After five months on the @ISS, the four members of NASA’s @SpaceX #Crew5 mission—including @NASAAstronauts Nicole Mann, the 1st indigenous woman in space, safely returned to Earth. NASA
“Prudence must be exercised in the proceeding, lest we do more hurt than good.” Richard Baxter
For most of the day found myself troubled by one of today’s posts at The Gospel Coalition: When a Beloved Pastor Falls.
They got this part right.
When a pastor or other church leader fails morally, church members often tend toward two types of responses. We might deny or excuse the pastor’s failures—He’s done so much good in our congregation over the years; that can’t be true! Or we might discredit his ministry altogether—All his sermons and everything I’ve learned from him are no longer valid.
Instead, we must learn to hold these extremes in tension. The good doesn’t mean a pastor is incapable of doing wrong, nor does the bad necessarily erase the fruit of his ministry.
I think Lutherans understand this tension well. Our pastors often discuss the tension Luther illuminated with his famous” Simul Justus et Peccator,” or translated “Simultaneously Saint & Sinner.” I found this explanation at Silverdale Lutheran somewhat helpful.
Thus a Christian person is righteous and a sinner at the same time, holy and profane, an enemy of God and a child of God. None of the sophists will admit this paradox, because they do not understand the true meaning of justification. This was why they forced men to go on doing good works until they would not feel any sin at all. By this means they drove to the point of insanity many people who tried with all their might to become completely righteous in a formal sense but could not accomplish it. And innumerable persons even among the authors of this wicked dogma were driven into despair at the hour of death, which is what would have happened to me if Christ had not looked at me in mercy and liberated me from this error.
We, on the other hand, teach and comfort an afflicted sinner this way: “Brother, it is impossible for you to become so righteous in this life that your body is as clear and spotless as the sun. You still have spots and wrinkles (Eph. 5:27), and yet you are holy.” But you say: “How can I be holy when I have sin and am aware of it?” “That you feel and acknowledge sin—this is good. Thank God, and do not despair. It is one step toward health when a sick man admits and confesses hisdisease.” “But how will I be liberated from sin?” “Run to Christ, the Physician, who heals the contrite of heart and saves sinners. Believe in Him. If you believe, you are righteous, because you attribute to God the glory of being almighty, merciful, truthful, etc. You justify and praise God. In short, you attribute divinity and everything to Him. And the sin that still remains in you is not imputed but is forgiven for the sake of Christ, in whom you believe and who is perfectly righteous in a formal sense. His righteousness is yours; your sin is His.”
There is a coffee mug I keep meaning to purchase, which has the word ‘Saint’ on one side and ‘Sinner’ on the other. Something is comforting in this for me. I tend to be frustrated with the sins I know about and worry about those I do not know. This is my personality. I am learning more about peace by incorporating this freeing message into my head.
I am grateful to be part of a church that reminds us of our failings each week which finds its expression in the confession. We are then reminded of our forgiveness and receive communion. The pastor also confesses his sins along with. The rest of us. He is forgiven like the rest of us.
Church discipline and restoration to ministry.
The article said this.
But that doesn’t mean church leaders receive a free pass for their sins. Abraham was separated from his son Ishmael, and Moses never entered the promised land. The results of sin can often be severe and grievous. Pastors may need to step down from their positions until repentance and reconciliation occur and church discipline has been enacted. Even then, full restoration to ministry may not be possible or wise.
Church leaders should not receive a free pass for their sins. This passage connected to this post by Don Carson Can a Fallen Christian Leader Ever Be Restored?
But that does not necessarily mean that the Christian leader who has been restored to the Lord, and perhaps restored to church membership and participation at the Lord’s Table (if we assume that he or she has been excommunicated) should also be restored to Christian leadership. Not every Christian in good standing in the church is qualified for every office in the church.
The “above reproach” category does not demand sinless perfection. Rather, what is demanded is that the candidate have no moral flaw for which many people “reproach” him. Moreover, the fact that this pastor must have “a good reputation with outsiders” is surely worth thinking about. Sometimes a church is so sentimentally attached to its pastor that even when he falls into grievous sin, many in the church, perhaps even the majority, will be happy to let him remain in pastoral office, provided he shows adequate signs of repentance.
But what about the outsiders? Do they look at his adultery, nod knowingly, and smirk? Is Christ’s name debased, not only because the pastor has committed adultery but also because the church has indicated it does not mind being led by a man who cannot keep his zipper up?
In this passage, Carson uses the word ‘adultery’ and skips over the term ‘pastoral abuse.’ Not only is this act even words than a consensual relationship, but it can also be illegal in some states and hope in all states shortly.
Carson rightly claims that we should be concerned about how outsiders view this person. He then proposes a view toward the restoration of the pastor to his position and stresses how difficult this can be,
But this sort of path to restoration to pastoral office implicitly means two things. First, it is doubtful if this man will ever regain the authority he had before his fall. Too many people will know what has happened, and they will never be able entirely to forget it. Even if they agree that the man has regained substantial credibility, when he deals with certain themes they will inevitably remember his own egregious failure. And second, this model of restoration presupposes that the more prominent the pastor before the fall, the more unlikely is his full restoration to public trust after the fall. His very prominence means that more people will be devastated by this tumble, and more outsiders will make snide comments, ensuring that his restoration will take longer, be more difficult, and perhaps prove impossible.
Given today’s view of power differences in many relationships, restoration should be impossible if it involves a pastor and any congregant or staff member.
Unfortunately, in today’s churches, SBC and otherwise, a pastor can get a quick road back into the pulpit. One can always look at Johnny Hunt as an example. Julie Roys posted Johnny Hunt, Disgraced Former SBC President, Back in Pulpit, Top-Billed for Upcoming Conference.
Hunt refused to carry through with the discipline plan at his former church. He then got a group of pastors together to say he was restored. He joined a Baptist church in Panama City that is defending his restoration and is now preaching again. However, rumor has it that a lawsuit may be forthcoming.
Church discipline appears to be rarely publically carried out for the famous folks and often carried out for the little folks.
Years ago, I wrote about a pastor who was removed from office. He took off with his family and joined another church. He later wrote me, asking me to remove my post about what happened since it “hurt his family and job chances outside of the church.” I told him that he was the one who hurt his family and his job chances, not me. I then asked him how things were going with his family and church. He never responded, and I never removed the post.
We have been writing about those pastor types who have done things that would get us lowly folks “discipline.” Heck, Todd was disciplined for merely leaving a church that loved CJ Mahaney and not immediately joining another church.
Ultimately, the little people get hurt, and the famous guy receives all sorts of passes. Elders suddenly leave the church, and nothing is ever said even though they are supposed to be as important as the pastor, who claims he is just one of the elder board. Excuses are given for pastors who leave, and then they are given good job recommendations and helped to find another equivalent position.
There is one pastor who I heard about, a famous one, who was involved weirdly with a young woman. He suddenly resigned from all his positions and then moved on to another high-level job in the Christian world. Not a word was said. Some pastors have lied about their academic qualifications, but this is glossed over because they are ‘needed.’
I have become quite concerned about how church discipline is applied inequitably in churches that claim the need for the all-important public castigation. For example, suppose a person is a public figure (well-known pastor, elder seminarian, deacon, etc.) in a church or institution that claims the strict application of authoritative ‘hell to pay’ is necessary. In that case, I believe it is in the best interest of the greater church world to reveal who gets to skate.
Please forgive my rambling thoughts. Our post on Bruce Ashford was the result of much thought and concern. This post was me thinking through the last couple of days.
There is no correlation between “church discipline” and the doctrine of grace. Why? Because “discipline” is for the “big sins” (adultery, etc.) and nothing for the “little sins.”
And there is no hierarchy of sins in the NT . . .
“Ultimately, the little people get hurt, and the famous guy receives all sorts of passes.” Sadly, that’s usually the case, with no comfort for the victims.
“Christian” celebrity culture and a refusal to follow the guidelines in Timothy and Titus regarding qualifications for all leaders are in large the bain of our Western Churches. These have greatly polluted and corrupted what we call churches and have caused the salt to lose its saltiness.
Luckyforward,
I’m not so sure about that. Paul called for expelling someone committing grievous unrepentant sin from the church in 1 Cor 5, but he didn’t call for expulsion of all sinners. And this blog has always been careful not to practice “sin leveling” but instead to recognize that some sins ARE worse than others.
R,
P.S. I meant that I wasn’t so sure about the “no hierarchy of sins” comment.
R,
The Bible Project has an interesting (in my opinion) series doing word studies of the Hebrew words commonly translated as “sin,” “transgression,” and “iniquity.” I like the context and nuance they can help give the discussion.
https://bibleproject.com/explore/category/bad-words-series/
“I wrote about a pastor who was removed from office. He took off with his family and joined another church. He later wrote me, asking me to remove my post about what happened since it “hurt his family and job chances outside of the church.” I told him that he was the one who hurt his family and his job chances, not me.”
So he didn’t dispute that it happened, but wanted to have info about it taken down because of job chances? In other words, remove something that people from whom he was seeking appointment could check about him? How about that.
“You Dishonor Me!”
“No; You have Dishonored yourself.”
— Game of Thrones
JDV,
No transparency. Cover up.
Two red flags. Two reasons not to hire for leadership.
Job records. Are churches as employers supposed to just hire and trust blindly?
No.
A schmuck is born every minute, some say. But hopefully not among the born again.
Sarah (aka Wild Honey),
Thx for the link. Checking it out.
Every time there’s sin leveling, 1 Corinthians 5 is the go-to.
The six behaviors listed are toxic and damaging in social situations, in communities.
Thus, Paul is saying to not even socialize with so-called Christians who practice these behaviors as these are destructive in a community of trust (church). Protect those vulnerable, in particular.
Get out of an abusive marriage or family relationship, where trust is necessary.
Leave an abusive church where trust is implied. Protect yourself and your family. Don’t look back.
Interesting how religious leaders shirk accountability, which is unhealthy, abnormal and abysmal.
Consider the Murdaughs. The one incarcerated is said to never know accountability until jailed for life. His boating party son, (allegedly expired by his dad), was also raised without accountability (so they say).
Simple sure formula to raise an off-the-rails monster: no accountability. (Rubbing out one’s own wife and son is indeed in the off-the-rails monster category. Not adjacent but spot-on a monster.)
Obviously, I’m not big on churches paying for stuff. The Gospel has no price tag.
If however, a church has resources and wants to hire people, then for heaven’s sake, follow the protocols and laws regarding employment. Maintain proper employee files with records. Assess performance and character. Don’t pass the trash. Maintain proper accountability for workers. A church leader is hired and paid by a church. He is an employee. Churches need to set up rules and maintain them – for this employee. For the Gospel.
Church leadership should never be a No Man’s Land where anything goes for the guy(s) at the top. If a church leader wants to be paid as an employee, then they should be required to follow the normal standard practices of employment.
An employee is beholden to those who pay him. Not the other way around. Let the unhappy employee find work elsewhere. Let the employer (church) hire and fire their leadership employees as appropriate.
People who are paid for their work are employees. They are accountable to and answer to those who pay them. That’s honest work.
Agree with Dee very important to distinguish between a clergy member “having an affair” and perpetrating clergy sex abuse. IMO most of the stories you hear are actually the latter mislabeled as the former. Maybe the TGC article mentioned this-maybe??
The problem with “restoring” leaders after sexual misbehavior or other serious failings is that the overt behavior is the tip of the iceberg. A perpetrator of clergy sex abuse, for example, has a deeply unhealthy relationship to sexuality and power. They’re often narcissistic and may have groomed the rest of the congregation as well as the victim(s). Untangling such issues may take years and much challenging labor for the perpetrator and the system that enabled them. And once it’s done, would a truly repentant person even WANT to be back in the pulpit?
Thanks Ava, for reminding us about accountability. I know our church has run background checks on all volunteers who work with children at my church. It would be interesting to learn if they do it for pastors and paid staff as well. Unfortunately, I lost track of the person who used to do this, so I can’t ask her.
Other companies I used to work for insisted on a background check every time a person was to be promoted, or did random spot checks.
1 Timothy 5 seems to “level the discipline playing field”, with similar language and similar reasons for public rebuke/reproof of laity and leaders.
Personally, I think that leaders ought to be held to an even higher standard of conduct than the laity is held to. Their “misses” are more consequential for the group than are those of people with little or no power.
Such a good point. Like an alcoholic swearing off the bottle for life, would not a repentant clergy sex/power predator not stay out of the pulpit power position … forever … deeming that position inappropriate for them for life? Sex offender teachers, counselors, physicians, coaches, psychologists, etc., for this very reason, lose their professional license, for life.
Misuse of a power position requires the restriction of never having that opportunity again. Violation of vulnerables is equally as deadly as substance abuse. Perhaps far worse, with the destruction of the lives of others.
Allowing predators back in the pulpit is idolatry.
Ava Aaronson,
Yes. For some reason church folks in general seem to be startlingly blind to power dynamics, and the little I know of TGC suggests they have this problem too. Focusing on specific sins is a convenient way to make problems “fixable” without the deep work of repairing psyches and dismantling toxic systems. I don’t think this is always willful. But when it’s a big name pastor whose brand makes certain people a lot of money, well, it makes you wonder.
Always the OTHER guy’s SIN.
Ever heard of Virtue-Signalling?
And then there’s Rule by Vice, where the behavior of a leader gives sanction by example.
“He (the Highborn leader) Gets to Do It, SO CAN I!”
Like Joaquin Pheonix’s take on Caesar Commodus in Gladiator:
“A spoiled rich kid, idolized like a rock star, who has Never heard the word ‘No’ in his life.”
(And the movie Commodus was still seriously toned-down from the real one. “AWE KEASAR DIWNUS!”)
Headless Unicorn Guy,
That happens, sure. I’m more thinking of situations where someone is “restored” after an instance of egregious behavior without deeper issues being addressed. Treating symptoms and not the disease.
But these Anointed Answer Only to GAWD!!!”
I’m not sure if the discipline exemption is based on fame or on the ability to make money/donate. I have found that many times lay elders are chosen more often based on their financial status than their spiritual gifts. And when they fall, it’s covered up like those of celebrity pastors.
God had to send Nathan to David, David didn’t confess his sin. Not after Bathsheba got pregnant, nor after he had Uriah killed. When Nathan pronounced God’s forgiveness it was immediately followed by God’s discipline, the consequences, for David. “And then Nathan left and went to his house.” He didn’t stick around and let David weep on his shoulder. He left David weep and plead with God. Also David didn’t say “this is not fair. It wasn’t such a big deal. I made it right by marrying her.” No, he suffered the consequences and saw what it did to his now wife. So I wait for the leaders of God, who when confronted by their sins, refuse to be coddled but mourn and weep, ask for forgiveness, and accept the church discipline. And I wait.
Not if they’re collecting pay from others.
That’s a very important question.
As the outsider, I really appreciate these posts. it is nice to see that some Christians actually expect better behavior from their leaders.
Maybe not in the New Testament, but in real life there is, most definitely.
Which is why there’s no death penalty for jay-walking but there is for mass murder.
Why can’t it be both?
“We don’t need to bathe —
We’ve got Perfume!”
— Charlene, “Used to Be”
Thank you, Muff; that was the point of my first comment.
In the church we can gossip, backbite, slander, and bear false witness all day long and it not affect us at all. But the moment someone admits to adultery or other “TOP TEN SIN”, that’s all that is needed to separate “us” from “THEM”
Common sense.
Common sense once again pops the bubble of evangelical pseudo Christianity creating an alternate reality where somehow grace for everything translates everything is OK always hunky-dory. NOT.
YES
Verbal abuse is one of the six dealbreakers for church community fellowship, listed in 1 Cor. 5. There are no TOP TEN but there are six church fellowship dealbreakers listed. It seems like the NT churches did evangelism out in the community rather than incorporating everyone into their circle of trust and commitment, and THEN trying to communicate the Gospel once they are part of the group.
“But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is a sexually immoral person, or a greedy person, or an idolater, or is verbally abusive, or habitually drunk [substance abuse], or a swindler — not even to eat with such a person. For what business of mine is it to judge outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the evil person from among yourselves.” NASB, 1 Cor. 5.
By the way, promiscuity, even adult consensual, can be a reason to leave a church. We had a couple in our small group Bible study in our church that left because of it. They were both on their 3rd marriage and felt their marriage would not survive our church’s rampant promiscuity, even among married couples. After they left for another church, we took note and followed. Our new church did not have award-winning architecture. It didn’t have the prominent wealthy cool crowd. The pastor was not a community celebrity. It was more low profile and low key with healthier, safer relationships.
Both verbal abuse and promiscuity among trusting adults is destructive to relationships of trust, 1 Cor. 5 seems to say. Church is supposed to be a community with a certain level of trust.
Real question here – is church discipline even effective for anything anymore?
Maybe back when everyone had to live together in a small town and selling all your cows was dependent on everyone thinking well of you, there was some repercussion to not cheating on your wife. Though I think it was probably more likely that women were punished for cheating and men doing the same were ignored.
But I don’t think I’ve ever seen it used effectively. Aside from it’s cultic use now to threaten and punish anyone who goes against the pastor or elders or cover up the problem, people who are doing terrible things usually just walk away from the church.
If it were applied fairly to everyone, leaders included, and specifically for things that were harming the church, would it even work?
For example, my last church had a terrible feud started by a family who claimed that because their family founded the church (not entirely true), then they should be able to make all the decisions. They even purposely sabotaged events and then blamed their detractors (apparently, the fact that everyone has doorbell cams now didn’t occur to them). Attempts to resolve the situation through mediation didn’t work. The church never went to the point of church discipline, and as far as I know, the feud is still going on. Would it even work in this situation? I think it would probably result in lawsuits, but I honestly don’t know.
ishy,
Even pastors who did really bad things and were kicked out by their congregations, like Mark Driscoll, just went somewhere else and started a new church. It’s not that hard to move somewhere else and start over. I’m not sure church discipline could be useful in any way now.
I think evangelical culture in America is largely authoritarian, with one man and an “inner ring” at the top of many churches. In this culture, there will not be policies in place to hold the leaders accountable for bad behavior. And even if there was, there is no one to enforce them. For example, look what happened with John MacArthur and Hohn Cho. I left a church after seven years when I brought these issues up with my own pastors and was told that putting policies in place to hold pastors accountable wasn’t of “utmost concern”. “Church discipline”, “Biblical counseling”, “Matthew 18”, – I see these things as methods for leaders to exert dominance over their congregants and pressure them into submission. I would like to see new churches form in which power rests in the collective will of an informed congregation.
“For some reason” is a culture of authoritarian control. It is the water evangelicals swim in and the air we breath. It have been in NAR churches and MacArthur-style Reformed Baptist churches and the culture is the exact same: blind loyalty to unaccountable leaders.
I have never attended a church that disciplined members. I do know someone who was disciplined, though.
She was a married woman who had an affair, got pregnant, ended the affair, confessed to her husband, bore the baby, placed the baby for adoption, worked to reconcile with her husband, and apologized to her oldest child who was old enough to understand the shame.
During the third trimester of her pregnancy, the good churchgoers who owned her apartment read their Bible and evicted her family of six in the middle of winter.
After the adoption, the church expelled the woman but did nothing at all to the man who had seduced her. Of course, the whole family had to leave the church.
They ended up moving away and starting over with worse jobs and an eviction in their credit history.
I’d rather eat with flagrant sinners than put a family out on the street.
Cue the discussion about “but she repented, the church shouldn’t have done that.” This is how discipline played out in one real life.
“There is a coffee mug I keep meaning to purchase, which has the word ‘Saint’ on one side and ‘Sinner’ on the other.”
Don’t do it unless you are left-handed!
“Hunt refused to carry through with the discipline plan at his former church. He then got a group of pastors together to say he was restored.”
Yes-men celebrity-worshipers in a religious leader’s inner ring are a dime a dozen. Folks who will stand with integrity before God and point a finger in the face of your unrepentant sin are your true friends.
The title “Pastor” does not exempt anyone from accountability. The ministry is not a shield from responsibility.
“A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.” (Thomas Paine)
I remember the scene from The Bunker, where the Mean Girls Clique of Bohrmann, Goebbels, and Himmler let Speer know in no uncertain terms that he will NEVER EVER be one of their Inner Ring. While Russian artillery landing topside.
The Beauty of Complementarianism.
Boyz Rule, Gurlz Drool.
Paul K,
You’re right. It’s not that mysterious, really. Speaking as someone who grew up an insider, evangelicalism’s fascination with hierarchy and authority touches everything. Marriage, parenting, church life, political views, social engagement, everything. And views of God. I don’t know if the theology is the root or the branch, so to speak, but I can’t stand hearing evangelicals talk about God’s authority or how all us humans are little rebels anymore. Not that I don’t believe in it, but I think some pastors are more excited about God’s authority than He is.
Some pastors are excited about claiming God’s authority as their own, but it is an illegitimate authority in the hands of a counterfeit ministry. It’s been sad to behold the waning of Christ’s authority in the American church … He has little influence over what goes on in the average church.
… always ends badly. It’s been at the core of many TWW posts.
I’m not sure I understand everything you were pointing out here. (Communicating via a blog isn’t always clear.)
We’ve seen the cultic use of church discipline to threaten and punish anyone who goes against the pastor. That’s usually how church discipline seems to work. It’s about the pastor maintaining his control for money or resources, power, and decisions, as well as covering up vices of the donors, leaders, and inner circle.
Bottom line, it’s based on money for the top tier and social networking for everyone else. Pastors like to keep their income. Everyone else, the working people who donate, want to keep their social circle of chicken dinners or potlucks, social networking for realtors and business people, ladies’ lunches, men’s hunting events, activities for kids, etc.
People who are doing terrible things are tolerated or supported as long as they are donors, in churches, is what we have seen. The church doubles down and protects them.
We’ve always just walked away from churches when the social behavior becomes toxic. To whatever extent that we’ve tried to work within the situation, nothing improves. So we’ve used the walk away and let others do their church thing option. The behavior is sometimes not criminal, but nevertheless, it’s not healthy.
A leader with a strong donor following in lockstep is nothing to toy with. Why waste time on these codependents that cling to each other? Better to walk away and let them be.
Criminality in any institution, needs to be reported to LE for DOJ due process. But lots of bad behavior, that in our opinion does not belong in church, is legal. Marriages should not tolerate domestic violence. Church is not a place for toxic social behavior, IMHO.
Examples of toxic social behavior? Racism, cruelty to the disabled, old guys trolling for young dates, kids slapping other kids around in Sunday School, youth group activities with groping or sexual innuendo, boys that dangerously roughhouse (borderline hazing), mean girls, intense pressure to donate money and time, swinging couples, criticism of those who are not healed following prayer – these are things we’ve seen that are legal but inappropriate (for us, anyway) in church.
As long as the pastor gets his paycheck, he doesn’t care how people treat each other in the trenches. But he does care about how he is treated as leader. We vote with our feet (and wallet).
Those kinds delight in cruelty.
They were long before that incident, stripped of their humanity.
So would I.
But the landlords were obeying 1 Corinthians 5:11, “… I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother or sister who is sexually immoral or greedy, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber. Do not even eat with such a one.”
Make it make sense.
In the real world, robbers live with Grandma, philanderers have twins in the NICU, drunkards have long-suffering spouses, and who isn’t greedy? Church discipline would be arbitrary, except that it seems to be meted out to the most vulnerable, sweeping in those who depend on them for bread on the table. And of course the upper echelons are exempt.
Am I the only one who has never attended a church with church discipline? I guarantee I haven’t spent my life worshiping among libertines.
This is my problem with most evangelical “radical grace” churches.
They preach God’s “greasy grace,” but they don’t practice it very well. It’s “Hypergrace for me, but not for thee.”
The New Calvinists being the current worse-case example of that. They preach grace-this and grace-that without experiencing and ministering true Grace.
Played out in countless churches across America. It’s an ungodly synergism of pulpit and pew which has nothing to do with the New Testament church model. It is a prayerless and powerless performance of pretended piety.
Personally, I don’t think 1 Corinthians 5 is embracing cruelty or inhumanity. The church that “read their Bible” – well, the Bible has been used for slavery and misogyny and every type of cruelty so no surprise there.
There are so many ways to help people: mothers and children – this example. Or the unemployed – men or women. This can be done and have nothing to do with church and faith fellowship, although one would hope Christians would embrace helping others for the Common Good and Greater Good of Humanity. Habit for Humanity, Meals on Wheels, St. Jude’s Hospital, etc. These are all ventures that help people without faith requirements. Our family is involved with much humanitarian aid in the greater community with no faith connections other than our hearts committed to God.
1 Cor. 5, in my opinion (we may disagree, I may be wrong), is not about social welfare. It’s about socializing – the extracurriculars – within a faith fellowship.
Here is a mini-example of something we’ve dealt with – not quite the same, but maybe the same principle. A teenager was brutally shoving around younger children at a Christian fellowship’s family gathering events. My husband phoned the dad and said that we will be keeping our little one away from this teen at events – maybe the older boy could hang around the other older boys instead of picking on little ones. Boundaries. Not throwing anyone out on the street.
The other family’s mother became incensed and the group kicked us out. Later that year, that older boy gouged out one eye of his younger brother. Our son still has two eyes. If that other family had had any essential needs – food, clothes, housing, transportation – we would have helped.
But socializing can have limits and boundaries without tormenting anyone. I believe 1 Cor. 5 is not talking about denying anyone their essential physical needs. However, it is addressing socializing in a community where trust is a factor. Six toxic behaviors that are dangerous to vulnerables in a community are highlighted.
Social welfare provides meals. Socializing eats a meal with. 1 Corinthians 5 speaks of the second but not the first.
Sums it up well.
Does church discipline through reference to specific verses ever help a person or a congregation? Can anyone think of an example?
Again, I have never belonged to a church that disciplines members. I genuinely don’t understand what church discipline adds that is distinctly Christian and helpful.
I’m sorry you went through that. I don’t think Jesus or Paul would have treated your family that way.
Friend,
Okay maybe someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the whole concept of “church discipline” sort of extrapolated from Matt18 and a few passages in some of the epistles? We take some bits that are general advice on handling interpersonal disputes, and some others about kicking out people who won’t repent of behavior harmful to the community, and sort of Frankenstein them together. The result is a system where a pastor or a an elder board or some other little clique gets to “discipline” other grown adults for “gossiping” or “being divisive” or whatever. Which doesn’t seem very Christian to me, either.
Ava Aaronson,
That’s terrible. That child needed urgent psychological help, not Mom and Dad covering for his aggressive behavior. How incredibly traumatic for his siblings. And how ironic that you were doing the appropriate thing and “going to your brother or sister” yet you were treated as the problem. That is perhaps why people find it so hard to work through disputes in a Christlike way. If the other party is really not interested in making things right, there is not a lot you can do besides shake the dust off your feet, so to speak.
For the agenda of the powers that be.
A lot of Biblical this and that in churches seems to be the Frankenstein approach – cobbled together Scripture to serve someone’s particular purpose. Perhaps that someone is a Dear Leader. It’s a different approach.
When we have gone looking through Scripture to answer Life’s questions (and we do subscribe to Science, including all of the Behavior Sciences), the only agenda we have is to try and get a perspective from God about something for ourselves, our family. NOT to rule over others. For what it’s worth, this Biblical searching through Scriptures has been great for our marriage. More often than not, it puts us in agreement, on level ground as a couple.
Jesus told the disciples that their leadership was NOT to rule over others like the elite religious leaders of the day.
We believe everyone has the right to shake the dust off their sandals and move on when something in church is not working. No one has the right to rule over others in church.
Salaried workers dependent on the church for their livelihood and to support their families can be a can of worms. Is that guy that can’t shake the dust off his sandals then running around with filthy dust-caked sandals? One has to wonder, if he can’t leave. Tragic.
Church is voluntary. Jesus would not go to many churches in America.
In my experience, unhappy pastors can and do leave. They might leave church work altogether, move across the country, or take a different category of work in the ministry—teaching instead of preaching, or working with three small congregations instead of one medium-size group.
As always, I’m not a Southern Baptist. Maybe people do get trapped in one Southern Baptist congregation. But is it for financial reasons? (Asking rhetorically… I don’t expect you or anyone to know the big picture.) I would think that people might stay for power, family reasons, due to limited skills, or because no one else would hire them to do what they like to do.
CMT,
I read “Escape From Freedom” by Erich Fromm, and I think he’s onto something. There’s so much anxiety today stemming from deep feelings of insignificance (for a number of reasons) that authoritarianism has become extremely attractive to all sorts of people, even the church. Authoritarianism promises simple answers for complex problems. It never delivers but a lot of people fall for it.
Friend,
Just wondering if the strongmen types* doubling down with control tactics has to do with paycheck insecurity.
*NeoCals, authoritarians, et al.
Ava Aaronson,
I’d guess that’s right, but authoritarians are also very image conscious. And they like making all the decisions.
In my experience at a MacArthur – style baptist church, they did have some instances where leader ship was actually held accountable and disciplined for egregious sins (adultery, pornography etc)
That said, I found the overall process and workings of “church discipline” to be a show designed to demonstrate to everyone how holy and godly the leaders were, and to reinforce to the congregation how special they were. They puffed up the “true believers” and humiliated the struggling saints. (As if this church, among millions, over thousands of years, was the only one to really “get it right” in terms of doctrine and practice…)
Sidebar- the senior pastor at that church once said “David was a good king, but he would not be qualified to be an elder.”
One of my favorite passages of scripture is where Jesus tells the story of a Pharisee and a tax collector who go down to the temple… the Pharisee prays out loud and praises himself. The tax collector bows his head, beats his breast and says “ God have mercy on me a sinner.” Jesus, then says the tax collector was justified before God. (I can so relate to the tax collector – I don’t measure up and I know it!)
So much of modern evangelicalism is run by Pharisees. I am tired of the posturing and performing.
Then free yourself.
I freed myself from Calvary Chapel years ago and haven’t looked back.
I now attend a small Lutheran (ELCA) congregation.
“Brewery-wagon driver saved from insignificance by his beloved Nazis.”
— (fictional) death camp commandant, Armageddon: a Novel of Berlin, Leon Uris
“RIGHTEOUS and PIOUS are WE (NOT Thee!)…”
Oh man, I was at a MacArthur-affiliated church as well. There were good things about that church, but I can absolutely relate to the culture of “pastors, they are the best of us”. It was very harmful because there just wasn’t any accountability, so even normal human limitations couldn’t be addressed. I feel sad just thinking about it.
I love that quote. In other words, “I am better than King David.” Might actually be true, but a weird thing to say.
https://baptistnews.com/article/pastor-johnny-sues-the-sbc-and-guidepost/
I’ve served overseas for 30 some years. My observation after working with and living among multiple ethnic groups is that societies everywhere, every time struggle with authoritarianism. It seems to be part of the human condition resulting from the sinful nature. Whether Christian or Buddhist (I live in strongly Buddhist nation), narcissists and autocrats rise up yet most people say nothing because everyone has been taught to “be polite”. Speaking up about bad behavior in any culture means being labeled a troublemaker.
You’re right, dangerous leaders- whether religious or secular- play into the human desire for simple answers to complex problems.
There are no simple answers. The earthquake in Turkey didn’t happen because of X (fill in the blank with a simple answer, especially one which blames locals for sin the brought disaster on themselves).
Pastor Johnny keeps digging himself into a deeper hole.
And if there was NO earthquake in Turkey, that was because PROPHETESS Kat Kerr (of the pink hair) smote the ground three times with her Magick Wizard’s Staff (as she did for those hurricanes).
“TOUCH NOT MINE ANOINTED!!!”, remember.
I agree there are no simple answers.
One not-simple answer is to design systems that resist authoritarianism and lawlessness.
Another answer is to encourage people to think critically and independently.
Another is to include lots of people in discussions.
And another is for people to listen at least as much as they talk. Hey, we might hear something new that does not even threaten us!
“That’s Not SCRIPTURE! SHOW ME SCRIPTURE!”
— PastorRaulReesCalvaryChapelWestCovina (all one word), every time someone tried to reason with him
i.e. The moment you realize you’re trying to talk to a Jack Chick tract.