In the span of six weeks, two
prominent megachurch pastors offered humble apologies for matters related to
church government.
The first came in a blog
post by James MacDonald, pastor of Harvest Bible Church in Chicago.
MacDonald, who received criticism for a blog post four years ago that said
congregationalism was from Satan, apologized April 16 for his “inflammatory,”
“unbalanced,” and “unfair” analysis of churches who give final authority in
decision-making to its members.
MacDonald says while he still
holds to an elder-ruled church polity—not to be confused with elder-led
churches, which still give final authority to members—he admits, “What has
changed is my confidence that elder rule is a better protection against satanic
attacks on a local church than congregational governance that attempts to be
biblical in distributing authority among mature church members.”
Further, MacDonald says, he has
realized that with both elder-ruled and congregational models, “The potential
for damage to a church seems likely in both models if a lack of humility is
resident in those participating in the governance.”
The second apology came from Matt
Chandler, pastor of The Village Church in Dallas. After concerns related to
several church discipline cases went public on news outlets and the
blogosphere, Chandler told
Christianity Today May 28 that
elders at the Village Church were guilty of a “domineering” approach in some
cases and that he would be publicly apologizing to his church the following
Sunday morning.
“We have sinned against some
people—and we are owning that before God and specifically before the people we
have hurt,” Chandler said. He issued a lengthy, convincing apology during his sermon
May 31.
I’m thankful for the humility
by both of these men to own up to prideful comments and actions in such a
public way. They did what was right and in the right way. I believe each of
them to be sincere apologies.
Both of these scenarios are a
striking reminder of the need for humility in the church. As Paul exhorts, “Do
nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more
significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own
interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among
yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,” (Philippians
2:3-5).
The relationship between church
leadership and members can easily be fractured when we fail to reflect Christlike
love and humility toward one another.
Likewise, the Apostle Peter
exhorts elders to shepherd the flock that God has entrusted to them with
carefulness and tenderness rather than compulsion and tyranny. He also urges
church members to submit themselves to the elders’ care. (1 Peter 5:1-5). He concludes, “Clothe
yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for ‘God opposes the
proud but gives grace to the humble.’” Here, the call to humility is applied to
both leaders and members.
Additionally, the scenarios
with MacDonald and Chandler remind us to think critically about church
government.
The church growth, or seeker-sensitive,
movement of the 1990s encouraged churches to take a businesslike approach to
leadership and structure, with CEO pastors steering the ship in a “more
efficient” system that avoided the liabilities of too many hands in the
decision-making pot (i.e., congregationalism). Even congregational churches
that adopted this approach essentially relegated the members’ decision-making
solely to approving a budget and calling a new senior pastor.
In recent years, more churches
have adopted a plurality of elders as leadership. But, while I believe having
elders is more biblically supported than the CEO-style of church leadership, I
fear that some of the same “business principles” that guided the CEO model have
filtered down into the elder model as well. For example, elder-ruled churches simply
swap out the CEO for a board of trustees and minimize the biblical role of the
congregation in matters of doctrine, membership, and discipline. (see Matthew
18:15-17; Acts 6:1-5; 1 Corinthians 5; 2 Corinthians 2:6-8; 2 Timothy 4:3).
But even in elder-led, congregational churches, these business practices can
find expression when elders overstep their authority, choosing control over
compassion and policies over people.
Baptists have historically been
advocates of both congregational polity and, prior to the 20th century, a
plurality of elders (see Mark Dever’s By Whose Authority: Elders in Baptist Life).
Even the first president of the Southern Baptist Convention, W.B. Johnson,
spoke of this in his book The Gospel
Developed. The two can co-exist provided both the elders and members
exercise the humility of Christ.
But, ultimately, MacDonald is
right—regardless of the model of church government (elder rule, elder led,
single pastor, congregational, etc.), abuses abound when we do not demonstrate
Christlike concern for and submission to one another. So, brothers and sisters,
whichever camp you find yourself in, let’s practice this kind of humility and
love. When we do, Christ will be glorified as the gospel is put on display to a
watching world.
No comments:
Post a Comment