches. We went to the elders and outlined the problem which involved our belief that the church had been told of problems with a man who would go to prison for 13 years for molesting young teens. They denied it. We repeated our concern and we became the problem. One of the elders even had the audacity to spread a rumor that my husband and I were having marital problems. He apologized much later to my husband but the damage had been done. Our little group was painted as liars, out to hurt the church.
I had a pastor in the Anglican church ask me why we didn’t appeal this higher. He obviously had no idea that there is no one higher in the SBC churches than the pastors and elders. I have come to learn, in my 12-year journey, that even those in denominations with higher levels of authority often do not fare well on their appeals. At least, they can try which is something we couldn’t do with the SBC. The elders were the highest court.
How do we do what the author thinks we should do? Is there an independent, third-party group that churches can trust and use?
- How do we involve a higher, independent authority in the appointment of elders?
- How do we get an independent authority to evaluate how the current elders are fulfilling their job description?
- Is there a mechanism by which church elders can be evaluated by a third-party independent investigative group? Is there such a group?
- How do we find men and women to serve as elders who will not *yes* people, enthralled by their rainmaker celebrity pastor?
Why do I feel that there is no solution to this problem? I believe few churches would be open to having their process for choosing elders evaluated? I don’t know if there is even a group that can do this type of evaluation. Maybe someone has a good idea.
(Special thanks to Jeffrey Chalmers for pushing me to think about this.)
is it possible?! I’m #1
In the Presbyterian form of government, the congregation votes for the elders and deacons. Just FYI. It’s not infallible, but it does help.
“Why do I feel that there is no solution to this problem?”
IMO, the Christian Industrial Complex doesn’t have much elder material to work with. It’s hard to follow the Biblical model for elder selection when you just don’t have many folks qualified for the office.
When the early church started to bust at the seams, the Apostles told the churches to “choose from among you seven men with good reputations, men of godly character and moral integrity, full of the Spirit and of wisdom.”
Congregations were to choose deacons/elders; they were not to be appointed by church leaders. While most churches could probably find some folks in their midst with good reputations, candidates with godly character, moral integrity, Spirit-filled, and wisdom would be a tougher search.
After 70+ years in SBC ranks, I can tell you that most deacons I knew were not spiritual men – they were chosen by the church because they were popular, prominent in the community, from powerful families in congregation, and/or wealthy donors to the church. They didn’t lead by the Spirit; they moved in the flesh. Thus, given the dearth of elder material, “there is no solution to this problem.”
R,
So did my church. Many churches have the congregation vote for the elders. As I wrote in the post, the problem is that the congregations rarely vote down the elders chosen essentially by the elders. Presbyterians experience this problem like the rest of the churches.
> How do we find men and women to serve as elders who will not *yes* people, enthralled by their rainmaker celebrity pastor?
A few thoughts from observation of a congregation that started with congregational governance, was captured by the vision of the lead preacher (who was genuinely skilled, and a kind of “rainmaker”, though not a celebrity) and switched to elder-led governance (justified on biblical grounds but IMO really for the purpose of concentrating power in order to fulfill the “vision”):
I think a big part of the problem in at least some churches is the excessive dependence on the preaching ministry of a single person, and perhaps excessive emphasis on preaching as the purpose of the main church meetings. This elevates the importance of the solitary preacher and even in polities in which all elders are notionally equal in authority that can give the preacher much more power than his notional 1/Nth share of the vote among the elders.
“Pursue (i.e., fund) my vision or I will go elsewhere where the people will help me pursue it” is a real power that a “lead preacher” has over the other elders and indeed over the laity. Even if they are notionally collectively responsible for the leadership of the congregation, under that kind of threat, elders will be strongly tempted, even against better judgment, to embrace the vision of the “lead preacher” in order to hold on to him. I think that it is not common to find a skilled preacher who is willing to submit to the group judgment of a group of men who are, with respect to the function of preaching, less talented than he is.
In the end, while claiming to follow Jesus’ way, they end up becoming like “the great men of the age.”
Interesting how Dee said I pushed her to write this post…… i am wondering what I said!
however I completely agree with what she wrote….
a little further irony is that I am in the middle of text discussion on Universities politics and differences between science/engineering a medical schools..with medical colleague
I love this quote… “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely ”
This is a HUGE problem in the organized church. The whole idea of having ‘a’ man at the top of the heap is contrary to the multiple offices called for in the early church (Ephesians 4), which are designed to equip the saints to do the work of the ministry. Whose job is the ministry? Every believer has a part! Tossing aside priesthood of ‘the’ believer for a single priest is antithetical to doing church as described in Scripture.
Over the centuries, we have really missed the mark in this regard. When we focus on preaching in a church building as the main thing, we miss the Main Thing. The Great Commission should be the primary purpose of doing church and every believer needs to be personally engaged in it. Evangelism is waning in the American church … we have limited our faith to simply going to church to hear a man preach and then coming back next Sunday to do it again (most forget what the sermon point was before they get to the car). An overemphasis on preaching can be a form of heresy if we neglect evangelism, IMO.
Max,
I COMPLETELY agree….
In Lutheranism, the worship system is liturgy-centric and not pastor-centric.
They have elders and elder boards yes, but they are not answerable to a strong-man in the pulpit.
In my experience they act more as figure heads, assisting the pastor in his duties rather than acting as a cabal to carry out the wishes of an authoritarian pulpit.
I like it this way because it discourages the rise of a tribal ‘chieftain’ whose main goal is to impose his will over the congregation with a gang of yes men.
I go to church, follow along with the liturgy from the Lutheran hymnal, glean what I can from the pastor’s short homily, take communion, and then shoot the breeze with great people over coffee and donuts.
End of story, no drama, no horse poo-poo, no silly political intrigue.
Am I saying that these negatives do not exist in Lutheranism?
No I am not, but it’s a system in which they’re minimized.
“Why are elders usually men of position in the community: businessmen, trustees of foundations, lawyers, doctors, etc.? Why don’t we see more blue collar workers become elders? Are they not as *spiritual* as well-known professionals?“
Thank you so much for asking these questions. I have seen this over and over again while on staff with churches. Elders are often chosen for their power and influence in the community and/or their wallets rather than their character. They may have distinguished themselves professionally but don’t have a pastoral bone in their body. They run the church like a business and the business is always prioritized over the sheep.
Jeffrey Chalmers,
I do not “love the quote”. However, I do acknowledge it’s truth. Man is sinful, and with no restraint, he will abuse his power. It will consume him and he will eventually act in his own sinful interest.
“Why are elders usually men of position in the community: businessmen, trustees of foundations, lawyers, doctors, etc.? Why don’t we see more blue collar workers become elders? Are they not as *spiritual* as well-known professionals?” (Dee)
I have a real-life story in this regard. Decades ago, we were members of a “First” Baptist church in a community which had a large industry. The whole city revolved around that business. It was clear shortly after joining that the deacon board were all executives/managers at the company. Very few “lesser” employees held church positions of any sort. We put up with the nonsense because the pastor was the real-deal who loved and ministered to the congregation; he did not appear to be controlled by the powers-that-be, but left the church eventually to accept a pastorate in another state (SBC pastors move around like that).
I was asked to join the pastor search committee. The chairman of the committee was Vice President at the mentioned business. He trusted me, not because of my “spirituality”, but because I was also an executive at another company. After a committee meeting one evening, we were standing on the porch of the colonial-style church atop the highest hill in town. That vantage point overlooked the industry complex. He asked me why I thought more “blue collar” workers wouldn’t attend “First” Baptist, preferring the smaller churches in town. I advised him that I thought it had a lot to do with the church structure appearing no different than the company structure, with all the big-wigs running things! He acknowledged that and appeared sincere when he asked what could be done to reach the blue collar workers. I told him that he could start by going to work the next day, rolling up his sleeves, walking into the plant and loving them as Jesus would. He began to cry, walking down the long flight of steps to his car. He knew he couldn’t do that – the company and “First” Baptist needed to retain the white collar/blue collar separation … it was their culture, it was required of him.
My family and I left shortly after that. But while we were there, we had determined that the few members of “lower” class were the most spiritual of the large congregation, the ones who were really ministering to the needs of the community, you knew them by their love. They should have been in leadership.
Max,
Great story
Jeffrey Chalmers,
Sad story
Push her again! It is a great post! It addresses the root of the leadership problem in many churches. Churches which practice illegitimate pastor/elder systems, with yes-men and power-structures, are doing church without God.
Money talks. And rules. In our present model.
Church transitioned from itinerant leaders in community venues (like Jesus & His disciples) to brick n’ mortar with full time paid (some overpaid, some underpaid) staff (similar to the regime that took Jesus down).
Obviously we’re not going back. However, moving forward, it’s notable that church brick n’ mortar is not a guaranteed safe place. It’s become a hunting ground for predators. Full time paid staff do not necessarily work for God & the Greater Good (godly values), no matter how much money they are given via donations.
IMHO, as stated before, I think the answer is in the 18 gifts the HS endows to assemble the Body of Christ. Giving or Mr/Ms Moneybags is only one of the 18. Same with pastoring. Discernment is given to root out evil (leaders, for example). Service (doing things like blue collar people) is equally as valuable as $$$. Etc. It’s an amazing community, a miracle, these 18 gifts, only available through direct & true connection with God Himself.
Max,
True… It actually sound like a modern day Parable that Christ would say…
Good point. It would do the organized church well to revisit the New Testament model for doing church and begin to disassemble the pieces of the modern version that don’t resemble it. Why would Jesus want to attend what we have determined is better?
This item from a few years ago seems highly relevant (and my apologies to those who have seen it before)
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/07/power-causes-brain-damage/528711/
—
The thought also occurs that there is a kind of potentially destructive self-reinforcing dynamic in Evangelical thinking about “call.” My observations about this are decades old, but I suspect the dynamic is even stronger today. Ministry candidates were told that they must be highly confident of God’s call. The reasoning was that “it’s a hard life and you will grow discouraged if not absolutely confident that you are ‘in the center of God’s will’.” But there’s a flip side to that: utter conviction that God has authorized you to do what you’re doing or to seek what you’re seeking anesthetizes you to any subsequent evidences that may come into view that you are actually on an unfruitful path. And it anesthetizes followers who concede that you are under God’s “orders” to do what you’re doing. Once the decision is made that “X is the will of God”, further debate — even debate clearly rooted in biblical wisdom considerations — is ruled out as “unbelief” or worse.
I think that the current conceptions of the meaning of “call”, along with the meaning of “authority”, are a big part of what is going wrong in the authoritarian churches. And I suspect that the thinking on these has been moving in the wrong direction (away from humility and healthy self-doubt) for a long time.
I hope this fits in to this post somehow…My wife found an old Baptist church manual (Broadman Press!) in our church library from the early 1950s. Nowhere, and I mean NOWHERE did it even mention elders as church officers! It only listed the pastor, deacons and yes, even deaconesses! If these young reformers really want to get back to ‘historical Baptist doctrine’ like they say they do, then they had better eliminate the office of elders from the mix!
In my exploration of these various terms which are viewed as ‘offices’ in the church, they actually seem to be more like characteristics and descriptors of what people DID and how people SERVED, rather than being merely titles bestowed upon them.
My short stay in the SBC leads me to believe your story. What a lousy few years except I made some good friends. All left.
Interestingly, the word “preacher” is mentioned in the NT only 4 times – each time in reference to a disciple “preaching” the Gospel (the real one). Offices given to the church in Ephesians 4 and elsewhere don’t include “preacher.” Yet, we build the whole church structure around the preacher – something that is not done in the NT model for doing church. Sure, you’ll find “pastor” in Scripture but his/her function is different than pulpit exhortation – they are gifted to minister to the Body of Christ, not to lead or control it or to “preach” to it.
Yep, we need to start over … a “reset” is necessary. I truly believe that God desires to give to each local church all the gifts it needs to worship and follow Christ properly … “if” the saints are equipped, engaged and mobilized to fulfill their individual roles. However, we may have drifted too far from what the Church should look like, that conforming the counterfeit to the genuine appears to be impossible … but God.
You have expressed the need for some sort of accountability program. Ivr been thinking about this fort quite awhile and looking for other folks who might be writing about it.
Muff Potter,
In my Lutheran church, there is a leadership council which meets with the pastors. They are the heads of the ministries in the church which means women have some input.My understanding is this is how many of the newer Anglican churches do it as well. It is apparent to me that women have more input into the church than in the SBC.
Thank you for your comment.It is something that I have thought about for a long time.
dee,
During my 70+ years in SBC life, I functioned despite of the structure it served up. My family ministered “behind the scenes” in Jesus’ name. We held trusted positions of teaching to others, but often had to toss the LifeWay literature aside and preach Truth instead from the Bible passage at hand. We rescued others from teachings and traditions of mere men and get them to focus on Jesus. We were able to survive ‘until’ New Calvinism showed up … the flurry of changing belief and practice and a generation of young reformed whippersnappers moving with stealth and deception were just too much for our old bodies, so we moved on.
This is a beautiful illustration of what I’m talking about.
Hide it! Lock it up! Lay low! You have now made the New Calvinist hit list. They already know your approximate whereabouts … somewhere along Route 66 🙂
Ava
The number of predators in the church is far worse than I imagined when starting this blog 12 years ago. (I think it is this week.)
Awesome comment!
Been there, done that. No wonder I like you. Our experience seems similar.
“Power attracts the already-corrupt and the easily-corrupted.”
— Frank Herbert, author of Dune
Liturgical churches do not focus excessively on preaching or on the man doing the preaching. Which is a good thing, since the preaching often stinks.
Instead, they focus on the Eucharist. And on the liturgy itself.
I think that’s also why the pastor’s name is rarely shown on the sign outside the church building. It’s not about the pastor.
“The Cavalry charged,
The Indians died;
We were a young country
WITH GOD ON OUR SIDE…”
— Bob Dylan
I agree!
Liturgical churches have a LONG Institutional Experience and Institutional Memory.
But Liturgy is too ROMISH. “NO POPERY!”
(You remember PastorRaulReesCalvaryChapelWestCovina? How his level of anti-Catholicism was literally impossible to exaggerate?)
This sounds like a fascinating story. I’d love to hear more. Have you written about it?
For the same reason there was no solution to the dysfunctional dystopias in Eighties Cyberpunk SF. The only ones with the power to change the system were those who personally benefited from The Way Things Were.
“I Got Mine,
I Got Mine,
I DON’T WANT A THING TO CHANGE
NOW THAT I GOT MINE!”
— Glenn Frey, “I Got Mine”
“Elder” is a fitting translation for “presbuteros” in the Bible. But there’s some critical issues that are completely ignored by many churches, so if anyone says only having “male elders” is “biblical”, and all those elders are the average age of the congregation or younger, well, I would say they are wrong.
The first is that the word can be used as a noun, “elder”, but it also means “elderly”. This is a word that has a strong connotation of age. There also only seems to be limits on character, not number of elders. Modern churches often treat elders as pastors and pay them (sometimes very well), so they put limits on the number. I think this creates a culture where the elder now answers to the one holding the purse strings, instead of all of the mature and elderly Christians in the church guiding the church in wisdom.
The second problem is that the word is also used with a feminine ending. There are female elders in the Bible. English translations often translate it “older women”, but the word is the same in Greek. 1 Timothy 1 is written in a parallel style about male elders and female elders, which is a common rhetorical device that highlights the importance of having both.
I have never heard a New Calvinist take about the original language texts. They can’t use it, because the original language texts throw some huge wrenches in their claims of being “more biblical” than everyone else. This is also why they were in such a hurry to make their own translation in the ESV 2016.
I think a solution will be hard to find. I think the church in America today is accustomed to a church experience that is mostly consumeristic, ie sit in a pew and experience an hour to an hour and a half “performance” by a fairly competent and entertaining speaker and band. I think we gravitate toward personalities we consider “anointed” or special in some way and like to pick our favorite leaders and teachers. I think this is a culture that’s change (if possible) will be like turning an aircraft carrier.
I think healthy authority structures are key, and I think this will have to involve a motivated and informed local congregation that has formal power. At the same time, I think every church denomination or convention needs its seminaries and full time scholars – a magisterium, if you will.
But I don’t think you’ll get there until individuals really grasp their own responsibility to think and exercise their own discernment independent of their favorite leaders and teachers. I think what the apostle Paul has to say about this in 1 Cor 1-4 is really important.
I think the church needs healthy authority structures but it’s members need to reject the separation of clergy and laity. We need clergy, but we need to think of them (and they need to think of themselves) as what they are: regular human beings no closer to God than anyone else. We need to ordain and evaluate our clergy.
I actually think there are nascent organizations where this happens to a great extent – denominations or church organizations that practice healthy authority. Any good system can be corrupted, but at least there are some that are attempting health. However, Elder-Rule churches are so inherently dysfunctional in their organization there just isn’t a good reason to be a member of one, IMO.
Every day on TWW … in bits and pieces. I’m reluctant to put the whole thing out there in one place, because it would identify and pinpoint me and SBC’s New Calvinists would dearly love to know my whereabouts so they could do me in 🙂
Time to cancel culture? If we don’t start turning the ship, God will eventually and it won’t be pleasant. He desires a holy remnant and we ain’t that!
Agreed! New Calvinism hangs on a distinct separation of pulpit and pew. This is exactly why SBC’s New Calvinist elite have diminished long-standing Baptist doctrines of “soul competency” and “priesthood of ‘the’ believer.” They don’t want the pew to know who they really are in Christ! It’s a threat to pulpit authority. It would mess up their game plan.
Rees is exactly the kind of tribal chieftain I suggested.
Absolutist, in control, and every ready to put you (generic you) to the sword (so to speak), if you don’t knuckle under.
God, give us a new measure of discernment. The enemy of ‘your’ Church has come in like a flood.
I’m Dutch Reformed in The Netherlands. I am an elder. The way it works in our congregation, which is part of the mainstream PKN church: the congregation is asked to supply the elders with names of suitable candidates for open positions in the church council. The church council gathers these names and goes through the list, top to bottom. In principle, the names most mentioned will be chosen for a two-way ticket: two men that the congregation can choose from. It should be these two top names, barring pastoral/other issues that the congregation maybe isn’t aware of. Then there is an election where the full members vote (anonymously) and elect one of the two candidates. The candidate then has some time to consider whether he considers himself called by God and able to do the job, and if he does, he is confirmed as an elder. If he doesn’t, a new election is necessary (in which the rejected candidate of round 1 is not eligible to be on the ballot again). Finally, we have term limits, with each term lasting 4 years. The intent is that you serve for 8 years; due to staff shortages the PKN nowadays allows people to serve 3 terms but it is not the intention.
If a church council is too obvious in neglecting names nominated for election by the congregation (or, honestly, if there are other issues that the church council isn’t responding well to) church members can file complaints with the national PKN church. I have seen the national church step in and act to correct malpractices or abuses twice, in my lifetime. And it worked, too; the church council is not in between the PKN and the church members, they (we) can’t block those things from happening. When such an audit happens, church members have full, anonymous and unobstructed direct access to the PKN auditors. And the PKN can issue binding advices to correct problems.
Finally, our pastors are appointed by the church council. The pastor is never formally the boss, so to speak. And usually they stay in a single congregation for a minimum of four years and often they move on to a new congregation after 6-8 years.
In any church there are problems every now and then, but our traditional system works, as far as I can say.
What is “pulpit authority”? I think I could probably guess, but please explain.
I noticed that pastors sometimes think they have authority in their congregants’ lives that extend WAY beyond the healthy functioning of the local church in which they minister. I understand and agree with church leaders having authority within the local church in order to maintain order, protect people, etc… but my previous church covenant had provisions in it which said the pastors could restrict people from leaving in the “3rd and 4th” stages of church discipline. There was also language in there about anyone who leaves joining a “likeminded” church. I think pastoral authority ends at the church doors, so to speak.
Yes. I think one can map this onto thinking about “call” and “authority”. Current thinking is that “call” and “authority” are possessed by individuals as a bestowment from God; all sorts of abuses can flow from this. It might be better to think of “call” as being on the group — on the congregation — to minister to itself and to others, and the group makes determinations about who among its members has appropriate skills and gifts to perform the various tasks that are needed in order for the group to fulfill its call. The group then appoints individuals to perform these functions. The individuals are then accountable to the group, which is the source of the “authority” that the group agrees to delegate in order for the appointed individuals to perform their appointed functions.
Perhaps this is a way that Dee’s question about “what is the higher authority” in independent churches could be answered. Robust and wise congregational rule could be the answer in such situations.
The idea that the group might stand between “God’s call” (because it is the group that recognizes that “call”) and “the called individual” strikes me as valid and as warranted in Scripture (the appointment of the first deacons has already been mentioned as an illustration of this principle). Unique spectacular individual experiences such as Paul’s on the Damascus road should not be thought of as the norm. The norm is for the group to recognize the fitness of specific individuals for specific functions and to authorize them to perform those functions. The authorization can be withdrawn if there is later found to be warrant for that.
I attend an ELCA outfit (liberal wing of Lutheranism).
They ordain women to the pastorate, and appoint them (women) to key leadership roles.
It’s really too bad that the word ‘liberal’ in a church context is so off-putting to many folks, because it doesn’t mean any of the double negatives that so many think it does.
Catholic Gate-Crasher,
Good way of recapping what I said farther up-thread.
The authority of Christ is waning in the American church. He has little influence. His authority has been replaced by “pulpit authority” … an ungodly alliance of pastors/elders who wield complete authority over congregations to manipulate, intimidate and dominate them. These rulers control members through church covenants and discipline (think 9Marks). It’s a mean-spirited way to treat Christians. It’s an illegitimate authority in the counterfeit church in America. The only covenant a believer needs is the one written in red by Christ, but authoritarian church leaders don’t want you to know that.
Absent direct revelation from God to appoint leaders (which I don’t think God is doing today) this is the way it should function.
The only correction I would say is that the “higher authority” really is Christ through his apostles’ teaching (the Bible). Then we need a magisterium to responsibly interpret the Bible to the best of their ability and available knowledge – not that the magisterium’s teaching is capital-T Truth, but it can be used as a foundation upon which to construct a church organization.
What is absent in many independent churches and ministries is an understanding of how God delegates his authority to the church. Independent leaders simply appoint themselves instead of being appointed by a higher authority which itself is trying to submit to Christ’s authority in scripture.
I think what we’re witnessing in the Methodist split is actually kind of healthy. You’ve got a bunch of people with actual “ownership” in the organization split on LGBTQ issues. They have a context in which they can argue it out and go their separate ways. With an independent, elder-rule church this context simply does not exist.
Max,
Great explanation.
Samuel Conner,
I agree… and have basically seen the same thing…
dee,
Ahh… yes…
Max,
Not just in Church Structure…. Think par church groups also… i.e. RZiM and Answers in Genesis….
ken Ham has NO business pontificating on Science like he does… some of things tgey say on their web site make my jaw hut the floor…. but then, I am just a secular humanist scientist, so anything I say is suspect..
ishy,
Yes, this! ‘Presbuteros’ has more of the meaning of someone who is chronologically older, rather than some kind of ‘authority’ in the church. Younger men and women were to follow the example of those who were more mature in the faith and had some years on them. This was also the gist of the Hebrews 13:17 clobber verse that they love to use. ‘Obey’ is a bad translation…’imitate their example’ is more on the right track, just like it says in Hebrews 13:7.
Perhaps this is a side note, but according to Matthew 28, didn’t Jesus say that all authority had been given to Him?!? So why are all these earthly glory hogs seeking all this ‘authority’ that isn’t even theirs in the first place? To me, positions in the Church are to be more ‘servant-driven’ than they are ‘power-driven’. It’s Jesus’s authority–not ours!
No, I only get my kicks there–unless Route 66 runs through Ohio! I’m already on their hit list anyway for ‘chasing off’ one of their fresh-out-of-the-box Southern Seminary recruits from our church a few years ago!
Congratulations!
It they knew Him, really knew Him, they wouldn’t challenge or ignore His authority. All authority is His in heaven and in earth, but this fact is not accepted as true in much of the church … so we submit ourselves to the authority of mere men and forfeit His presence. You have to look long and hard across the American landscape for a church with people (in both pulpit and pew) who behave as if Jesus is Lord of All rather than a symbol of their faith.
In many churches you only can vote for the slate picked by the elders (there are no alternatives). I was in a church where the son of an elder was picked. He came to one of our Bible studies and was so excited to tell us: “Do you know why there are rainbows?” He had never read the story of the flood before!
Oh, then, he probably fit right in with the other unspiritual elders. Sounds like his dad failed one of the basic requirements of an elder: “able to teach others.” Really, how many elders do you know who know the Bible enough to instruct others? (not to mention all the other qualifications necessary for that sacred office)
It appears that church authority is linked with worldly success as in the power of the tithe colluding with the pastor.
The glitter of gold, shiny and new. As an extreme example, Hybels comes to mind, selling success via showcasing celebs & their secret sauce. The formula worked for Hybels himself, as he achieved wealth via Willow Creek. For the married Hybels, it wasn’t enough as he chased women.
SeredW,
Thank you for sharing your church experience in The Netherlands. Your account was fascinating. It sounds like there is the possibility for diversity in your choice of elders. I was heartened to hear that your appeal to the national PKN for conflicts and they actually respond, unlike some similar groups in other countries.
How do the church members evaluate the work/actions of the elder?
me,
Typical.
Muff Potter,
My church is more conservative but does a good job of including women in various positions. I was told before I joined that the LCMS was very conservative. I sat there for 2+ years before I joined, worrying over what I was told. Thankfully, it was far better than an SBC church.
We changed our non profit board of trustees to where we police our own board. I wasn’t a fan. No problems now, but I can see potential problems in the future. I advocated more for having elders whose sole job is to appoint deacons to be the policymaking board. That way the elders (old) have authority but are not involved in policy/HR/operations, etc. They only see the fruit, and I think would have an easier time trimming branches.
Our congregation has a group of lay men and women volunteer leaders who serve three-year terms. A third of them leave office ever year, when new candidates are elected by secret ballot mailed to every member. They cannot serve two terms in a row.
These folks work exceedingly hard. Our buildings are old, and any repairs need to meet updated safety code as well as historical review board standards. In the Before Times, we had nine worship services a week; the plan to resume indoor worship is consuming many hours of thought, planning, and prayer. And get this: they have asked us what we want!
I have first hand knowledge in my organized denomination where elders have held to account by higher authority – including removal and replacement of the entire board. The key is that there needs to be a functioning organization with a mission that far transcends the pastor’s ego. And there are written protocols – ‘called by God’ doesn’t mean a thing. Serial killers say the same thing.
Embedded in your remarks is the assumption that the elders will be men? Let’s synchronize watches – I have 21st century.
This has way more truth to it than most TGC articles I have seen…
Muff Potter,
Ruth Magnusson Davis in “The story of the Mathew Bible, part 2” demonstrates that it was the Puritans who changed this by introducing long sermon instead of lecture of the Bible as done at the very beginning of the Reformation. “Only 3 years after the Geneva Bible was brought to England, the Puritans brought forward a motion for several changes to church practice…. now they took aim at the very order and government of the Church.” (p 113)
In page 78 GNV dedication : “Ministers the divine authority. (Para.9.1) Yea, he (God) promiseth to be with their mouth, and that their lips shall keep knowledge, and that the truth and the law shall be in their mouth. For it is their office chiefly to understand the Scriptures and teach them.
Clerics claiming divine authority over Scriptures is Roman Catholicism all over again. Tyndale warned that a tactic of the beast is to claim sole authority to teach and interpret the Word of God……”
“Unaccountable Authority Given to Elders in Many Churches” (from post title)
In many churches this should be more aptly referred to as “Illegitimate Authority.” Authoritarian structures with controlling pastors and spiritually immature yes-men elders bear no resemblance to the NT model intended for the Body of Christ. Congregations are required to submit to systems which manipulate, intimidate and dominate their spiritual life. An illegitimate has supplanted the legitimate; the counterfeit has replaced the genuine. The American church is drifting farther and farther from due North.
“9 Marks would say the congregation gave their approval for these elders. When was the last time you heard of a congregation refusing to vote for the slate?“
In my 30+ years spent in a conservative Presbyterian denomination, I never saw an elder candidate voted down. The broad-brush process was similar every round. The pastors (and sometimes “ruling” elders) determine who potential elder candidates are, Then leadership gets someone in the congregation (elders are technically not allowed to nominate new elders) to talk to and get the potential elder candidate’s permission to be nominated. The candidate gets “nominated” by someone in the congregation and then completes his theological training. Finally, the congregation (who’s been trained to trust and submit to leadership) votes him in.
This is a whole other issue, but no one ever talks to the elder candidate’s wife during the entire process. If he’s professionally successful and has enough of a public “such a godly man” vibe, he’s good to go.
Nor do they take into consideration the behavior/reputation of an elder candidate’s children:
“He must manage his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity, keeping them respectful and well-behaved … for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?” (1 Timothy 3)
I’ve known Southern Baptist deacons whose children were notoriously bad apples in the community. I’m sure some of them grew up to be domestic terrorists!
R,
Another thing is that the Presbyterians, Angelicans, Continental Reformed, Lutherans, etc. have Book(s) of Church Order and higher ecclesiastical authorities clearly laid out. There is nothing higher than the local church for the SBC. The only thing the SBC can do is kick that particular church out of the convention
Tyndale warned that a tactic of the beast is to claim sole authority to teach and interpret the Word of God…”
Yes. and Amen.
The elders of my reformed church, including the teaching elder(pastor) taught that the baptism of the Holy Spirit along with the gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased, as per the Westminster Confession Of Faith, of which the reformed faith finds its foundation. The teachings of Calvins institutes came latter.
Fortunately, my easily education was steeped in the scripture alone by goodly men who knew how to weld it, by the Spirit of God. Not unlike David, my knowledge became thus to me, a sum total greater than my teachers.
As a result, powerful religious men could not harm me. He, Filling my heart with His Spirit and holy scripture made that quite impossible. It is to this day. The Word of God made flesh is my captain, the Spirit of God, my invincible guide. The Lord God, and his angels, have helped me all of my days. It was this effort of the Living God, that covered me with the blood of his son, Jesus, and to understand, that if I confess with my mouth, the Lord Jesus, and believe in my heart that God raised him from the dead, I could be saved, that Almighty God so loved me that he gave me his son, Jesus, that believing in him, I should receive eternal life, knowing that faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the conviction of things yet unseen.
ATB
Inter Mission,
Third Day – Your Love Oh Lord
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEF7IoQ3eUk
Sòpy
.
Headless Unicorn Guy,
H.U.G.,
Calvary Chapel has their own liturgy as you well know:
Praise Band intro/ entertainment, announcements, brief sermon (points taken from the Chuck Smith tapes on that same section of Scripture), altar call, and then Praise Band entertainment ending. The Holy Spirit shows up after making an appointment for one those “AfterGlow” services that are listed in the bulletin discussed during the announcements. That way the CC can claim to be Pentecostal but NOT one of those kooky Pentecostal churches that is know by everybody.
Their clerical vestments consist of a Hawaiian shirt and either khaki or chino pants.
Sounds about right?
Paul K,
“Elder-Rule” vocabulary seems to leave the wrong impression. 1 Peter 5:3 describes elders as “not lording it over those entrusted to you” (NIV). Shepherds care and lead and serve; they do not rule.
Jesus only is Lord of All. Elder-rule polity has no place in the Kingdom of God. The Church of Jesus Christ is a free church, but believers don’t have the freedom to abuse their Christian liberties. Yes, each church needs structure in its leadership following the NT pattern, but not rulers. God gives various offices to His Church, but never appoints nor anoints overlords. The elder-rule model of the New Calvinists and other groups is simply off-track of the divine plan for the Body of Christ.
It’s not just Catholicism Eli, big name fundagelicals do it all the time when they haul out their Bibles and preach their latest shticks and screeds.
Have you ever heard Greg Laurie thunder from his pulpit?
My apologies if I am repeating a point previously made; I haven’t carefully checked the recent state of the thread.
Arguably, in independent congregations — which have no formal recourse to supracongregational dispute resolution entities (such as “church courts” at Presbytery and General Assembly level in denominations with presbyterian style polities) — the officers should be regarded to be accountable to the entire congregation, since they hold their offices, in principle, by the consent of the congregation.
The thought occurs that one of the purposes of the emphasis on “membership contracts” in independent congregations is to subvert this “common sense” corporate governance approach to officer accountability to the group. The contract can redefine the direction of accountability so that rather than the officers being accountable to the congregation, it is the congregation that is accountable to the officers.
It’s another reason to flee groups that insist on officer-protective contracts as a condition for membership. No-one in their right mind would knowingly invest in a for-profit corporation that had these kinds of moral hazards instantiated in explicit contracts required of investors. The same caveats apply to not-for-profits.
Q. How many churches will shutter their doors, and be sent packing due to COVID-19?
(Sadface)
Gates Ohell…
hmmm…
I wonder, wonder, wonder…
Sòpy
A gift. 4 U …Top 100 Hits Collection Of Mercy Me 2019 – Best Worship Songs Of Mercy Me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GccKeVry14 ollection,
Can I just say that I really, really, REALLY hate the idea of preaching to/at people? I have some bad experiences around being preached at and don’t want to do it, period. (Example: I was a 14 YO whose mother just attempted suicide, was taken off to the hospital for treatment and the next door neighbor decided THIS was the most appropriate moment to read Bill Bright’s “Four Spiritual Laws” to me. NOPE.) I don’t know where the person I’m talking to is at, and I don’t want to be the person who gives the listener something she’s still chewing over 47 years later for being highly inappropriate.
I think that telling people they MUST do something is unhelpful and problematic. Just My Personal Opinion.
In books about church organization, governments are labeled “congregation-ruled, plural-elder led” or “congregation-ruled, single-elder led”. I think it’s just a labeling convention.
But you’re right, “Elder-Rule” raises a red flag in its description. I don’t know who first coined this label, but it is used by John MacArthur and GTY to describe their preferred governmental organization.
Yes! I thought very similar things when researching this. Contracts/covenants legally remove the elders from any form of independent accountability, remove power and rights from members, and essentially make it official that members are voluntarily subjugating themselves to unaccountable authority figures. It is so messed up.
I can understand signing a membership statement or document in order to clarify church doctrine and GIVE power to a member in a congregational-ruled church, but to do so in order to subjugate oneself is not wise.
This fae the OP (and, in fact, from at least one of Dee’s previous posts, if memory serves):
My elders have only disagreed with me twice in 28 years.Jesus’ church… but my elders. Yes indeed. And as long as that remains the case, then Jesus’ church will do exactly what I want it to.
This creates problems. It’s what can differentiate churches, negatively, from other voluntary civic orgs seeking good and collectively run by citizen participants.
As soon as someone, usually a guy or guys, waves that magic wand and says “god”, everyone is supposed to come under that spell for “spirituality’s” sake, without question.
Better that all participants keep standard informed reasoning (including science) in place, as well as rule of law, Common Good, and their hiking shoes to evacuate, just in case. This is how functioning voluntary civic orgs do well.
For Christians & Christian orgs, reading the Bible independently (without someone else’s magic wand) as a plumb line is important, too.
In the NT, even the apostles did not claim divine authority over other people (did they?). They claimed what they had seen and heard (1 John) as a witness to testify, tell others, share good news. NOT as a ruler’s scepter of control over others.
It’s disturbing that the “divine authority” people have set up the church to be a predator’s haven, according to the data of Robert Downen at the Houston Chronicle. Ironic. Divine? Not so much.
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
My private view is that most believers are called primarily to “support” the task of evangelism by “adorning the Gospel” through the wide variety of “good works” that are within their reach. “Evangelist” is but one of many “Spirit-giftings”, and I suspect that just as not many should aspire to teach — being subject to stricter judgement — it is also the case that not many should aspire to “do the work of an evangelist” (as Paul wrote to Timothy). IMO it’s — as you note — delicate work and very easy to get wrong. At the level of “personal evangelism”, there’s a great deal of overlap with “counseling”, and we rightly expect our counselors to be highly trained and competent. I suspect that “evangelism” in the form of “direct speaking of the Gospel into the lives of others” is not a task that should be pressed on everyone.
For awhile I was a customer at a business operated by a mega. The congregation had recently pulled away from a big denomination, come up with a weird name for themselves, and now they were building something like a little town while doing legal battle with their old denom.
I was less jaded then, and really wanted to know about the transition. A clerk said, “That was just a denomination. This is an anointed ministry.”
You can guess what happened next. The courts threw them out of their building, but then millions of dollars rained down, they constructed a vast Sunday morning entertainment complex, the pastor bought a fleet of aircraft, and his son and namesake took over the pulpit.
But they are anointed, doncha know.
As usual, I’m not Max. 😉
Only briefly did I believe that I had to convert people, lest it be my fault that my loved ones spend an eternity in hell. I flunked proselytizing.
Nowadays I really believe that the example has more power than the (often alienating) words and branding: “We’re shoveling your snow because we’re Christians!”
Just do the work and let them wonder why. Show unlabeled love and let them love you back. This practice works more naturally for me than saying, “And now, a Word from our Sponsor.” It also eliminates any unpleasant associations between what I do and bad experiences people have had with churches.
Agreed. There is a specific calling/gifting for an “evangelist.” Other believers can play a supporting role in the Great Commission of the Church by ministering to others within their sphere of influence with the abilities they have. Demonstrating love in Jesus’ name is how Christians are to be known; it’s the behavior that turns the attention of those seeking God from the attractions of this world. It’s the watering and cultivating which bring harvest, whether you are the harvester or not.
Friend,
Exactly.
A dynasty waved the magic wand/snake oil/anointment ointment, & brought someone(s) under their spell to empty pockets, fill the rosters, volunteer, etc. Dale Carnegie.
King Herod built bigly and gave orders to eliminate villager Jesus.
The underbelly? Governance? Quality of relationships (as opposed to show)? The trade-off? Safety for women & children?
Lies take the elevator; truth takes the stairs.
God is not into kings & kingdoms. Not His idea even for Israel. We have Jesus and His Kingdom as He describes in the NT with God’s HS literally among us, but not as snake oil anointment ointment to amass money & followers & thus donors. Proof of the HS is in a life lived, fruit of quality of relationships, not worldly “success”.
There are those who fellowship in the shade of a tree in the Sahel. Been there. Guitars crafted from gourds & tree branches, original songs, harmony, drums. Praise. Worship.
Eli,
Context is everything as will be seen in the full quote from the Geneva Bible Introduction.
“Now as concerning the manner of this building, it is not according to man, nor after the wisdom of the flesh, but of the Spirit, and according to the word of God, whose (Isa. 55.8.) ways are divers from man�s ways. For if it was not lawful for Moses to build the material Tabernacle after any other sort than God had shewed him by a (Exod. 25.9,40; Act. 7.44; Heb. 8.5.) pattern, neither to prescribe any other (Deut. 5.32.) ceremonies and laws than such as the Lord had expressly commanded: how can it be lawful to proceed in this spiritual building any other ways, than Jesus Christ the Son of God, who is both the foundation, head and chief corner stone thereof, hath commanded by his word? And forasmuch as he hath established and left an order in his Church for the building up of his body, (Ephes. 4.11.) appointing some to be Apostles, some Prophets, others Evangelists, some pastors, and teachers, he signifieth that every one according as he is placed in this body which is the Church, ought to inquire of his ministers concerning the will of the Lord, which is revealed in his word. For they are, saith (Jer. 15.19.) Jeremiah, as the mouth of the Lord: yea he (Exod. 4.12; Mal. 2.7.) promiseth to be with their mouth, and that their lips shall keep knowledge, and that the truth and the law shall be in their mouth. For it is their office chiefly to understand the Scriptures and teach them. For this cause the people of Israel in matters of difficulty used to ask the Lord either by the (Judg. 1.1. & 20.18; 1 Sam. 10.22; 1 Sam. 9.9; 2 Kings 22.13.) Prophets, or by the means of the high (Exod. 28.30.) Priest, who bare Urim & Thummim, which were tokens of light and knowledge, of holiness & perfection which should be in the high Priest. Therefore when Jehoshaphat took this order in the Church {} of Israel, he appointed Amariah to be the chief concerning the word of God, because he was most expert in the Law of the Lord, and could give counsel and govern according unto the same. Else there is no degree or office which may have that authority and privilege to decise [determine] concerning God�s word, except withall he hath the Spirit of God, and sufficient knowledge and judgment to define according thereunto. And as every one is endued of God with greater gifts, so ought he to be herein chiefly heard, or at least that without the express word none be heard: for he that hath not the word, (Jer. 23.16.) speaketh not by the mouth of the Lord. Again, what danger it is to do anything, seem it never so godly or necessary, without consulting with God�s mouth, the examples of the Israelites, (Josh. 9.14.) deceived hereby through the Gibeonites: and of (1 Sam. 13.11.) Saul, whose intention seemed good and necessary: and of (2 Chro. 35.20.) Josiah also, who for great considerations was moved for the defence of true Religion and his people, to fight against Pharaoh Necho King of Egypt, may sufficiently admonish us.”
And always remain a sheep of height.
Lowlandseer,
And thenI remembered. Eli said the same thing in February – “Ruth Magnusson Davis address this in her books on the Matthew Bible. The reformation at his beginning was a lot of Scriptures readings. Cranmer and his book of prayer was just that. Then very quickly came Calvin, the Puritans and they changed that. They put the preaching at the center, so that they can transmit their theology. She also has articles about it. Read their letters of introduccion to queen Elisabeth 1st.(on Ruth blog) They, the puritans, will explain Her and her people what God’will is.”.
Behaviors are influenced by the belief system. If you believe in a hierarchical authority structure then the elders are still under the authority of the head pastor. Combine that with a bad definition of submission, that is dissent equals disobedience, you really make it extremely hard for accountability to occur. This is a fundamental flaw in those types of churches.
Headless Unicorn Guy,
I remember when Neuromancer came out. We are both getting old my friend.
“They Have a (snner) ‘Religion’. We Have a (smiiile) RELATIONSHIP!”
PastorGregLaurieVineyard?
Vineyard is a Calvary Chapel clone Megacurch in SoCal. Dates back to at least the early Eighties. Throughout the Eighties, PastorGregLaurieVineyard was a major AM radio presence, right up there with PastorChuckSmithCalvaryChapelCostaMesa.
Is the structure oversight? Or “anointing by ‘God'”?
Civic orgs have hierarchies w/o the “anointed by ‘God'” piece. The hierarchies can work well, including over time & generations. Hierarchies can task assignments & oversight. It’s a network of people working together with agreed values, transparency, and organization. Personally, I don’t want to be the president of an org I’ve joined. I can do certain tasks. The higher-ups keep things organized & running in the org, NOT in my life.
IMHO, after looking at this post & comments, the danger lies in claiming “anointing”.
We can individually sense God’s calling & anointing over what we do:
1. However, when we make that claim to others, IMHO, it’s a red flag.
2. If worldly success ($$$, position, attractiveness, popularity) are used for proof of “anointing”, that’s red flag x2.
3. If we use the “anointing” to dismiss transparency, common knowledge (science & evidence), rule of law, LE & DOJ, Common Good, voice of others, oversight, individual agency, and then the “anointed” hierarchy is used to RULE OVER OTHERS – like their lives – this is a HUGE red flag.
4. If the “anointed” hierarchy indebts/covenants people so they can’t even walk away from a voluntary civic org, RUN, don’t even walk away. RUN.
IMHO, I try to keep my “anointings” to myself, and stay away from others’ claims of anointings, too. No one has a corner on God, for goodness sake. Claims – talk is cheap.
Lowlandseer,
It’s always good to remember what went on during the English Civil Wars, but perhaps also to recall a good Anglican idea that emerged. The via media, or middle way, espouses moderation. The pathway between Catholicism and Protestantism seeks to avoid extremism as well as disagreements which, although minor, nevertheless inspire violence.
Imagine a church where people listen and get along, perhaps even enjoying different ideas!
dee,
Hi Dee,
There is no formal way to evaluate elders or the church council, apart from using the election mechanisms. If you have served your first four-year term, you are up for reelection. The congregation is notified that brother so-and-so is available for another term and if the congregation does not react, you just continue in your current role for another four years. The congregation does however have the option to enter an opposing candidate which would then result in an election like I described before. This is however exceedingly rare, due to the perceived gravity of the act of entering an opposing candidate.
A more passive-aggressive way for a congregation to voice their displeasure at the candidates nominated for election to the office of elder or deacon, is to vote blank. A large number of blank votes in an election is an overt sign that the congregation is unhappy and the church council will surely be embarrassed.
Of course these procedures aren’t airtight. If elders want to play power politics, they can get away with it for quite some time as long as they have a firm majority in the congregation backing them, and unless enough congregation members appeal to the PKN (there is no set number, it’s just that the signal needs to be loud enough to be noticed and taken serious).
There is a lot of complexity here by the way and individual congregations sometimes hold to different (valid) policies that are all listed in the PKN ordinances. The PKN is a merger church (three national mainstream Protestant churches, two large and one smaller) and as such, the church ordinances reflect the variety in rules and regulations that were present in the churches before they merged.
Ava Aaronson,
Ava. I work as an Organizational Consultant and would agree with your overall premise. Churches can be problematic because leaders and others to be honest believe their point of view coincides with God’s. Secular organizations are a lot easier to work with.
It would appear in close examination that a great percentage of local 501c3 Christian churches today are simply unscriptural and do not follow biblical guidelines. Is your church biblical? Might want to check, huh?
= 9Marks version of church leadership
No, his main ‘campus’ is in Riverside, with two ‘satellites’, one in Corona, and the other in Irvine.
All three pull in tons of dinero and add handsomely to his coffers.
Laurie is still a staple on fundagelical radio in Southern Cali.
He recently aligned himself with the SBC.
Max,
There are a lot of examples in the Bible of people who questioned God including Moses, Job, Gideon, Abraham, and pretty much all of the disciples. The real good leaders I have worked with like to have people around them who are not yes people. The term for submission used in Ephesians is more about military alignment and fighting together and not blind obedience. In fact alignment often requires questioning and dialogue. And as Ava said when you have an “anointed” hierarchy and combine it with blind obedience you end up with a toxic stew.
Q. Does 501c3 church addiction now require a 12 step program?
No church leader … I say NO leader … is beyond rebuke and correction by the congregation they serve. Of course, 9Marks would never include this as one of the marks for a “healthy” church. Indeed, a healthy church requires an honest exchange between clergy and laity as they seek Truth together.
The LIGHTS are on but nobody’s home?
(Blink , Blink)
hmmm…
The ever expanding Calvinist 501c3 SBC church organization authorities now predominately entertain a form of toxic religion they so call Christianity which is taken wholesale from the pages of John Calvins Institutes Of the Christian Religion not from the Bible, even though they say they do. Don’t be fooled. That this is a sheer falsehood and presents a false gospel, a grand lie, never enters into their seemly intellectual thought processes. If they cannot get you to buy into their toxic religious theological system, they will, in essence, call and thereby mark you as UNSAVED. Beware of such groups of nefarious and enterprising individuals. They are known to push their religion by stealth. Remember, SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES the life you save may be your own…
In a bit,
Sòpy
I wonder how much of the trouble that authoritarian elder-ruled churches get into is based on the presumption that elder-rule is simply the only, or “most” biblical manner of church polity. I know the system fits well with the agrarian village-type systems, some of which remain today, and with the ancient systems of patriarchal-led home and family-groups. But today, we don’t grow up looking to our town/village “elders” for day-to-day decisions and leadership. We look to parents, spouses, partners, teachers, police, bosses, etc, and other experts with specialized competencies. We’re a small church and found that we work best in a council system of men and women with equal authority, who serve as fellow counselors and friends, for a couple of years, and then we rotate to new members. Also, I (pastor) don’t have anything to do with the money. . . which is fine with me!
Muslin, fka Dee Holmes,
The most effective, true, evangelism, IMHP, does not involve preaching, or giving out “tracts”, or seeing how many “prayed the sinners prayer”, so you can justify your ministry to get more $$$..
After participating at TWW, and observing how bad things are in “American Church land”, I really beginning to wonder who the “real Christians” are…
Getting back to Max’s original point, if one were truly following Christ, one would be fulfilling the great commission
Another POV:
Our great grandparents told of itinerant circuit preachers that traveled the countryside back in the day. The village would meet at the community center of the town hall, the dance hall of the night before. There was neither power nor big money, just service.
Purchased your book on Jude.
We’ve not experienced spiritual abuse in churches (your 1st book). We vote with our feet when things are off. So intermittent participation at best and never achieving the inner circle. However, our Bible reading and prayer are continuous. Served on the mission field twice – seeing about 50% authentic ministry there.
Muff Potter,
this is why there are so few people attending lutheran churches. Bible teaching is for equipping the saints. Short homilies and coffee miss the point of assembly.
arthur
I attend a conservative Lutheran church that is in the shadows of SEBTS. It is one of the most wonderful churches I have ever attended in my life. I have learned about how the Law and Gospel interact in the believer’s life. We have Bible studies online during Covid. There is a sharp uptick in evangelicals getting out of the post-evangelical morass. I am one and am so glad I did.
Coffee is not a big deal in my church although it is available (in pre-Covid days.) I would be careful in making judgments on us Lutherans. #SBCtooo #gone.
So crowd numbers is the only reliable metric for success?
Everything in Lutheran liturgy is taken directly from Scripture. We (at my Church) have a retired college professor (a woman) who teaches an historical perspective class on how we got the Creeds and their direct derivation from Scripture. If you’re looking for the kind of equipping you receive by getting beat over the head with some obscure verse in 2nd Chronicles, you won’t find it at my Church.
I’ve also seen that in the Church of Christ. There are nominees but any member of the congregation can raise an issue about one being considered.