Now, about interacting with contemporary religious leaders, we need to remember that unlike Jesus' time, the church today allows for a wider circle of leaders. Anyone placed in a position where there are leading at least one person, acting as a representative of the body of Christ, is considered to be a leader. In most cases this means they receive the proper training and education to lead in the role they are given. And most of the leaders in the church I think are doing a fair job and do not behave in an unbiblical way. But many leaders in the church today, have entered into behavior that reflects that of the religious leader of Jesus' day. Being in a position to know they place impossible burdens on people, asking the gay man to change his ways before allowing him into the body of Christ, or asking an elderly woman with little money to provide an offering that she cannot afford, or excluding a woman from the group because she has had an abortion (something she cannot undo now). The Church leaders manipulate scripture to bring judgment on people, as I discussed in the post below. Others exclude people, rather than include them in their small group, bible study, prayer group, etc. because they have a purple mohawk, or are living with their boyfriend, etc. But remember, Jesus ate with prostitutes and tax collectors, he had adulterers as disciples, because his mission was to include, not exclude. So many of these people in church leadership positions, act counter to the biblical message with regard to people they see as "sinners." So, using Jesus as our guide, how do we interact with these leaders today.
One thing to understand is that, even though Jesus is our guide, he is God and so he does hold a special authority that we do not have. It is because of Jesus' authority that he could speak to the religious leaders so harshly and heap judgment upon them. We read in Mark 1:22 that the people Jesus was teaching in the synagogue "were astounded at [Jesus'] teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” Now remember, the Scribes were the authority on Scripture when Jesus was around. But Jesus' authority was so great, that he made the Scribes look like they had no authority at all. It was because of Jesus' status as God that he could speak so harshly to them. And yet, biblically speaking, when we are confronted with a church leader who is in the wrong, we are given a duty to respond to them.
As Jesus spoke to them boldly, we are to be bold; the difference is that we are required to be respectful. The biblical precedent for this is Romans 13, among other passages, which teach us to be respectful to all authority. They are in a leadership role, and because of this our respect is due. The problem in the past is that we have given too much respect to the leaders in our church, placing them on a pedestal above us. We have forgotten that there is really no difference between the pastor and us, or other church leaders and us. We respect them and make them inerrant, trusting everything they say because of their position. But there is no difference between church leaders and us. Respect is due to them because of their leadership role, but they are not to be seen as omniscient and perfect. It is because of this that people are so often shocked when a pastor does fail in some way. The higher up on a pedestal you place a church leader, the harder they will fall when they sin. But we all sin and fall short of the glory of God, even church leaders. Leora is right, in a comment below, to point this out and say that grace is due even to church leaders. That is why the principle I discuss below is important in confronting church leaders who have acted like Pharisees.
First I want to direct the reader to Acts 4:1-22 and Acts 5:17-42. This is a great example of how the disciples responded to the wrongs of the Church leaders. In both cases Peter and John were brought before the religious counsel because they were teaching that Jesus was the promised Messiah. In each case Peter showed nothing but respect and stated only the facts concerning what they had experienced as Jesus' disciples. In Acts 5 when Peter is told to stop teaching about Jesus, he responds by respecting their authority when he says, "we will let you judge whether we are right or wrong," and then he proceeds to answer boldly and directly by saying, "we know what we saw with Jesus and we cannot in good conscious stop teaching about him." They were direct, they were bold in answering them, but they remained respectful of who they were speaking to.
The principle to follow in speaking to today's religious leaders is an old one but a good one, it comes from Matthew 18:15-20 which reads:
[15] “If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one. [16] But if you are not listened to, take one or two others along with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. [17] If the member refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if the offender refuses to listen even to the church, let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. [18] Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. [19] Again, truly I tell you, if two of you agree on earth about anything you ask, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven. [20] For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.”
This is a simple 4 step process. First you go directly to the leader, alone, to address the wrong with him or her. This prevents embarrassment, It avoids the sense that the leader is being ganged up on. It is the gentlest way of handling the situation. If he or she listens and apologizes to the person wronged, and corrects the situation, great. If not, you go to step two and bring one or two people with you to corroborate the fact that you are not simply advocating your opinion that they really are in the wrong. If this doesn't work, you get the church involved. This might bring about a little more embarrassment, but it still allows for the reconciling of this person and allows him or her to maintain their leadership role. If the person is still stubborn and refuses to accept correction, the person must be dismissed from their position for the health of the people of the church. This is the best way to approach a leader who has taken the wrong path, allowing for respect, but facilitating boldness and directness. Below is an excerpt from my latest chapter where I give an example of how this might look in practice.
"As a quick example, imagine a member of your small group admits to being gay. Upon hearing this the leader of the small group exclaims, “in order to remain in our group, in the church, and in God’s good graces, you need to renounce being gay, ask God and the church members for forgiveness, and refrain from engaging in homosexual behavior from this point on!” Besides not following the Matthew 18 principle, this leader has greatly embarrassed this man who, in spite of his fear, just confessed in front of everyone that he is gay. He got exactly the reaction he was afraid of receiving, judgment and condemnation. In order to correct this wrong, you first go talk to the man who has just confessed to being gay, and show him God’s grace through acceptance and love, and you tell him not to worry about what the leader has just said, that the Bible promises that those who accept Jesus as their savior are put right in God’s eyes. You then approach the leader, after you have brought comfort to the injured man, and in private you tell him that whether homosexuality is a sin or not, that is no way to talk to a fellow believer of Christ, and that Jesus would not have responded to a confession like that in the way he had. You tell the leader that we are all sinners and need God’s love and acceptance to help us overcome sin in our lives and that if homosexuality is a sin, it is unreasonable to ask this man to quit it before he is allowed back into the body of believers. If he listens and apologizes to the hurt man, then your job has been accomplished. If not, you follow the chain of command as it is presented in Matthew 18, eventually dismissing the leader if it is necessary."
God Bless
-Brandon
No comments:
Post a Comment