Who’s in, who’s out, and why?
A recent post criticized Tammy Faye Messer’s choice of speaker at her private funeral. Here’s the pertinent part:
Christianity Today last week featured a blog post that claimed Tammy Faye taught us “how to die.†That she has become, in death, something of an evangelical cultural icon surprises me very little in our lawless age. The news from ABC that the private family service after Tammy Faye’s death was conducted by a homosexual “pastor†illustrates very clearly what she believed about the authority of the Scriptures.
And then further down:
The rebellion against God’s order in homosexuality attacks the very image of Christ and His bride. That Tammy Faye chose a man to conduct her funeral service who not only manifests that rebellion, but has taken it into the office of the pastorate, says all that needs to be said about this brand of religion the purports to be Christianity.
So my question is, who’s in, who’s out and why? Obviously we’re talking about a guy who’s not just tempted by homosexual temptation but a guy who acts on it. He’s speaking/leading/whatevering a private service for a friend. I suppose what I’m asking is where do we draw the line? What constant pursuit of sin excludes someone from what activities?
FWIW, I’m throwing this out there as something worth discussing, rather than as a criticism or disagreement with the posted article. That’s not to say I necessarily agree with the quoted article either.
July 30th, 2007 at 10:26 am
I obviously disagree with a homosexual pastor. But, Tammy Faye’s family can do what they want (does anyone know if Tammy Faye picked this pastor personally?)
Anyhow, it just makes me sad that Ingrid is trying to backtrack with an even harsher article against the late Tammy Faye. Last time she blew it. If feel like she is saying “see, I told you so!” with this article. Pathetic.
July 30th, 2007 at 11:47 am
My initial reaction is that a practicing homosexual should not be in the position of pastor, just as a pastor who is practicing adultry or infidelity or has a current problem with, say, embezzling or something.
But then that makes me think: what about lying? or other “private” sins? gluttony? hidden lust? gambling? envy?
Do we only punish (by not allowing a person to be pastor) the obvious sins? I’ve always been careful to guard against thinking that there is a “sin hierarchy” i.e. that some sins are worse than others… but in this case, that’s exactly what I’d be doing.
Tough questions, Tim.
July 30th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
“(does anyone know if Tammy Faye picked this pastor personally?)”
“Messner’s second husband, Roe, who was with her when she died, has carried out her final instructions ‘to the letter.’ That included having Rev. Randy McCain, an openly gay minister from the Open Door Community Church in Sherwood, Ark., conduct the private service.” (Tributes Pour In For Tammy Faye Messner
July 30th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
Julie,
I think you’re right on this issue. When it comes to most churches, for some reason certain sins its ok to openly engage in them, others are ok to be tempted by, certain sins can’t even be mentioned. If we understand that sin is, by its nature, disobedience to God, and that something as fundamental as the scriptures can become an idol I think it iwll shift our perspective on how we deal with sin.
Nathan is absolutely right when he talks about the difference between presiding over a private service versus being the preaching minister of a church. Tammy Faye Messer was a friend to sinners, one of those sinners happened to be an openly gay minister. She asked that he speak at her private service, she didn’t appoint him to a ministry.
I also find it a bit funny that Ingrid thinks it displays an attitude of rebelliousness to the scriptures to get married against an institution’s rules when Paul writes in 1 Timothy 4:
July 30th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Well, yes, Julie, some sins are more serious than others. Of course, ALL sins are not minor in God’s eyes nor should it be in ours. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. However, God did considered some sins worse than others as evident by the civil punishment for them.
Okay, we need to narrow the scope of discussion to what sins disqualifies a pastor.
*Obviously, sexual sins do (including homosexuality, adultery, sexual harrassment, viewing pornography, etc.)
*Stealing church monies, yes
*Continual misuse/abuse of church funds and assets despite repeated reprimands, yes
*Gambling? depends on the situation
*Murder, yep
*If the pastor is confronted with evidence of ‘private’ sins, such as gluttony and envy, and he doesn’t repent of such, then I think he should leave the pastorate. But if he is struggling to overcome it, then a period of time (probation) can be granted. If the problem continues after probation, then leaving the pastorate would be the best for him.
I believe some sins have some leeway depending on the severity, extent, and will and wisdom of the elders, deacons, and the congregation. (Maybe a “three strikes you’re out” rule)
July 30th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
Timothy Bell,
Care to address the why of all that?
July 30th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Isn’t some of the issue we’re talking about wrapped up in the fact that today we are more likely to think of the pastorate as a profession rather than a calling. Would pastors be willing to be open with their struggles, whatever they are, if their livelihood didn’t depend on their position in the church? Lawyers, architects, engineers, etc. can still do their jobs and not have fear of losing their careers if someone finds out about sin in their lives. Pastors, on the other hand, it seems are expected to not struggle with sins, and if they do admit it, they are run out of town a lot of times.
Personally, I do not like the term “the office of pastorate”. I understand there are specific giftings that God gives people, but I think the Church in general relies too much on paid professionals to do ministry.
July 30th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
The practicing homosexual (condoning) pastor is obviously wrong. But even in death, someone like Tammy Faye who had major issues, still has to be attacked. Can we not let her leave in peace or must we pick the skin from her corpse?
While realizing her doctrinal issues, I always felt sorry for her. Feeling sorry for brothers and sisters in error is a lost art.
Sad…
July 30th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
By the way, I’m not arguing against strict standards for pastors in my previous post. I do not think a practicing homosexual should be a pastor. I just think in some churches, people put pastors on such pedastals, that they really become very isolated and find being transparent near impossible.
July 30th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
“Care to address the why of all that?”
I thought it was obvious why.
July 30th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Is it just me or does the Bible create a hierarchy of sins for the office of pastorate. I believe God has called me to vocational ministry and I also realize that raises the standard by which I am called to live. James tells us that those who teach will be held to a higher standard. I personally would not go to a church where a pastor was living in open homosexuality as that is open embracing of sin. As for the private sins, I would hope that he/she is fighting them. I would have little problem with going to a church where a guy struggled with homosexual temptation and didn’t give in, no more than I know pastors who struggle with illicit thoughts toward women in their congregation but they fight them.
Having said that, I find Ingrid’s attitude in her handling of Ms. Baker to be scandalous. This is necessary to prove her earlier and now pulled post. It makes me feel extremely sad for both her and those who listen to her.
July 30th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
T. Bell,
No it wasn’t. You created two types of sins “public” and “private” without any scriptural support. Declared particular types of sin as immediate disqualifiers for leading a church, again, without scriptural support, and created a “three strikes” rule, also without scriptural support.
I’m not saying I disagree with any or all of it, just wondering why you came to those conclusions.
July 30th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
I was addressing Julie’s post in my original post…she referred to ‘private’ sins so I just was taking her use of language into my answer.
As for immediate disqualifiers, well, I assumed a certain Biblical literacy in my posting…..didn’t think I needed to explain the ‘why’ of sexual sins such as homosexuality, adultery, and the like because Christ pointed out that practitioners of such sins would not inherit the earth.
Stealing monies…a sin (8th commandment) and a crime. A pastor should have the upmost trust of the congregation. This sin breaks that trust. This can apply to misuse and abuse of monies and church assets.
Gambling can mean different things….is it lottery tickets or driving to a casino every week or playing for hours online? Is it a ‘fun’ thing or a losing addiction? There is no direct Biblical prohibition against gambling per se but there the Bible does require self-control. Buying $5 worth of lottery tickets is one thing; spending $1,000 a week raises questions of self-control. A gambling addiction can lead to trust issues with the church’s funds.
Murder is prohibited by the 6th commandment. This is obvy.
I guess Julie called gluttony and envy ‘private’ sins because they happen to be sins against the self and not always evident, at least in the beginning. Envy is violation of the 10th commandment. Proverbs has various verses against gluttony. Whether or not they qualify for immediate disbarment or not, I don’t know. I would only be offering an opinion in regards to these types of sins depending on the severity of them.
As for the “three strikes, you’re out” rule, I only offered that if a church wanted to codify grace and compassion with a strict rule of disbarment in the church policy for sins outside of sexual sins, stealing, murder, and extreme lack of self-control.
July 30th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
So the civil punishment is an indication of a more serious sin in God’s eyes?
If sin is sin, and is despicable, are there really more despicable versions of despicable, when it comes right down to it? The problem in being able to make a list of “the really bad sins” at the drop of a hat is that a person who might be guilty of the “minor sins” thinks — “Whew. I’m not that bad, at least. I’m OK.”
You may think that is not how people think, but I know it is. It is, because everyone has sin and most Christians spend their time talking about the horrors of the “really bad sins” instead of those insidious, creeping vine sins like pride and lying that creep in and choke us.
I am not being sarcastic when I say that yes, Tim, I would like a more in-depth discussion (with scripture verses) to back up the idea that some sins are worse than others. I am genuinely wanting to know, and if that is the case I would like to know it. The question of “degrees of sin” has been running through my head for years, so anything you can offer up as explanation for what you said would be appreciated.
July 30th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
I don’t think there should be a different standard necessarily for pastors and leaders. I think the passage in James is saying that if one presumes to be a teacher, he should expect to be more accountable. In a sense that person become not only responsible for his own actions, but for what he taught others. I think it becomes dangerous when people take that verse to mean something like there are certain things that are OK for “regular people” to do, but not for pastors. If it’s a sin for a pastor, then it is a sin for everyone, basically. That is, unless, we’re talking about things that are more matter of one’s conscience, where a pastor decides for himself he can’t do something.
Here’s an example - my church has a policy that doesn’t allow pastors to go see a movie in a local theater. They can go out of towm and see one, but not in town. They don’t apply that to the church members. It’s truly just a stupid rule.
As far as degrees of sin, I would say it not really helpful to think of sins in terms of big and little. Maybe the analogy of cancer is good one here. Even if someone has a little spot of cancer, usually the best thing to do is deal with it rather than ignore it. If it’s ignored it will grow into something more deadly. So the things we see and classify as sin are really symptons of the cancer that lives in all of us. Christ defeated that sin on the cross, but we are still dealing with its effects.
July 30th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Phil, I agree with you. The problem I find with your argument is that you are saying (I’m hoping to rephrase you here to make sure I understand you correctly) “there are people who misuse that verse so it cannot mean that.” I find a problem with that logic (if it is your logic) because the verse should be defined outside of how people miss-apply it. While I believe that all sin is sin and any sin can separate you from a Holy God, I also believe that there is a higher standard for those in church leadership. How else do we look at the qualifications for leadership. In the original example it is still an example of a man openly engaging in an act that we know to be sinful. I can’t police everyone’s life, but I can choose to not follow those who would openly engage in sin. For instance, if a pastor was an open drunk, I could not in good conscience go to his church, but if he is a silent at home drunk and I don’t know anything about it, there isn’t much I can do. If it came to my attention, I would ask him to step down, if that didn’t happen I would go looking for another church. Being a drunk disqualifies someone from leadership as much as the first example.
Did Jesus have degrees of sin in the way he handled the Pharisee’s (teachers of the law) and how he handled other sinners, say prostitutes?
July 30th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
I was addressing Julie’s post in my original post…she referred to ‘private’ sins so I just was taking her use of language into my answer.
As for immediate disqualifiers, well, I assumed a certain Biblical literacy in my posting…..didn’t think I needed to explain the ‘why’ of sexual sins such as homosexuality, adultery, and the like because Christ pointed out that practitioners of such sins would not inherit the earth.
Stealing monies…a sin (8th commandment) and a crime. A pastor should have the upmost trust of the congregation. This sin breaks that trust. This can apply to misuse and abuse of monies and church assets.
Gambling can mean different things….is it lottery tickets or driving to a casino every week or playing for hours online? Is it a ‘fun’ thing or a losing addiction? There is no direct Biblical prohibition against gambling per se but there the Bible does require self-control. Buying $5 worth of lottery tickets is one thing; spending $1,000 a week raises questions of self-control. A gambling addiction can lead to trust issues with the church’s funds.
Murder is prohibited by the 6th commandment. This is obvy.
I guess Julie called gluttony and envy ‘private’ sins because they happen to be sins against the self and not always evident, at least in the beginning. Envy is violation of the 10th commandment. Proverbs has various verses against gluttony. Whether or not they qualify for immediate disbarment or not, I don’t know. I would only be offering an opinion in regards to these types of sins depending on the severity of them.
As for the “three strikes, you’re out” rule, I only offered that if a church wanted to codify grace and compassion with a strict rule of disbarment in the church policy for sins outside of sexual sins, stealing, murder, and extreme lack of self-control.
July 30th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Joe,
There does seem to be a degree of sin in their actual impact. Paul differentiates sexual sin in that it is “against his own body” in 1 Cor 6.18. Jesus tells the Pharisees that they are making others into “twice the son of hell” that they are in Matthew 23.15. In Proverbs 6.16-19 there is a list of 6 sins that are singled out for God’s special kind of hate (notice that homosexuality or any sexual sin is not among them, but “a man who stirs up dissension among brothers”, hmmm).
That’s all I have, and there may be more.
I’m just curious why you put such a strong emphasis on the 10 Commandments? And this is a general wonderment, because its something the reformers did, and people today do. Are not the 10 Commandments a part of the Mosaic Law, and as such shouldn’t they be put on the same level as the rest of the Law?
July 30th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
and
Is there a sin of condescension?
July 30th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
So you gave me Biblical basis for why these are sins. I don’t feel you answered my question (at the risk of irony, considering the discussion in another post about questions not being answered). My question wasn’t if they were sins, but if they were WORSE than other sins.
If we’re going to say that consequences are greater for some sins, making those sins greater, here’s an interesting problem with that, based on a real story:
Pastor’s son gets girl in youth group pregnant. This was an extremely fundamentalist church, and the girl is basically forced to leave the church. The guy, however, is not. In fact, he goes on to become a youth pastor. Was his sin less than her’s because the punishment was less?
Frankly speaking, various forms of sexual sin have consequences for all involved, but if a girl gets pregnant she also has shame and other things to deal with for at least nine months if not more. The guy, not so much. I don’t think it a good idea to say that the results of the sin determine how bad God thinks the sin is. If, however, there is a clear Biblical answer to this which says “Sin X is worse than sin Y because of this reason” I DO want to hear it.
I do think those seemingly quiet, less obvious sins are among the most dangerous, though the punishment for them on earth is mild in comparison to other sins.
July 30th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Julie - you asked about degrees of sin. This is the way to measure the degree of sin:
Yours are worse than mine.
July 30th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Joe,
I wasn’t necessarily trying to argue with what you are saying, per se. I understand where you are coming from. I guess if we’re talking about qualifications, it seems to me that we’re mainly talking about spiritual maturity. So, yes, if someone is getting drunk regularly, we can assume that they’re not fit to be a pastor.
I guess what I’m getting at, though, in a round-about way is that spiritual maturity should be something that is sought after by all Christians. In Hebrews 5:12 , the writer says’ “In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers” not to just a select few, but to the whole group. It seems to me, that to some degree, all Christians should be ministering. We all can be “shepherding” someone. Discipleship has been so neglected, that people have really decided it’s better to leave ministry to professionals. I don’t see such a big clergy/layperson divide in the NT.
July 30th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
Julie, you don’t think murder is obviously wrong? I hadn’t realized that you would consider it NOT to be wrong. I don’t understand why you are picking on this? I really don’t! My jaw just dropped at the suggestion that I was being condescending there! Uh, man!
Yes, some sins are worse than others. Some do more harm to other people that it is done to and we usually have actual laws in the books against it (but not always, like abortion). Murder is obviously, er, scratch that….
Julie, I wouldn’t measure the severity of a sin based on what punishment MAN gave it, but rather on what GOD does. You can get an indication from the Mosaic laws what punishments God gave certain sins and Jesus Himself pointed out certain sinners would not see heaven.
Both the boy and girl in your example are equally at fault unless the boy committed rape. I certainly would not have the boy become a youth pastor if I was a member there. There are always unfair and unjust punishments in this world when we go outside of the Bible as our guide.
I do agree with you that some less obvious sins can create enormous sinful consequences, especially when committed by those in authority when passing laws favoring certain companies or by omitting medical coverage over certain peoples (greed). In other people, the less obvious sins (envy, hatred) can lead to greater sins (murder) as happened at Virginia Tech.
July 30th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
As Tim says, “Paul differentiates sexual sin in that it is “against his own body†in 1 Cor 6.18.”
If a pastor is practicing sinful behavior that they redefine as acceptable behavior, the question goes beyond looking at a ranking for sins.
July 30th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Julie,
In your comment about the pastors son and the girl, the greatest sin was committed by the church for treating that young lady different than the boy. They should have loved them both. That is what makes grace so scandalous. I’ll never forget the chapter in Yancey’s, What’s So Amazing About Grace where a counselor asks a young lady prostitute who is prostituting her baby if she ever thought about going to a church for help. Her answer, “No, why in the &&*$ would I do that.”
That is the result of “degreeing” sin. Quite frankly, it sucks.
July 30th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
Tim Reed,
I agree with the first half of your post addressed to me. Was the second half also addressed to me? If so, where did I put “such an emphasis on the 10 commandments?”
July 30th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
Joe,
That was in response to Timothy Bell. I’m genuinely curious though at the power that the ten commandments has over people. Is there a reason it is placed on a different level than the rest of the Law by so many people?
July 30th, 2007 at 9:00 pm
Beats me brother, beats me. BTW, check your email for your OT blog. I sent you something I’d like to do tonight.
July 30th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Tim Reed,
Why not use the 10 commandments? A lot of people are somewhat familiar with them. Would using some other part of the Bible be more to your liking?
July 30th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
Timothy,
While I can’t speak for Tim Reed, I’ve often wondered about the same thing. The Ten Commandments are the preamble of the Mosaic Covenant, in which the Christians are not part. Even one of the ten (the Sabbath), we are not required to keep, which becomes confusing to explain to new believers and seekers.
I usually start with the Noaic covenant, which all men are required to keep, even though it is not as concisely listed as the Ten Commandments.
July 30th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
After some reflection, I would say that all sin is equal when it comes to the effect that it has on our relationship with God. Sin, by its nature, separates us from the holy and righteous God. This is true of lying and gluttony and envy and other sins not so readily apparant to others, as well as the sins of adultery and murder. Sin is incompatible with the divine and all sin has as its consequence death.
On the other hand, sins vary in the effect they have people. Murder and adultery are obviously greater sins than gluttony or lying because of the lasting impact they have on those who commit and/or experience them. Sins that have an greater impact on others are worse sins than those more limited in their impact.
Now, do I have Biblical evidence for this distinction? Not that I am aware of. In God’s eyes sin is sin, but in human eyes sin has degrees of evil. That is why humans have developed punishments that fit the crimes committed. Murder may get you life in prison or execution, while stealing may get you 5 years in jail. One could argue that the levitical laws also make a distinction between sins because the punishments that are mandated in the law.
As to what sins disqualify one from serving as a pastor, there are a whole host of them. Now while I may disagree with some here about particular “sins” (such as homosexuality) being adequate for disqualification, I think we would find many sins thatg we all could agree on.
Finally, it is my belief that all sin has already been forgiven by the death of Jesus and the blood shed upon the cross. Every sin in the past, every sin now being committed, and every sin that anyone will ever commit, they have all already been forgiven. How this truth affects ths discussion, I have no idea.
July 30th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Will,
One place I start is with Jesus’ measuring stick of ‘love God’ and ‘love others’.
All sins are equal in the eyes of God - they all violate the greatest commandment of loving the Lord our God.
Some sins also doubly violate the first commandment when they are directed at Him, such as idolatry and blasphemy.
In addition to this, some sins are then sins against other people and violate the second greatest commandment, as well. So, in a sense, they violate both the greatest commandment and the second greatest commandment.
Finally, there are sins which are sins against yourself (the second part of the second greatest commandment ‘as yourself’).
I suspect that this is what Julie was getting at with ‘private sins’.
However, there are some “private sins” which really are not “private” - for instance pornography. The use of porn objectifies the women and men who are depicted in it, and is thus a sin against them, as well.
Since Jesus said that all laws hang on those two, that is where I find it helpful to start in assessing a sin and its impact.
July 30th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Trying to reinvent the wheel on something like explaining why the 10 commandments is still applicable today would go beyond the time I have to do so and the desire I have to continually post on this. So I searched for a website that explains my position better than I could: http://godstenlaws.com/law-grace/new-covenant.html
I hope this helps. God bless, Tim.
July 30th, 2007 at 10:28 pm
Now really, Tim, this quote actually is a bit condescending. I should it would a given that I think murder is obviously wrong. At what point did I suggest otherwise? By not addressing all the specifics, i.e. murder, you mentioned? Good grief.
If you don’t understand “why I’m picking on this” then I guess we’re through with that particular conversation. (I believe this happened in another post with you as well). I’m not “picking on it” but wondering about the way you suggest that some sins are worse than others. By no means did I mean to, nor do I think it would seem like I did, condone murder.
On another note…what about the concept of what you think in your heart being as bad as doing it? Lusting, murdering in your heart is as bad as doing it, for example. The action never happened, so the obvious consequences might not happen, but the “thought sin” (if you’ll allow me to use a rather clunky phrase) did happen. A little “minor” thing. Which is just as bad as doing the actualy sin. To me, that says there is a lot of weight on things we are rather flippant about.
I would totally agree with Henry (Rick). My sins are far worse. I am, in fact, the worst serial killer on the planet, if you consider the moments of hate and anger and times I’d considered what it would be like if someone were just dead.
In thinking of the weight of our thought life being as heavy as the action, i.e. all sins are hideous and just as bad, it is very easy to see why I need Christ in the worst way. I am as bad as the murderer, the adulterer — all of it. It’s when I start tallying up which sins are worse that I start tallying up my own score and think that perhaps I’m not quite as bad as…Ted Bundy, for example. I’m “good” compared to that.
Do you see the importance of this?
July 30th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Julie, you considered my statement “this is obvy” in relation to murder as being condescending. To ME that means you don’t think that murder is obviously wrong. If murder is obviously wrong, then why do you think that my statement “this is obvy” is condescending?
A man who commits rape commits a worse sin that one who steals a pencil. Both are condemned to hell but we are talking about what disqualifies a pastor from his position as leader of a church on earth, remember? I tried to keep the scope of conversation on whether a pastor keeps his position or not depending on the nature of his sin but it just overflows beyond the scope like a stopped up toilet. A pastor should be above reproach and some sins (which I considered the ‘obvious’ ones) are serious enough to require instant disbarment but other sins may require discretion.
If this is still confusing to you, fine. Once again, we’re done.
July 30th, 2007 at 11:55 pm
Always a pleasure, Timothy, a distinctly polite, enlightening, glad-I-bothered pleasure.
I’ll avoid future interactions. Even though I can never get enough “stopped up toilet” references.
July 31st, 2007 at 2:52 am
Chris,
I think you and I are on the same wavelength here. I too think that the real measure of sin must take into consideration the command to love God and neighbor.
July 31st, 2007 at 9:05 am
Re the 10 commandments, it’s my understanding that all of those except for the command to keep the sabbath are repeated in the NT.
Re obedience and the forgiveness of sins:
“If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (I John 1:8,9)
“We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him . . . ” I John 1:3-4.
“No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. (I John 3:9)
How this applies to this discussion: If someone really cares about the soul of a person who is not only disobeying the commands of Christ, but calling their sin “good” and treating it as if it is not a sin, then that person may very well be the kind of person that is being talked about in I John 3:9 and I John 1:3-4. If anyone supports a person like this in a Christian leadership role instead of showing concern for the state of his soul, that person is not demonstrating Christ’s love.