Polluted Polity

Introduction

Unless you are marooned on a desert island or exercising a media boycott, you have encountered the news of the attempted coup at Coral Ridge Church in Florida. A group of members opposed to the continued Pastoral Leadership of Tullian Tchividjian sought his removal. They brought in some Denominational personnel to referee the fight (let’s be honest, that is exactly what this was). They conducted this fiasco diplomatically. Each 'side' (cf. 1 Cor. 1:10-17, 3:1-4) had ten spokespersons who defended 'their' perspective. Better this than some other scenarios I have encountered.

There were a multitude of errors committed by a host of people involved in this scenario. I simply list a few. 1) Church mergers are seldom harmonious and effective initiatives - they almost always fail. 2) One of the most crucial aspects of calling a Pastor is 'fit' - - does the man fit the congregation and the congregation fit the man. That this is not the case here is obvious to the Blind Man in John 9! TT is 38, a majority of the CR Congregation is 60+. 3) Change is a process not an event. Those members with long standing participation saw their traditions being quickly jettisoned in favor of structures they absolutely oppose. Once emotional opposition is established, and it most certainly was in this case, forget rational or even exegetical solutions. It became an "us" verses "them" cat fight. There are many more issues, but this brief list reveals the struggle that almost had to ensue given the multiple failures on both sides of the equation.

Thesis

It should not be possible for a congregation to rise up and depose the Pastor simply because they are unhappy with peripheral issues (he does not wear a robe, he does not conduct 'altar calls' at the close of the service, etc.). This is nothing more than a popularity contest and it denigrates the office of Pastor, The Church and most tragically the LORD. (In a CT interview TT was asked - If you were an un-churched person reading about dissident church members trying to oust their pastor, how open would you be to seeing Christianity as the answer for your life? His response = Not very open. Francis Schaeffer once said that division inside the church gives the world the justification they're looking for not to believe.) ABSOLUTELY TRUE and how many people in South FL did not hear about this circus? There is not a single thread of exegetical substantiation for this kind of insanity. The process of democratic governance is drawn from culture not the text of Scripture.

The question then becomes - - Why is this permitted as standard practice in the majority of Evangelical churches? The answer is clear. Churches are not governed by Special Revelation. They are governed by The Constitution, The By-Laws or worse, Roberts Rules of Order! Research conducted by FOTF and H.B. London revealed that 25% of Evangelical Pastors reported that they have been 'fired' or chose to leave rather than being fired at least once (Chuck Swindoll is among this elite group of Shepherds).

Proposed Solution

1. When considering a Pastoral Position, thoroughly and with laser like precision clarify this issue and secure an absolute binding commitment codified in a document by all parties to this principle – all polity and ministry issues will be governed by the clear and precise exegesis of the text of Scripture. If the proposed action or initiative does not have support from the text of Scripture it is not carried out. If any existing documents differ with this premise they are modified to harmonize with Scripture or discarded in favor of the Word of God.

2. Determine the issue of “Fit”. Is the position you are considering a genuine Christ honoring alliance of Pastor & People, or, will you be the latest in a long line of discarded Shepherds? Unapologetic honesty on the part of all concerned is crucial in this process.

3. There is a clear and unambiguous written statement that the principle set forth in #1 above is the final arbiter in all matters. There is a well defined decision making process that is applied in all matters without apology or exception. Approval is never granted to decisions or initiatives that are in conflict with God’s Word. Votes are never taken on any matter that is clear in God’s Word.

4. Leadership is not an issue of ‘democracy’, but rather, one of gentle, courageous and prudent direction taken from the Word of God and communicated to His people; communication is clear, frequent and abundant. Affirmation is expressed by God’s people having been apprised of the mind of God on specific issues. When there is ambiguity or questions, those matters are addressed with the person or persons having the questions, not as a ‘floor fight’ which merely provides a venue for the malcontents to champion their cause.

Much more can be written on this topic but I would appreciate your response and thoughts on this vital issue of Church Polity.