purpose driven problems.
Remember that part in the purpose driven program where Rick Warren said that pastors should do the following:
- lie, manipulate, and breached confidentiality
- remove Sunday School teachers for refusing to back down from their position on the Purpose Driven program, even if it is a confidential and discreet position.
- no longer welcome confidential and discreet dissenters to attend Sunday School
- refused to respond in writing concerning removal of dissenters (which should occur without a vote by the congregation, even if that congregation originally voted to install the discreet dissenter as a teacher and a deacon)
- tell the secret dissenter’s Sunday School class that they were removed for challenging his authority
- have the deacons claim that they were removed temporarily for an investigation they did not conduct
- not allow the congregation to hear the either side of the complaint
- have the discreet dissenter’s fellow deacons cutoff the mediation process with a mediator from the state convention
- make sure the fellow deacons send them a letter stating that they see no evidence of pastoral misconduct or theological issues with Purpose Driven.
Oh wait… none of that is part of the purpose driven program. But apparently one ODM would like to blame their bad purpose driven experience on Mr. Warren personally. I am finding more and more that many who hate the PD program actually hate the experience they had with a pastor implementing the five purposes of the church. They don’t like the way they were treated, being forced to sing new songs, working with new church structures and that five letter word… change.
I mean, basing everything in your church around worship, evangelism, fellowship, discipleship and service should not be all that alarming. It is the growing pains that come with change, and the bad implementation of the five purposes by pastors who truly do not understand it that cause such dissension. So many times, pastors get over zealous with wanting their church to be the next Saddleback, that they make the wrong changes. So, it is one thing to critique the program, it is another thing to critique the program based on how pastors have inappropriately used it.
Plus, I am not at all familiar with this situation, but it is rare for a whole church community to treat an individual in this manner when they are confidential, discreet, respectful and supports the leadership in the midst of their concern. Red flags are always sent up when the pastor, leadership and deacons all find issue with the person who is in disagreement.
June 12th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Nathan it happens more than you know. I attempted to leave descreetly but they forced me out in favor of teaching the strict PDL lessons.
I have heard Rick Warren say that you cannot coexist with stubborn people, they must get on board or leave. The thirst for growth is often the culprit, but there are still problems with the PDL program.
June 12th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
That is just basic sense though, no? I mean, if you have someone in your church that disagree with you, you should either try to convince them of your direction or part ways. It’s never fun when the one guy who disagrees decides to stay and make a transition rough.
Sorry you had that experience though.
June 12th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
I think it goes beyond ’stubbornness’ in a number of cases, though. It ceases being ’stubbornness’ when individuals eschew submission to the authority of elders in their decision making and stir up dissention rather than discussing with the eldership. That is not to say that sometimes elders don’t act in a biblical manner - something I’ve witnessed first hand - but that at some point ’stubbornness’ crosses a threshold into full-blown divisiveness…
June 12th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Rick,
Have you considered you might have been the one in the wrong?
In the military we have a saying…when everyone around you, who’s on the same ‘team’ as you is telling you that you’re wrong, or you need to ’shut up and color’, you most likely are wrong. Or you seriously need to re-analyze your situation to see if you have fault in the matter.
I’m not saying that is the case with you, at all. I’m just saying I’ve been on the losing side of a battle like that more than a few times…and when it finally came down to it…I was the stubborn one, and not in a good “I’m the one with the truth!” way…lol.
June 12th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
That seems such an amazing quote,coming so close after recent discussions…
I wonder if thats the only genre of people we could get away with saying “part ways with” without it turning into a heated debate..
June 12th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Joe - me wrong? Please think about what you write before you hit submit.
I was wrong once - I though I was wrong but I wasn’t. I’ve learned my lesson!
I attempted in every way to stay but when you have been teaching over 100 people for years and then they ask you to either teach the same lesson as everyone else or leave you cannot leave under the radar. I spoke to no one. Not by phone, not by letter, and not face to face.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
I understand Rick…
It must have been a really hard position to be in. Sometimes everything can’t go our way I guess. But do you think the church didn’t go God’s way just because they didn’t go your way?
I do think there is something to many many people you are close to telling you that you’re wrong, or you need to change or please go your own way, and that being true. That’s just my opinion.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Hundreds left the church as well. People were telling my wife I should resist. I did not.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Andy,
what other options are there? The whole leadership is in agreement on where the church should go. One guy decides he doesn’t like it, completely disagrees, and is vocal about it…. what would you do?
June 12th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
I just wonder what the response would of been if PB had said
night all
June 12th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
“The whole leadership is in agreement”
Many times that represents the pastor impressing his will on the other leaders. Go ask Scott and John of Verum Serum about their “The whole leadership is in agreement” experience.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
A ‘what if’ like that seems only meant to create more division among people who are already having issues. I’d be careful using ‘what ifs’ like that.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
Nathen we posted together
It kind of strikes me as ironic,thats all
June 12th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I think if all of you read the letter beyond the OP that Nathan references you would see that this is a clear railroad job, and that the ODM was treated with a lack of integrity by the Pastor and deacon board.
No, RW and PD do not say implicitly to act in this way, but if you get his pastor’s newsletter, like I used to, he has said repeatedly that you need to get rid of dissenters. This mans dissent had nothing to do with music or specific changes other than how the Pastor was preaching and videos used in worship. In short it didn’t really have to do with change, it had to do with specific Biblical concerns. And it wasn’t just this guy, it was many others who had concerns
Read his letter. It has excellent Biblical support. And he has class and integrity by blocking out the name of the church, the pastors, and the other deacons.
And one more thing; why can we have compassion for a prostitute who pimps her two year old for drugs, and no compassion for this man who rightly or wrongly has been wounded by the church that he was a part of and committed to? I would argue that we need to be Jesus to this man and that prostitute. Is it just because he doesn’t like PD and RW that this site feel no problem in kicking him when he is down?
June 12th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
If Pastor McManus left and a strict Calvinist somehow got in and strongarmed a complete and radical change I think many would be trampled underneath and you would feel much different. The pastor/CEO structure of the American church is partially responsible for some of this.
June 12th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
PB,
Let’s go deeper PB,… why can’t you have compassion on your brothers and sisters you hurt? Before you call for compassion, practice it yourself.
iggy
June 12th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Agreed…with a caveat!
Anybody who has ever been in a leadership in a church could relate similar situations from the “other” side.
When I came to my new church I had one family who could not get over the fact that they were no longer going to run the youth group, their way, for their own goals and agenda. I met with them, the elders met with them, I met with them with the Pastor, I met with them with a mediator. For over 2 years I went the extra mile with these people. “As much depends on you be at peace with all people”. They spent the better part of those 2 years sowing seeds of dissension within the body, bad mouthing me, my wife, the pastor, my kids to everyone who was within ear shot.
Some people just don’t like change. And no matter how hard you try they ain’t gonna go along with any program.
Unfortunately this situation is not uncommon among my many pastor friends.
So I guess I would say there are 2 sides to every story unless your in a church and then there are at least 4. I’ll bet dollars to donuts that the other side of this PD story is a bit bigger than just “poor old guy got squeezed out of his position by the meany pastor and the demonic deacons and Purpose blinded elders”
June 12th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
We are getting way off track…
I am not saying I don’t have compassion for his pain. I am just thinking that it is ridiculous how this man blames Rick Warren for his pastor’s actions. NONE of the things listed are a part of the PD program. To put blame on Warren is careless.
Rick - for the record, if that happened, and the elders went with it, I would leave. I would have to respect the spiritual leadership there, but would not have to stay. Would I be sad… yes. Would I blame MacArthur and Piper… no.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
“That is just basic sense though, no? I mean, if you have someone in your church that disagree with you, you should either try to convince them of your direction or part ways”
“I have heard Rick Warren say that you cannot coexist with stubborn people”
Chris, I you say that a stubborn person must or should leave, there are 2 problems with that. 1- You wouldn’t have a gathering of believers, even within blood families. 2- To ask someone to leave because they are stubborn would in logic make that person asking the other to leave “stubborn” in there own view.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Nathan, I will be even more candid then my father on the situation which you and him have discussed.
My father said nothing and discussed nothing, yet the problem ran deep within the class itself. This class grew from 15 people to over 100 in a little over a year. The reason for the growth was that hungry and thirsty people were being fed. They were being fed in a way that most have never been. They were fed by the scriptures and not just a curriculum.
I remember, without a word previous from my father, the outrage when my father announced that last Sunday that he wasn’t going to be teaching anymore. I knew that I could be taught by him through the scriptures anytime since I am his son, but I had pain in my heart for those who had no other resource of that biblical nature within that particular church. Not to say theLord wasn’t working anywhere else, but these people came to love the ministry that was present there in and out of the 1 hour Sunday School class. It wasn’t about my father even though some felt as so! It was the fact that the bible was being used as the main source of manna and not that of man made lesson planning.
Now guys, don’t jump all over me. I am an advocate for scripture to be taught in other ways then just strictly reading out of text, but once man made curriculum supercedes scripture the power is reduced due to negligents.
BTW- Sometimes unity in lesson plans for a whole church can be a great thing, but sometimes it is used in effort to bring together for a certain cause. Like, building a multi million dollar facility with a line of credit which the church can not afford.
June 13th, 2008 at 3:13 am
I agree with PB and Rick on the matter regarding PDL stuff. The chuch I attended went purpose driven and there was no room for discussion! We were told in as many words, “If you don’t like it, perhaps this isn’t the church for you.” For me it was no suprise after reading some of PDC and a good deal of PDL.
June 13th, 2008 at 3:14 am
I’ll add too that these we’re bad people and I honestly feel that it was all due to the content of PDL and Willow Creek association.
June 13th, 2008 at 5:42 am
All of the first hand accounts still do not negate the point of the OP.
If your church nominates leaders then you are biblically mandated to follow. If your church is congregational led then you are biblically mandated to follow the majority will of the people (excuse my ignorance of congregational churches governance if that’s not the case).
I’ve often found, in my current role, that people pay lip service to the “will of God” up until the point that the “will of God” is in direct contradiction to “my will”.
June 13th, 2008 at 5:46 am
I’ve often found, in my current role, that
peoplepastors pay lip service to the “will of God” up until the point that the “will of God” is in direct contradiction to “mytheir will”.June 13th, 2008 at 7:00 am
Well Rick; then you and I very much differ on what the role of a Pastor should be in a church. So often I hear people say “We want you to Lead” but what they are really saying is “We want you to be out front and take us where we want to go” . That is accountability without any authority.
Currently we are reading/preaching through Exodus in my church. If it wasn’t for Moses, their pastor, the Israelites would still be in Egypt.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:47 am
oh man, major typo!! “I’ll add too that these we’re bad people” should be “I’ll add too that these weren’t bad people”
June 13th, 2008 at 7:49 am
Isn’t that the case with ANY church regardless of the program being implemented? I’m not defending the PD format but, I’d be interested in the number of churches that are damaged because of PD as opposed those that aren’t. It would be tough to ferret out those numbers.
Again, see my first paragraph. I’ve been around a LONG time and have seen churches torn apart for things more minor than a change of program. LONG before the PD paradigm! Where was Warren then to blame. It’s been going on FOREVER!!
And that’s different from WHAT that has caused many churches in the past, long before Warren.
Amen, Chris, that’s been my experience in the past.
Now look, I’ve been through a number of churches and chose to leave for MANY reasons. And PD wasn’t even a gleam in Warren’s eye. Did I mope, complain or point fingers? No, I just moved on. If we have one thing as Christians, we have options. Especially with a church almost on every other corner!
June 13th, 2008 at 7:57 am
You and I disagree on what the average American pastor does. Every large church should have several elders including several preaching elders. The “pastor led” structure in America lends itself to churches being led by one man, who even if sincere, is succeptible to power, ambition, pressure, and personal bias. He can have a personality that soon manipulates the other leaders to support what “he wants to do” (God’s will).
BTW - Moses was the meekest man that ever lived. That doesn’t seem to be the American norm. If you have a great and humble pastor you are blessed. Many churches are ripped apart by an abusive and misguided pastor.
Does an authentic shepherd decide to change the sheep food and when some sheep either get sick or balk he pushes them out? Or does he blend the meal to accommodate all his beloved sheep and wait on God to speak to those who do not desire the new feed that he BOUGHT from another shepherd?
And the other shepherd who sold him this new sheep food promised him he would GET MORE SHEEP, not so much that his present sheep would become healthier.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:05 am
I see the point of the OP with the wording, but not the intent. What’s the difference between “There will be discenters to the good change, let them leave - they get in the way of growth” and “remove Sunday School teachers for refusing to back down from their position on the Purpose Driven program”? Only the execution, not the overall game plan.
That is what I think is part of the problem to begin with. IMO a pastors job is not to lead, that’s what “governments” (KJV) is. Even then it’s not a leader, but a sometimes lead when people are stuck.
One of the things that stank to me about PDL/PDC the first time I heard it was all the marketing / business talk and the shift of a pastor looking after sheep to being a CEO with a budget. Saints don’t gather where there is a leader - they fellowship with the back of someones’s head in the pew in front.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:09 am
How is a programme biblical, fellowship or love? It’s what businesses do to make staff thing the new pop course will make them more efficient.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:09 am
Flagrant Drive-By!
“Touch not my anointed…” Or maybe it’s better stated by Bonita Bitrell: “Yes sir. Better NO one say nothin’ bad about Ms. Jenkins!”
June 13th, 2008 at 8:15 am
Dave - you make an excellent point. Some of these programs are clumsy attempts at using the sheep to get more sheep through business tactics, advertising, and other artificial means. It also implies that all churches are cookie cutter versions of themselves and can use the same program.
And when Warren taught the Jews that they can grow by implimenting these principles, what does that say about the spiritual? nature of that program?? It is for numerical growth which usually results in the church going deeply into debt by a major building program.
It doesn’t seem the shepherds lead, they PUSH.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Yes, the whole pastor as a CEO/grand visionary thing is something that bugs me about the PDL stuff as well. It’s probably because I have seen a lot of pastors who just enjoy telling people what to do.
I don’t know that Warren really encourages this, but there are definitely some pastors who have taken this thinking to an extreme. I’ve seen a lot of co-mingling between the John Maxwell leadership stuff and the PDL stuff, so I think some churches become very much about the pastor’s personality. That’s why so many experience a huge drop in attendance if a popular pastor leaves.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:21 am
That is exactly it, Rick. The entire book is set on the wrong foot by the assumtion that the number “40″ has magical powers. From there on it’s a prayer of Jabez. Growth = X + Y
June 13th, 2008 at 8:30 am
–And one more thing; why can we have compassion for a prostitute who pimps her two year old for drugs, and no compassion for this man who rightly or wrongly has been wounded by the church that he was a part of and committed to?–
Good question, PB. Noticed that, too.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:38 am
I think PD stinks.
I also think sheep don’t get to lead shepherds.
My question is this:
Is there ever a time for a local congregation’s leadership to put someone out if they are just constantly oppositional and adversarial to the leadership?
My criteria is this:
Unless there is a violation of doctrine (as defined by the local church’s statement of faith), demonstrated and proven immorality, or the misuse of funds then the leadership gets to decide how we “do things”.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:46 am
Agreed.
And I’ve seen a lot of people who like to tell the Pastor what to do.
Before Richard comes by I’ll just say that you know this is a lie right? Or at the very least a gross misrepresentation of the actual event.
And many churches fade into death because of poor leadership and an unwillingness to change.
So help us when we can’t figure it out but don’t tell us anything when we don’t ask for it?
Having been in the military, the business world, and the church I’ve got to say that I’m shocked by some of the views on leadership in this thread.
Unless I’m missing something I assuming that some here want a leader who bends to every flit and fancy that comes down the pike. Or at the very least every opinion in the church should be acted upon.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:48 am
BTW I also don’t like PD.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Um. I am sorry about the drive by nature here, as I need to get work–”like ministry”. But, I THINK that its six letters. Maybe it was just **satire** or **sarcasm**. I’ll give the benefit of the doubt.
For the record. I am one to talk. I hold the record for typos and misprints. I just love pointing them out in those that I strongly disagree with as it makes me feel better about myself.
June 13th, 2008 at 8:57 am
And so have I. My dad and my grandfather are both pastors. I grew up around people who constantly thought they knew how to do there jobs better than they did.
I have also seen the other side of the coin, though, as well. I have seen pastors who see what they do as not much more than a job. They really don’t seem to have much compassion for people in the congregation, and are willing to sacrifice almost anything to fill pews on Sundays.
No doubt that some people want that (not saying the people commenting here, though, really). I think that some of us who have gotten burned by pastors in the pastors really only want to be treated with respect. I don’t thinking submitting to someone’s spiritual authority gives the person with the authority to be a jerk.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:01 am
I think we can have compassion on both - at the same time, I don’t think we should condone the sin of divisiveness any more than we should condone the sin of prostitution. In the case of the prostitute, it was someone who recognized her state and desired change, but who could not seem to escape. With this gentleman, I’d say that the facts aren’t in to even know for sure what happened, and whether he recognizes any culpability on his own part, while still looking to point blame to anyone apart from himself.
So - as is probably human nature on my part, I don’t see these as necessarily apples-to-apples situations - both call for compassion, but both may not call for the same degree of sympathy.
1) If you have chosen to place yourself under submission to a body of elders at your church, as Chris earlier pointed out, that doesn’t mean that you will follow only where you desire to go.
2) If you have an issue with ANY curriculum, which you have expressed to the elders, if it has not been acted on in the manner you desired - that doesn’t mean that they are wrong/evil/etc.
3) If the elders have not agreed with your concerns or acted upon them, but you persist and persist in pestering them about it, at some point it is likely they will enact some form of discipline.
It very well may be that they resemble Kafka more so than Matthew 18 in dealing with you - and if that is the case, it is probably time to leave. (This is empathy on my part, BtW, not just sympathy.)
Much like malpractice, targeting the blame is usually faulty. In the case of malpractice, there are often times when people will refuse to sue the doctor most responsible for a medical mistake - because they know them or like them personally - but will usually sue the lab techs, etc. that they’ve never met - it is human nature to blame the faceless, nameless before you blame those you interact with and have some personal bond with.
In this case, and in others mentioned (and experienced), it is much more complicated and most (if not all) of the blame is local…
As for PDL, I find parts helpful, parts inane, and parts too pragmatic. I have also found that the way some implement it is the same way that I would install storm windows (read: badly). I remember chafing at having to change to standardized Sunday School curriculum during a “40 days” at a church we attended years ago. We ended up supplementing the material, as our class was rather mature, and then went back to what we had been doing previously after the 40 days was over. Nobody had a meltdown over it (that I know of), but it seemed a bit silly in the way it was implemented. Another church we used to attend prior to relocating to Indy, went through the “40 days” bit at about the same time - and, from talking to them, did a much better job taking the good parts and tossing the impractical/silly ones. As Warren, himself, notes - it’s not a one-size-fits-all deal for everyone, though a number of churches seem to treat is so…
June 13th, 2008 at 9:02 am
I haven’t been in military, but I have in business and my views on leadership are vastly different when it come to religion.
In my view of scripture that person comes from the gathering to suggest something. The umpire doesn’t tell the players how to play cricket, he only helps when they have a dispute.
It’s either business or it’s church. Gathering != leader; Even if we take the view of synagogue, there is much more fellowship and freedom abstract from a leader than modern churches. There is no heirachy in the Bible, simply roles people take. Paul never called himself nor had people address him as “Apostle Paul” and yet we are expected to call people Father…uh…Pastor.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:05 am
oops… meant to say four-letter word.
I am not saying that purpose driven doesn’t have it’s flaws. I think Warren would even say that it is just a program and not the end-all.
Back to the main point. The PD program, Rick Warrren nor Saddleback encourage pastors to turn into evil warlords when implementing these programs. To me it is like saying Smith and Wesson are encouraging gangstas to kill people because they are promoting hunting tools.
I have been through three PD transitions as church leadership. In all cases we grew and had a really good time. There were a few that didn’t like the music, or style of things… but we worked with those people. 99.9% stayed and helped us move forward. We even allowed one Sunday School teacher to reformat the materials for his own tastes.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:06 am
Hey, SJ - thank you for the honesty. It is more than we get from many of our drive-bys…
June 13th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Nathan that’s really encouraging to hear that story. Maybe I have had only had experiences.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Dave I’m not asking for people to bend down and kiss my ring.
I understand that Pastors have and do misuse their roles. But this does not negate that they are in leadership of the church. In some cases THE leader of the church.
This view that a Shepard is not a Leader has me miffed. Your cricket analogy doesn’t quite follow. Not only is a Pastor the Umpire but he is also an active participant in the match. If he was just an umpire how would that change the authoritarian view that you seemingly don’t approve of?
June 13th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Honesty, satire, truth, and stellar wit. Just a few services I offer.
cough.
I have been on the receiving end of some bad PD handling. And the thing is for me, when my church years ago did the “40 days of porpoise” which was extremely confusing as I had never seen seafood in church before–nevermind.
Actually, that church did go all out PD. And several people were, whether they knew it or not at the time, ‘driven” out. I was one, though I too did not entirely grasp what was going on. I knew I didn’t care for the more shallow music, and what looked like and for all intents and “purposes” was “change for change’s sake”. It wasn’t until later that I realized that the different music, the Sunday School courses, the barrages of messages about that fou–fiv– no six letter word “Change” were not in and of themselves the problem.
It was like when my truck started making a different noise back in high school. The noise wasn’t the problem–it was the bearing on the 4WD assembly. Something had broken or become affected by outside forces (dirt and grime) that made it start to make noise, and slowly disintegrate into iron filings.
The point being, it was what was behind the music, the courses, the messages that was bothering me, I just didn’t realize until later.
You’re going to find abuses anywhere along the spectrum from PD to 9 Marks. And, though I am not at all a fan of PD or Warren, I might concede that there are SOME good things in the program. But for me, speaking personally, the ‘good’ aspects are somewhat if not entirely suspect when they are found along side some plainly pragmatic or extra-Biblical ideas and methodologies. It calls into question the validity of, again, what is BEHIND the idea or truth.
A true statement doth not a truthful heart make.
Is Warren the antichrist? We should all know that by now. **sarcasm or satire, whichever it is**
Seriously though, Nathan, you may be right in that there is little or no explicit direction to behave badly. It is rather undenyable that there are MANY who have experienced and eerily similar circumstance on account of PD programs. So if you’re not denying that, I guess we’re fine.
Thanks.
And now I really have to get going.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:35 am
i know people whose church had 3 sunday services. All 3 with big attendance.
2 traditional/kinda blended in the main sanctuary and a full blown contemporary service in another part of the property.
The elders and senior pastor liked the format of distinguished services, judged it to meet the needs of their congregation, etc. etc. etc.
2 pastors on staff wanted them to go back to one big service with an aggressively “blended” feel after the new sanctuary was built.
The elders discussed, prayed, considered…and disagreed.
The 2 staff pastors stirred up folk–about 15% of the congregation. the pastors pushed, pushed, pushed and pushed.
The elders made it clear that they had made a decision and they were moving on.
They still pushed.
They were subsequently fired.
There was a rebellion in the congregation.
Blogs and email blasts about “saving the church”.
A vote of confidence was taken and the elders/senior pastor were confirmed by 85%.
Then about 10% left and…surprise, surprise…the 2 pastors fired were now planting a church with them.
It just goes to show that these things are about power, not trusting leadership and not knowing how to bow out gracefully when things come to a head and you aren’t in charge.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:38 am
Someone once said I was a real wit.
They were half right.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:41 am
nc - your story represents thousands of scenarios some of which are in different stages as we speak.
The structure of the American church is in shambles and like Samson we don’t even know it.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:44 am
So are we saying that “My experience tempers my view on things?”
So post modern of all of us.
S.J. for the record I agree with you. I’ll let you figure out about what. LOL
June 13th, 2008 at 9:47 am
“My experience tempers my view on things?”
No, I am saying my experiences ARE truth.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Chris,
No, my view in Scripture should (I wish I could say “always does”) temper my experiences.
One more PM implication and it’s “pistols at dawn” for you my friend.
June 13th, 2008 at 9:54 am
“The elders discussed, prayed, considered”
Ya, I’m sure they did while stuffing their faces at a local Shoney’s and discussing ways to get the pastor out! Hope the eggs were just a bit runny, not rubbery!
June 13th, 2008 at 9:54 am
**some ’s’ word indicating I did not literally mean what i just said**
June 13th, 2008 at 9:54 am
The second part that is.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:01 am
I think is true to a large degree. I think the old denominational power structures are dying off, and what will remain is going to look a lot different.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Sorry ’bout that! But just in case…
I’m rather post modern I own a S&W 9mm. Can I bring that instead?
June 13th, 2008 at 10:24 am
9mm! REAL men carry Colt 1911 45 ACP!
It would make me awful mad if somebody shot me with a 9mm.
At least it’s not a Glock–er, I mean “Tupper-Ware Special”
It’s okay, I’ll let you borrow my other 45. I know I’ll get it back…**again, not literal**
June 13th, 2008 at 10:25 am
actually, jonathan, they prayed, considered, etc. about the format of their church gatherings.
They and the senior pastor together.
They made a decision that was theirs to make.
2 staff pastors wouldn’t submit.
It was only after clear proof that they were stirring up members and other ministry staff that they were dismissed.
they deserved it.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:26 am
After I bought it I showed it to a guy at church who is a big time hunter and gun collector who said…”It’s a great gun if you want to kill paper and soda cans” LOL
June 13th, 2008 at 10:26 am
This sounds like the parallel of another trend that has taken the Hispanic church and brought division to many.
Maybe you guys have heard of the G12 format. Very similar to PD in terms of growth.
I have seen many hispanic churches divided because of G12. It goes on to say if someone does not agree with it, they should be let go.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Almost everyone I’ve ever talked to about that particluar program has had bad things to say about it. From what I understand, it makes the power struggle that occur in PDL look like a walk in the park.
I guess the thing is that whenever someone takes a program or model and turn into some kind of univeral cure-all, there will always be problems. Churches aren’t Wal-Marts.
June 13th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Phil,
that’s why i wonder about RW. The G12 started by a supposed vision from God to a Pastor he then turned it into a worldwide mandate.
We can’t ignore the spiritual aspect in this PD or G12. Division in a church is what the enemy craves.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:03 am
I agree with the fact that Satan tries to divide churches. I know I’ve already said I don’t like PDL, but I don’t blame Warren for all it’s misuses. I think Warren has done a lot of good, actually. I just think that there pastors who have taken his ideas and distorted them, and used them as a weapon. A car maker isn’t responsible if someone uses their car to run over someone.
I guess that’s the thing. I think a lot of people have been hurt by pastors, but I think aiming their critiques at Warren is just them looking for a scapegoat. I think in some ways these people feel powerless and having someone to blame gives them a little control back.
So I guess, in this issue, I can’t pick sides. I can’t say pastors are always right, nor can I say that people who leave churches are always right.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Ok,
so then the discussion continues. I present a case study….
Let’s say YOU are leading a church. You have been given the authority to lead the church to the best of your ability, always hearing from the Holy Spirit.
After looking at the landscape of the community, you find it to be ingrown, self-serving, selfish and not growing in any sense of the word. So, you pray long and hard, and decide to go in direction A (insert PDL, G12, 9 Marks, your own ideas, etc.). Hopefully direction A will help your members to become more healthy and vibrant people.
When you present the idea to the leadership, 85% are on board after they have prayed about it. The other 15% are not. They like the status quo and “small, home-town feel” of their church. You decided to move forward with the plan, having more than a majority confirm your direction.
You then present it to the church, and 75% are on board. The other 25% are with the other concerned leadership. The few dissenters are very vocal and make sure everyone knows they disapprove of your leadership.
What do you do? You know that you cannot let your community stay stagnant and unhealthy. But, 1/4th of your community is resistant to any change. Thoughs?
**Please note that I am not implying churches are unhealthy before a program is implimented. Nothing is implied here… just take the case study at face value.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Phil,
If you dig deep enough in any church, you are almost guaranteed to find people that were hurt by the leadership.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:32 am
“Let’s say YOU are leading a church.”
I reject that premise. Let us say you have ten elders and one comes across a program he thinks might be helpful. As he presents it, he knows that one of the priciples of that eldership is that any major decisions must be unanimous. Also every elder in is covenant with the others not to take an offense if any of his suggestions is not unanimous.
After six months of prayer and fastings, without any elders discussing it without all elders present, they vote. The vote is 7-3 for going with it, but it is not unanimous and according to the predetermined principles they agree to pray for one year with NO DISCUSSION, and asking God to help them all have NO OPINION in the situation. They will revisit it finally in one year.
Even if that program might help in areas, the elders are committed to keep the needs and welfare of the sheep first and foremost, and if the sheep were not ready they would never force anything upon them.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:37 am
ah, but that is not th case study my friend.
Is this a scriptural principle. It may be, and I just missed it. I am being serious.
I am really glad that THE shepherd doesn’t take this stance. Otherwise I would be one complacent and under grown individual. God never gives us more than we can handle, but he certainly puts us in very uncomfortable places for our own good. I am sure that Daniel was not ready to spend a night in a lion’s den. But, he ended up there anyways.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:41 am
There is a difference between preaching the Word without compromise, and implementing church programs at the whim of one man. I believe the unaminous agreement in major decisions is Scriptural and lends accountability. Changing the entire direction and teaching materials is certainly major.
And congregational voting on these issues is unscriptural as well.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Rick,
Every church is driven by some program, structure, or church plan. Anyone that says they aren’t are lying to themselves. We can try to come as close as possible to a biblical community, but it is somewhat impossible. It’s like someone saying that they are completely unbiased. They may be very close to center, but we are all influenced and swayed by something.
Curious, where do you get your unanimous decision making in scripture from. I would think that Paul parting ways from his brothers might suggest other wise
June 13th, 2008 at 11:48 am
BTW,
Sunday School at 9am
Fellowship at 10am
Worship at 10:30 am with:
* three hymns
* benediction
* scripture reading
* praise chorus
* preaching
* offering
* blessing
is still a man-made program.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:49 am
I can’t speak for my church (I’ve not delved into the organizational workings of the eldership), but the one I grew up in had something like an agreement on “unanimity”, though it allowed for abstention/recusal, rather than binary yes/no answers, on a number of issues.
June 13th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Chris L. - good.
Nathan - the elders also pledge to leave if they feel they have become so isolated and so obstructionist and they will leave in love. The others should beg him to stay. Christian love is just a myth if it cannot be shown in the most trying of circumstances.
But we as sheep must be lead that way.
June 13th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
I don’t know that I agree with the premise of your case study, I guess. Maybe my position is close to Rick’s in a way.
I guess the problem I have is that so much of this seems to be centered around the will of one person, or a board of people. Even if it’s working well, it seems like it’s promoting the idea that there are the people who are in ministry, and there are people who pay them and trust them to make the decisions for them.
I guess, ideally, I think a church leadership structure should be very flat with hardly any divide between the clergy and laity, if any. I think people who are natural leaders would come to lead in an organic way. I also think that the more we can get away from paid leadership/pastorate positions, the better. Money is just making the whole issue a bigger mess. A pastor needs to make a church grow to get a salary, and a congregation sees him as their paid employee.
So I guess, my feelings right now are sort of anti-establishment. I’m not saying everyone needs to think like me, but I feel like right now I can’t passionately defend any church growth program or method.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Haven’t read all the comments here, just want to comment on this one, which struck me as having been written by someone who has totally absorbed PD into his system:
. can in reality be:
“The whole leadership is following a pastor who they think can do no wrong. They have not checked out the new material, methods, philosophy themselves, and judged it according to scripture. They are pastor followers. This is especially a problem if the pastor also has not thought through the new material, methods, and philosophy but is simply doing it because “the whole leadership” that he admires supports it. The pastor’s “whole leadership” can be folks from the seminary at which he graduated, public authors or speakers, Billy Graham’s endorsement on the cover.
Also, the “whole leadership” does not necessarily include people who know the Word of God.
This statement makes the assumption that there is “one guy who doesn’t like it and is vocal about it.” There can be many who dislike something and aren’t vocal. They simply don’t want to “cause division” or “show a lack of tolerance.” They believe “it” will “pass over soon, then we’ll get back to normal.”
June 13th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Chris, as I have the article from the Jewish periodical itself regarding this event I would like to hear the other side of the story. That RW spoke at this Jewish event regarding PD principles and that he did not share the Gospel is indisputable. Wherein is the lie? Seriously. What does the pro-RW say about this. Even Richard couldn’t put much of a spin on it the last time it was brought up.
June 13th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Test,
Am I being moderated?
June 13th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Rescued you from the spam queue…
June 13th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
John we can take this to email if you don’t mind? I don’t want to hi-jack the thread.
If this is okay I’ll email you as soon as you say.
June 13th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Can I just say something? I know many of you have issues with the Reformation movement Christian churches, but I have been so blessed to have been taught and raised in BIBLICAL “hierarchy”. This is: NO PASTOR IS HEAD OF THE CHURCH. The church is lead by a board of elders, not the pastor. These elders are unpaid and ordained as servants, meeting the Biblical qualifications of the position of elder, and acting as the earthly shepherd of their own church flock. This group of men must realize that the minister/pastor/teacher answers to them (and God, of course), who in turn answer directly to God. Their leadership is that which we have submitted ourselves to as a member of the church (Christian). I believe we, as non-elders, can meet with them, give opinions and suggestions, but ultimately it is their decision. The greater responsibility is theirs, and as such, they should have the greater control. This is the NT system.
So in light of that, alot of the problems that I read here (true or hypothetical) are resulting from a inappropriate (dare I say…Unbiblical?) leadership, not as a direct result of any man-made system of organization!
June 13th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Interrupting:
If you haven’t heard, NBC’s Tim Russert suddenly collapsed and died of a massive heart attack this afternoon.
Keep his family in your prayers.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/russert-dies-of-apparent-heart-attack/index.html?hp
June 13th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Chris,
Email would be fine.
Thanks,
June 13th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Just heard that on the radio Evan, thanks for the heads up. Prayer indeed, that’s a very sad thing to happen…just like that, you know?
JOe
June 13th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
He was great. He got up this morning not suspecting he was about to enter eternity.
June 13th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Hey Rick…if you think about it…we didn’t either….
That’s just how it goes. God knows the number of our days, and we don’t. We should live each day like it was the only day we’ve ever had. But practically, this is impossible I feel. Ah quagmires…
Joe
June 13th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Very good point, Joe.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Don’t worry Dad, with the way your health has been for the last year you have thought of it and was faced with it for the better part of the year. Now that you’re feeling better, you can go back to your old ways!
June 13th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Yea, smokin’ and drinkin’ and clubin’, man, that’s the life!
June 13th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Considering that we are called to lead by serving, I have never (not commenting on present company) been to a church where that happened, it was always lead by leading in the business structure sense. The pastor was never a fellow labourer as Paul was, but up the front, or in his office, or in one case gardening four days a week. I have never been fed by a pastor, only evangelised at, powerpointed at or preached at about why some man made concept is so important and supported by the Bible. When these important things are fobbed off to the small groups, how am I supposed to believe that the pastor is supposed to lead?
I should make myself clear that I do support a level of authority in the church, just that I think it’s backwards. I think it should be more like in Zan’s post. An elder is not an elder 24/7, he’s a fellow Christian and does his elder job when needed.
Another great example just in a minute ago with the latest RW ministry toolbox:
(My hyperbole:)”Pastors, here’s how to extract more money out of your already poor sheep. God forbit the Church which is God’s holy place should suffer like the people are!”
June 13th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
I’d like to hear that too. I saw the videos on synagogue 3k and it looked pretty clear on them.
June 14th, 2008 at 7:47 am
Here’s another drive by for you:
Zan offered up the concept that it might be unBiblical and is inappropriate to have a church structure that does not have a plurality of elders.
I myself am a fan of elder leadership, of course when everyone behaves Biblically with each other, which we all would admit is a weakness that will arise no matter what form of Church “government” one ascribes towards.
However, and if I am misrepresenting Zan here, my apologies, I would not say that a non-elder lead structure is unBiblical.
For one simple reason. There are church bodies all over the world that, for one reason or another, simply cannot have a plurality of elders for they barely have a plurality of members. As these members grow and mature, I think it would be a good idea to head the direction of eldership.
So here is the problem, and even if I’m wrong about Zan’s stance, this is still a problem and I am now speaking to those who would and do say that church organization that is other than eldership is “unBiblical”, and also those that would say non-Pastor primary leadership is un Biblical.
By that, we need to concede first that church bodies are not perfect and that “unBiblical” practices and ideas (like free will, Rick :)) will be found in most any congregation. But to really say that a church is “unBiblical” is to say, in effect, that they either need to practice a huge bout of church discipline, split and hopefully regroup with those who are true believers, disband completely or do something that would dissolve what was known as the body before for in being “unBiblical”, they did not honor God’s word and therefore did not honor Him. This is serious, even grave, business.
I know this extreme isn’t what Zan meant. So don’t let iggy come at me with guns blazing in here defence–Chris thought about trying something like that yesterday until it was discovered he had a 9mm, poor fella, it’s a pea shooter. Anyway.
But I did want to point out that I do believe there is SOME, I repeat SOME leeway in Church body organization and leadership structures due to the plain fact that no two bodies are the same in the same town let alone across the world (speaking of size and minor ideology, for the church should be of one accord no matter where and what culture). Again, like I said about why I am not at all a fan of RW and the PD, it’s not so much the “how” in most respects but the “why” things are the way they are that I have a problem. My distaste for PD directly is respective to my conviction against what is generally behind it, that is, over emphasized pragmatism, man centered theology, business oriented methodology, etc etc.
In the words of Tigger
TTFN
June 14th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Careful SJ, with that kind of attitude you’re going to be in an ODM’s sites soon enough.
June 14th, 2008 at 9:58 am
SJ,
You do NOT misrepresent what I have said. Good job, and thanks!
I think it is important to understand that there is still alot of leeway for how a church is run, while still being lead by the elders. Let me use one church I know as an example…The board of elders is the spiritual leader of the church. The STAFF, on the other hand, runs the “business” of the church, including the staffing, preaching, programming, services, children’s programs, etc. The lead minister is basically an executive, managing the other ministers and doing the teaching on Sundays and throughout the week. The elders are there for spiritual guidance, support, leadership, correction, etc….all the tasks that come with being the shepherd of a church community. This is, of course, a large church of around 3000 or more (not sure what the most recent stats are). You see, just because the elders are, in the end, responsible for the teaching and guiding of this body, there is great freedom in the construction of the organization below them.
As for the plurality of elders, what is the Biblical position of this? What was done historically? (1st - 2nd century) It is my gut (NOT Biblical, btw!) to say that there should always be at least 2, purely for accountability. But one other benefit to that is the emotional and labor support, that is definitely encouraged in the text. Is it wise to embark on starting a church with just that one person? I don’t believe so. It can become a one man show too easily. And pride enters the scene…
June 14th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Hi Guys,
Last night while going to sleep, God convicted me of some things I said here. Some of the topics here are a little sensative to me for various reasons, and I typed certain things without love in my heart. I deeply apologise for anything that may have offended or seemed like attacks.
Dave
June 16th, 2008 at 11:28 am
say has anyone ever read or looked into the claims in the book:
Who’s Driving the Purpose Driven Church? by James Sundquist
cause it has some really big accusations against Warren and his movement.