Threads from Henry's Web

Category: Christian Ministry

  • Burned Out Pastors

    One of my observations in both churches of which I’ve been a member and churches I’ve visited, representing several denominations, is that the actual job of the pastor is so enormous and multi-faceted that no human being could actually perform it.

    That isn’t what was envisioned in the New Testament, but it has become pervasive. Responding to an article in the New York Times, Arthur Sido has some excellent comments on this point. I’d add my small quibble–I’d say “men and women” where he says “men,” but in general I just say a hearty “Amen” to his post.

    What truly bothers me on this issue is the way in which we cling to stupidity in the church. There are many cases where the Bible asks us to stand against the viewpoint of our secular culture. But any business consultant could tell us that the model of church management we use isn’t going to work, and that the actual job description of a pastor is impossible to fill. Those who try are destined for much heartache.

    I do see a place for the professional ministry, in the sense of people paid for full time service. But both to save their sanity, and to allow the church to accomplish its full mission, we need every member active in ministry, which those paid full time equipping the whole body.

    In this case we’re running hard against both Biblical commands and common sense. I wonder why we do that!

  • UMC Rather than SDA – Again

    This was brought to my attention when I read the text of Ted Wilson’s address to the SDA General Conference. (I listened to he first 10 minutes as well, but preferred reading.) Why am I interested in the sermon presented by the new president of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists? I am, after all, a member of a United Methodist congregation.

    There are three reasons. First, I was raised SDA, and one’s upbringing tends to stay with one. In this case I’m not at all sorry about my background. I received an excellent education in SDA schools and being homeschooled using SDA materials. I had many wonderful experiences as a member of the SDA church. Second, I still have friends and colleagues who are SDA, and I appreciate their friendship and their ministry. Finally, I still hear the question pretty regularly: “Why are you no longer a Seventh-day Adventist?”

    I should note that there is another common question that arises in connection with the first, which is to ask just why I’m not an angry ex-SDA. It seems that there are so many of those. I’d simply like to point out that one can disagree with the positions an organization takes and can determine that one should not be a member of that organization without also hating that organization, or even thinking that organization is negative on balance.

    From the other side I get the question of why I will not more forcefully distance myself from “that cult.” The reason for that is that while I disagree vigorously with certain positions of the SDA church, I do not believe it is any more or less likely that a member might be a true Christian or not. I could hardly give statistics since I don’t believe it is up to me to judge. What I am concerned with is mission and ministry.

    Before I give a brief response to the question of why I am now a member of a United Methodist congregation, rather than still being SDA, I want to look at some quotes from Ted Wilson’s sermon. (You can find the complete text here, so you can put these into context. I provide page numbers.)

    As I read this text I felt a concern for my many friends who are members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. At the same time I feel a concern for what I see as the potential blessing that the SDA church could be to the broader Christian community.

    Let’s look at some quotes:

    This church is not just another denomination; it is a unique, heaven-initiated movement with a mission of salvation to the world that must continually go forward in the humility of Jesus. pp. 3-4

    In my view, the “unique, heaven-initiated movement with a mission of salvation to the world” is not the SDA church but the universal Christian church. This is a critical point for me. If Seventh-day Adventists believe they have a message for the rest of Christianity, I think that is a positive thing, and they should be heard, not relegated to the status of a “cult.” But that line puts a single denomination in the position in which the church universal should be placed. I think it would be difficult to find a scriptural warrant for such a thing. This quote figures in the most critical reason I’m not SDA.

    Go forward, not backward…….Do not succumb to the mistaken idea, gaining support even in the
    Seventh-day Adventist Church, of accepting worship or evangelistic outreach methods merely because
    they are new and “trendy.” We must be vigilant to test all things according to the supreme authority of
    God’s Word and the council with which we have been blessed in the writings of Ellen G. White. Don’t
    reach out to movements or megachurch centers outside the Seventh-day Adventist Church which promise
    you spiritual success based on faulty theology. Stay away from non-biblical spiritual disciplines or
    methods of spiritual formation that are rooted in mysticism such as contemplative prayer, centering
    prayer, and the emerging church movement in which they are promoted. Look WITHIN the Seventh-day
    Adventist Church to humble pastors, evangelists, Biblical scholars, leaders, and departmental directors
    who can provide evangelistic methods and programs that are based on solid Biblical principles and “The
    Great Controversy Theme.” p. 7

    That’s a longer quote, even though it carries a great deal of baggage. It is, I believe, a call to look inward. I would point out that this impulse is not exclusive to Seventh-day Adventists. My wife was in a curriculum meeting in a United Methodist church in which a piece of curriculum was criticized for being “too Baptist” and having “too much Jesus.”

    If you have to look only within your own denomination in order to keep people on the road to truth, I have to question whether it is truth you are protecting. In both Wilson’s paragraph, and the remarks made in that curriculum committee, what is being protected is power, not truth. Truth can withstand examination.

    Go forward, not backward! Stand firm for God’s Word as it is literally read and understood. p. 8

    All I can say is that this statement and its many variants is probably the worst advice on Bible study that is commonly given–and unfortunately believed by many. Even in reading a vision, such as the book of Revelation, people are told to think literally. Bad advice! Very bad advice!

    This unbiblical approach of “higher criticism” is a deadly enemy of our theology and mission. This approach puts a scholar or individual above the plain approach of the scriptures and gives inappropriate license to decide what he or she perceives as truth based on the resources and education of the critic. p. 9

    Yet whenever we read scripture we interpret. This criticism of higher criticism does nothing more than reject it because one disagrees with the results. There are problems with higher criticism, just as there are problems with reading everything literally. These are problems that require thoughtful responses. I would reject a version of higher criticism that stands on purely naturalistic assumptions. But such a foundation is unnecessary to find value in many of the tools provided.

    While the Bible is paramount in our estimation as the ultimate authority and final arbiter of truth, the Spirit of Prophecy provides clear, inspired council to aid our application of Bible truth. It is a heaven-sent guide to instruct the church in how to carry out its mission. It is a reliable theological expositor of the Scriptures. p. 9

    I would simply point out that this issue stands out as one of the milestones on my own departure from the SDA church. If you treat Ellen White as a definitive interpreter of scripture, you are placing her above scripture, whether you like it or not. I recognize that Wilson didn’t use the word “definitive,” but I think the intentions are clear. As a Christian, I do not reject the idea of a modern prophet, but I do reject he idea that any person can be the definitive interpreter, denying me the opportunity of full examination, discussion, and disagreement.

    So having responded to some key points in the sermon, what does this have to do with my own departure from the SDA church?

    I think it highlights it rather well. Let me begin by noting that my key issues with Adventism were not the standards of the seventh day Sabbath, legalism, or the state of the dead, which seem to stir people up so much. Let me be clear: I disagree with SDA positions on the Sabbath and somewhat on the state of the dead. They just are the critical issues for me.

    The state of the dead doctrine is trivial in my view. I really don’t care how much time elapses between death and going to be with Jesus–eternally. There is no time lapse which will matter, in my view. I think there are some scriptural arguments on both sides, but I don’t care that much about the answer.

    I envy Seventh-day Adventists the doctrine of the Sabbath, even though I don’t accept it. What it did for many SDAs of my acquaintance–and still does–is give them a much stronger sense of sacred time than I find in other churches. Time stewardship in Christianity is in poor shape, and this is something the broader community could learn from SDAs.

    But at the same time we see legalism. Those in the SDA church who worship on Saturday for legalistic reasons also often miss the valuable blessings it can have. I don’t think such legalists are in the majority; my experience was of many Adventists truly refreshed by the Sabbath rest.

    The critical element for me was eschatology. I find the SDA approach to Daniel and Revelation almost completely wrong. The interpretation of Daniel 8:14 is completely unjustified by the text. The doctrine of the investigative judgment also runs contrary to any number of other orthodox Christian doctrines. But I’ve written about that before.

    Even that disagreement is not necessarily a deal breaker. I know any number of United Methodists who believe things about eschatology that I find profoundly troubling, yet I can be a Methodist.

    The problem comes in the doctrine of the remnant. Again, I must specify that I do see a doctrine of the remnant in scripture, but it’s specifically the identification of the remnant with an organization that I would call the critical deal breaker.

    When SDAs ask me why I left the church they often respond to my early, brief remarks by noting that the United Methodist Church also has problems. Their assumption seems to be that I left the SDA church because it was imperfect and have found the church in the UMC. But that isn’t the case.

    The SDA church is imperfect. So is the UMC. But nobody (that I know of) in the UMC expects me to equate my membership in that organization with my Christianity or my salvation. It doesn’t make me part of a special remnant. That membership means that I choose to find fellowship in my UMC congregation, to find accountability there, and to serve as part of the body of Christ there, i.e. to find my place of ministry there.

    When I said I would uphold the UMC with my prayers, presence, gifts, and service, I did not also affirm that I would regard the UMC as better than all other churches, much less as the one organization representing what Christianity ought to be.

    I believe that my disagreement with the SDA church on a number of doctrinal issues means that I do better not to be a member. But combining those doctrines into a core set of beliefs defining the one true organization out there is the most critical element.

    Love, appreciate, enjoy, yes. Join, no.

  • Looking for a UMC Pastor in the West or Northwest

    My wife Jody is looking for a pastor in the west or northwest to answer about 5 questions regarding ministry in the UMC, with the interview to be published in the Bible Study Paths WebZine. She’s looking for someone who is currently pastoring a church. Your interview responses will be published in September alongside those from one pastor in the southeast and one in the midwest.

    No, there’s no money in it, and Bible Study Paths is new and small, but we hope the answers to these questions will help others in ministry.

    Please respond by comment to this post. She’ll e-mail you with the questions.

  • Fouling the Water and Trampling the Food

    That’s my post today on the Worldprayr blog. It’s based on parts of Ezekiel 34.

  • Orbiting the Hairball

    United Methodist district superintendent (Grand Rapids District) Laurie Haller takes a cue from a book on surviving in a corporate environment to make some suggestions for United Methodist leadership in her post Orbiting the UMC Hairball 4-12-10.

    Amongst other things she notes:

    The whispered truth is that The United Methodist Church suppresses creativity and genius in favor of the status quo. We want to tame entrepreneurs because we don’t know what to make of them. When they do wildly successful ministry, we remain suspicious of anyone who doesn’t fit neatly into the “image” of a United Methodist. Even when such leaders bear luscious fruit, we’re still threatened because the fruit looks more like oranges than typical West Michigan United Methodist apples.

    I’d call it a focus on making United Methodists rather than Christians. I recall a meeting at which my wife was discussing materials. The book in front of her was produced by Baptists. A dedicated Methodist in the room was afraid that we shouldn’t put this in front of the members, saying, “This is a Methodist church, and as long as we have that cross and flame on the sign in front we should present Methodist curriculum.” Amongst the complaints about the book? It had too much Jesus. (No, I haven’t figured out precisely what that means!)

    Surely our Methodist congregations are secure enough in their faith that it won’t be threatened by a bit of Baptist curriculum!

    Rev. Haller suggests that we learn to orbit the UMC hairball rather than getting sucked into its growing gravity. She has a number of suggestions for how to do so. I think these suggestions are generally good, though rather incomplete.

    Somewhere in there we’re going to have to recover our passion for the gospel itself or any method we use will go nowhere. I’m not suspecting that Rev. Haller would deny that, but it’s something I like to emphasize. If we can once get people listening to the Holy Spirit, God can move things along. (Not to mention it’s God who will get them listening in the first place!)

  • Worldview Weekend on John Piper and Rick Warren

    John Piper is a Calvinist, and I am so totally not, but I have a deep respect for him, in spite of many disagreements. That respect has been increased lately by his actions, both in taking a leave from his ministry and in inviting Rick Warren to speak at the Desiring God conference.

    It happens I disagree with Rick Warren on a number of things as well, so why does this increase my respect? Let me put in simply (and briefly, which is nearly miraculous for me): Any faith or theological system that must be protected by not listening to other voices is both weak, and in danger of losing its way.

    Listening doesn’t mean one must agree. Listening is listening.

    Brannon Howse, of Worldview Weekend, doesn’t agree:

    … I think it is a VERY bad idea for John Piper to invite Rick Warren to speak at his Desiring God conference. Piper is showing a serious lack of discernment in this decision. I think Piper was taken in by the Warren personality and not the facts.

    I seriously doubt if John Piper has been “taken in.” Rather, I think he will listen and then do some discernment. Perhaps, as shocking as it may be to some, he will trust those who attend his conference to do some of their own discerning.

    Kudos to him!

  • Glenn Beck is Right – He Should Run from Social Justice

    Why? My pastor, Geoffrey Lentz, says it’s because following Jesus in social justice is hard and demanding and might mess up our lifestyes:

    What would happen if we “let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an everlasting stream” (Amos)? It wouldn’t work out very well for me.

    This one hits us right where it hurts!

  • Harvest of Souls International Ministries Web Site

    Via Dave Black Online and Nick’s blog I found that biblioblogger Nick Norelli’s church, Harvest of Souls International Ministries, has a new web site.

    Now why do I link to this particular church web site at this moment? Is it merely to congratulate them? Well, I do congratulate them, but I had something more specific in mind. Recently I’ve been going back to one of my favorite topics, Christian essentials. One of my hopes in this area is that Christians will spend more time thinking about this topic. (Bob MacDonald has written a very interesting post that takes a substantially different view than I do, and I want to link that here.)

    I want to call attention to the Harvest of Souls page regarding their beliefs. I really like this page, even though it expresses beliefs that would probably mean I would never become a member there. We start out explicitly stating the basic position, and then defining what is essential. Following that we have a list of more detailed doctrines. It is in these more detailed doctrines that I would find some significant disagreements.

    But based on the second paragraph, I find it easy to believe that I would be comfortable as a brother in Christ in working with folks from that congregation even if we tended to disagree enough regarding the second rank doctrines that we might not fit in the same congregation.

    I find this outline for a belief statement to be very admirable. It lets the reader get a clear idea both of what’s most important to the particular church family, but also what they hold to be important, though not essential. I’m again reminded of my friend Alden Thompson’s illustration of the castle. There’s a keep, a courtyard, and there’s “outside the walls.” In the keep are essentials, in the courtyard are things that are important to us, but not critical, while outside the walls are all the issues that we really aren’t taking a position on. As Nick notes in his blog post, he can “can affirm the statement of faith with one or two small variations, none of which concern any of the major doctrinal tenets set forth therein.”

    The issue I’m raising right now is not whether we agree on the list, but whether we have thought about what beliefs (if any) are critical for each of us and for our respective fellowships.

    So both congratulations and “good job!”

  • Quote of the Day

    From the Wesley Report:

    Mainline Protestant Christianity has become known for leaving people in slavery, because somewhere along the way, our strategy changed from leading people out of Egypt to planting churches along the Nile. And that’s why mainline denominations continue to lose members. People don’t need churches to help them stay in slavery– they can do that by themselves!

    Don’t get it? Go read the whole thing.

  • How About Planting a Church?

    That’s what Allan Bevere suggests as the ordination process, based on his experience in Cuba.

    I find the idea attractive, at least for certain types of ministry. There might be other ways to test various gifts. It does relate to a problem I’ve noted amongst United Methodist ministers, many of whom come out of seminary with a decent theological education, but much less practical knowledge than they need.

    Note that I’m not a pastor, so I hardly can speak here as an expert from that perspective. But from the perspective of a theologically educated person in the pews, I think I have some basis for comment. Unfortunately, I think that my main comment goes back to my post from Monday. The first thing we need to do is rethink the pastor’s job description. Right now what we expect of pastors is insane.