Leonard—If anything I can take your first paragraph and say that many in leadership in a certain church were boasting about the sin committed and did not expel those who are guilty.  To differentiate between “expose” and “expel” is semantics and not worth discussion, as the end result is the same, get the sin out.  In the cases of these pastors, nobody is doing that, so the blogs will. 

And again, this is why we are having this discussion.  You don’t believe they are God’s instrument.  I know that they are.  I only found one such blog after much prayer to the Lord to fix the problems in a place I used to be, and give opportunity to people like typical congregants to expose wrongdoing.  I know it was an answer to prayer, and so this, like the semantics problem above, will have to be left to our own preference in belief. 

I also believe that your use of introductions to epsitles as grounds for singular “rights” within the church, are off.  I take those introductions to Paul’s epistles as his stamp that he writes from the Holy Spirit, as God speaking, as all scripture is God-breathed.  I don’t believe you can apply that to “only Paul could confront”. 

You’re going in a very dangerous direction, and I won’t have too much more interest in talking about this with you if you continue in that direction.  I’m not about to crown certain pastors as alone having Paul’s “apostolic authority”, and the rest of us are mere peasants in the Kingdom that are their victims whenever they like.  I have no “Pope”, and I’m not taking on one now.  If I don’t have the “right” to speak out at wrongdoing, in your spiritual economy, then you and I are too far apart to ever find common ground here.  I don’t believe any pastor is a “pope”, and I don’t believe any pastor has greater grounds with the Lord than I.  We are all equal. 

Lastly, 1 John 3 is debatable in it’s application to what you’re applying it to.  If I take your interpretation, then I’m continually in sin for having material goods and not finding someone poor to give them to.  I reject such interpretation, because it is a never-ending “sin”. 

This is why I have no “pope”.  They’d have me destroyed....

Garret… are you serious?? You can’t be!  so if I get on here and say ... you know I can’t verify this but I’ve been told Garrett is having an affair, that would be ok with you because I’ve said other things in the past that are true.... really come on --- you really don’t believe that! Sounds to me you’ll defend PP no matter what because it was an “answer to prayer for you”.  No you’re right you don’t have a “pope” - maybe an idol!

G,
I’m not “trying hard” to insult you.  I am merely challenging your blind allegiance to something that has faults which you are not prepared to admit.  I asked you earlier to provide scripture for defense of what I brought up.  You did not.  Instead you said something which is completely unscriptural.  I am sure you have been very hurt by pastors and others.  No church is perfect.  Every denomination, or fellowship will have people who are blinded to their own sin serving or even being employed by them.  I am not excusing that.  My issue is bringing up unwholesome, unverifiable information whether it’s concerning a pastor or not; you can not excuse that.  Being hurt does not excuse sin against another person.  I’m not saying you personally have done that - I have no way of knowing but you condone others who do at the very least.  I have been very hurt by family members in the past (who hasn’t?).  Do I then have the right to get in the internet and drag their name across a blog whether what they did to me was justified or not, true or not?  I say ‘no’!
Oh BTW - I love my church (I dont attend CA in case you’re wondering) but I would not blindly defend things done there if I truly felt they were unbiblical.  If I thought my pastor was doing something illegal I would go to the authorities.

Ann—

“Blind allegiance to something that has faults” is exactly what the blogs challenge with certain pastors, and those who follow them.  We’re looking at the same mentalities from two different sides. 

To say “no church is perfect” is to permit whatever is going on.  I can say that about anything.  Therefore, no Christian is perfect, and sometimes they say things on blogs that you won’t like.  See?  It works that way, too.  If it works for the imperfect church, then it works for the imperfect Christian.  If the imperfect church is above correction, so are the blog-posting Christians. 

Difference between us is, I don’t think they’re saying things on the blogs that are wrong, and I support their existence as providing ministry to those that were victims of pastoral ungodliness.

I agree Bernie, the internet surely does have this potential.

However, it doesn’t justify abuse and blatant sin, anymore than did putting blasphemy or defamation of character or gossip or divisive speech into print in the 15th century, as the scripture you cited affirms.

Wendi

What bothers me most about all this (blogging to expose an issue) is how quick people are to let their difference in opinion within someone else become a public debate. Everyone should indeed be entitled to their own thoughts and have a voice to share them BUT when they quickly resort to the using a medium like the internet for leverage… it’s scary. I am also bothered with how often I see someone in an internal “church” debate quote scripture over and over to try and justify their plight. Secular society sees nothing more than a hypocritical “church” fighting amongst its members and that certainly can’t be a good example of how we should be living as believers and followers of Christ.

OK… let me chime in with my feelings on this issue.  I guess I can, since I’m the one that got us started! 

My feeling is that if there is a conflict in the local church it should be kept in the local church as much as possible whenever possible.

Let’s say, for example, that I felt my pastor was teaching something that was heresy.  Here’s what I feel my obligation would be:

1.  Talk to my pastor.  Explain why I think he’s in error.  If he agrees and changes, I’m finished.

2.  If not, I Timothy says that noone should entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.  At this point, I would go to my church leadership and share my concern.  There is a higher burden of proof when accusing an elder; and doing so unjustly is a very severe matter. If there is resolution there, then I’m finished.

3.  If I’m a part of a denomination structure or hirarchy, then I would proceed to the next level.  If there is no resolve there, then I’ve exhausted my alternatives.  At that point, the burden (and judgement) is on them as the leaders of the church.  I’ve done all I can.  It could be that I was entirely right in my opinion of the situation.  If so, then so be it… I’ve done my part.  It could also be that I was wrong in the matter (since the pastor, elders, and denominational leadership all disagreed with me).  Either way, so be it; and I feel that I have done all I can.

At that point, if no resolution is made to the situation, I think it’s in my best interest to move on.  That means leaving fellowship and finding another place to worship; quietly and without kicking and screaming because I didn’t get my way.

I’ve actually had this happen to me in the past few years.  I went through all the right procedures, and ultimately it did not go my way.  The result was a pastor that was really goofed up being sent to another church in another state without the church knowing any of the past situation.  Was that healthy?  No.  DId I do all I could do to prevent it?  Yes, within the discipline set up within our church structure I did.

Could I have started a blog, telling about all the meetings we had during the process?  Telling all the things that were said on both sides?  Printed all correspondance and published all emails?  Yes, I could have.  But I chose not to.

Why?  Because there is a point when you have to give it up.  Allow the people who are ultimately responsible for the health and spiritual authority of a congregation or church to carry out that authority, even if it’s wrong (or if it’s right and I just don’t agree with it).

So, this whole topic of blogs to go against church leadership, I think, for the most part, is wrong.  It is much better to handle things (especially conflict in the body of Christ) discretely and through the proper, biblical channels to bring things to resolution.

That’s my 2 cents worth.

Todd

PS—I also, really didn’t want this to turn into a Calvary Chapel Albuquerque or Phoenix Preacher thread again; so let’s try to stay away from that.  While it’s a good example of this type of thing; I don’t want to air that dirty laundry here again.  Discussion of how internally it could’ve been taken care of would be fitting though.

DanielR—It is not always that easy, to be concerned solely with the reputation of the pastor in question.  Sometimes it is the pastor that is ruining the reputations of others, and the blogs permit equal ability for the truth to come out. 

I know I can’t expect a group of ministers on a ministry website to understand, in fact I’d be surprised if any of you were to find anything worthy of such blogs.  Nevertheless, they have provided much needed accountability to some pastors that see themselves as God

I agree Daniel, that Todd’s comment, “I didn’t get my way” or our response when this happens sums it up.

Sometimes we think we’re right, and we’re not.  Sometimes we think we’re right and we are.

The rightness or wrongness of or our position shouldn’t guide how we behave in regard to a disagreement with the leadership in our churches.  God sometimes ordains bad leaders who make bad decisions (consider Saul).  He ALWAYS ordains fallen leaders (that’s all He has to choose from).

If we can’t submit to particular leadership, after expressing our concerns in the manner Todd described, we can move on.  Whether we’re right or wrong about the issue that prompted us to move on is between us and God.  That’s all.  Nobody else.

Wendi

I agree with DanielD and Wendi (only because they agree with me!)

Just to clarify my situation; it was a situation where I am sure I was correct.  It was a situation where the thing in question was a moral sin specifically prohibited in scripture.  But after going through all the proper channels things were not necessarily resolved the way I think they should’ve been.  But that’s ok, because I did all I feel I was biblically called to so.

God’s word doesn’t say to work through the structure that is there, and if that doesn’t work, go on a personal crusade or take things into your own hands.

Is it possible that the thing that happened that I crusaded against will surface again at another church because this leader was allowed to continue to lead?  Yep.  Strong possibility of re-occurance.  I could make a strong case for ‘shouting it from the rooftop’ to make sure that didn’t happen; but I don’t think that’s my responsibility.  The responsibility for that lies squarely with the leadership in place that allowed that to happen.

I’ve not seen one case where these types of blogs have ultimately made a difference.  They haven’t made Skip Heitzig responsible; they didn’t solve the split at BCC in Nashville; and they are only setting up a future split at Bellevue Baptist.

But it’s my church.  No it’s not.  Not any more your church than it is their church.

I do see one good side to this type of thing from my perspective.  (And I admit I’m a bit two faced here)… these type of blogs do give me something to write about; and serve as excellent case examples of the changing face of church conflict.  In most all of these church situations there were basic leadership mistakes that were made that shouldn’t have been made.  Those are things that I think are valueable for us to talk about here at MMI.  But for the individual churches involved, it’s not a positive situation for them to live through.  (Hope that makes sense).

Let’s use Garrett’s CA and CC as an example…

Should we stand by and let the Calvary Chapel movement go to hell in and handbasket?  Personally, if we’ve worked through the accountability system set up by Calvary Chapel and have exhausted my options within the system; then yes, I feel I have done all I can do.

But what about all the future people who will be hurt?

Not to sound crass; but is that my responsibility?  Not really; it’s the responsibility of the CC leadership; Chuck Smith on down.

I won’t be judged on how the CC thing turns out.  I will be judged on how well I worked through the proper channels to promote change.

That’s one reason I get a little weary of things like Bernie’s vendetta against John Haggee.  Bernie isn’t even a part of Haggee’s church.  To his credit, he’s tried to contact Haggee and work through his structure.  If that doesn’t work, then I say:  Leave it alone.  It’s up to John Haggee’s leadership to rebuke and discipline him.

Same with the ‘discerning’ websites that are out to expose everyone from David Jeremiah to Rick Warren to Rob Bell.  It doesn’t mean we have an opinion.  It doesn’t mean that we don’t share our opinions from time to time.  But putting up a website exclusively to bring other Christians or movements down is heavy stuff; stuff that I think you really need to be careful with.  When possible, work with the individuals involved; and work through their chain of command.  And for goodness sake, when it’s not under your jurisdiction; let it go.

God is ultimately in control.  He’s not surprised by any of this.  Matter of fact, there’s nothing that would surprise Him.  So stop trying to dictate His agenda; especially when it conflicts with our own. 

Again; just a little clarification on my 2 cents worth.

Todd

Well this is too much to take on.  I’ve had very long dissertations written by me and to me by others (4 people to be exact), here and in email.  I don’t know if this was the full intent of the webmaster when the article was originally posted, but I guess without people like me there would have been nothing to talk about with this in the first place

Wendi—I don’t know that every little detail of what would be done in the NT church, is covered.  We have examples to follow, the living Word of God, the Bible, to be the final authority, and we have the living Lord Jesus Christ to answer prayer.  If different people didn’t receive that Word different ways, then there’d be one church and we’d be done with all conversations.  So am I in absolute “rightness”, or are you? 

And of course the answer is, neither of us is.  But not every little detail is listed out biblically of what should and shouldn’t happen in the church.  I know some people would like to believe that it is, but those people are typically so fixed in their view that they’re right on everything, that there’s no point in talking to them at all.  I stick with what I’m sure about, that Jesus is the only way, and the Bible is His Word.  I have to take from His Word what I believe it says, as you do.  We’ll both be responsible to that in that last day, when the rewards are handed out. 

For me, at this point in my walk with Jesus, I’ve seen the Lord work in the hearts of those who were hurt.  The blogs helped them.  Did it change anything in the churches?  I know of one where the pastor’s indiscretions were so severe, and so well layed out on the blog, that he had to step down.  But some don’t change.  If there’s such a huge issue that required the starting of a blog to address, that pastor is already so far into pride, he ain’t gonna change because of a blog.  Then the blog exists to help the hurt.  Jesus will leave the 99 to help the one.  He will always do that, whether “Pastor so-and-so” likes it or not. 

So I don’t see that it’s unbiblical to take it to the church (now a cyber entitiy, again whether people like that or not), if the problems don’t change via Matthew 18.  Which brings me to.....

Todd— I no longer trust man to just take care of it, and me leave quietly.  More will be hurt.  I will speak.  Just leaving and forgetting it, isn’t “trusting God”.  Then let Him do everything, and I’ll go golfing.  Instead, we’re used by God to preach, to teach, to correct, to support, to comfort.  This is a mode of correction.  A hated one, I know, but still a mode nonetheless…

Garrett,

I never said it was easy, I said “if at all possible, things should be handled internally, in accordance with scripture”.  I also said I empathize with people who feel they’ve exhausted all recourse and resort to a blog.  I just think a blog is too public a venue, and should be a last resort.

If a person has an issue with his or her Pastor/Priest/Minister, take it up with that person, if it can’t be resolved then take it up with the Elders or Board.  If they all disagree with you, take another look at the issue because the majority is not usually wrong.  If you feel the issue is scripturally clear you might want to run it by the congregation, or at least some of them, to make sure you’re not all alone in your concerns.  What I’m saying is that every avenue should be thoroughly exhausted before you take an issue outside the church to a public venue like a blog.

Writing or e-mailing the board seems fine, but to then take a personal response to that correspondence (not from a board member) and post that publicly on a blog seems like a breach of the responsibility we all have to address issues in accordance with scripture.  I freely admit I don’t know all the details and frankly don’t want to know.  I’m not saying it’s never acceptable to take an issue into the public forum, but it should be weighed heavily and it should be a last resort.

There was a Pastor in my area who had allegedly assualted several women in his congregation, and had involved elements of the church in pressuring the women not to report the incidents.  I say apparently because again I don’t know all the details and don’t want to, but this was clearly a case of something that needed to be taken outside the church, specifically to the police because a crime had apparently been committed.

Churches split over issues sometimes, entire denominations have split and at least one looks like it will split soon because the two sides are going in different directions.  Sometimes it may be necessary to leave a church and find one that fits what you agree with.  At what point are you standing up for truth and at what point are you just griping because you didn’t get your way?  If the majority agrees to adopt a policy or doctrine or worship style or whatever you disagree with maybe it’s time to find a church where the majority agree with you.  And if an issue is truly an issue of heresy, maybe you stay and fight against the heresy.  As I said, I’m not saying it’s never acceptable to take an issue into the public forum, but it should be weighed heavily and it should be a last resort.

As far as it depends on me, I will try and live at peace with everyone…