RESTORING FALLEN MINISTERS - THE PROCESS (Part 5)

Last time, in Part 4, saw how how the Body of Christ began with predominately home fellowships, with more public meetings whenever a large venue was available.  Over time, practices have changed to the traditional model that somewhat followed the early synagogue model.  Congregations or larger organizations own the buildings they meet in and each congregation likely has a full-time pastor who is paid by the congregation or the larger organization.

However, many congregations today might not own their building.  Often the pastor does, or his non-profit organization does.  Many pastors today "own" their church buildings, parsonage, and vehicles through through their organizations, as a tax dodge.  No wonder so many ministers have fallen.  If they get away with financial shenanigans, then they could easily think they could get get away with other misdeeds.

Because of these changes, the process of restoring fallen believers, ministers included, has gotten more complicated.  How so?  The involvement of government in church business affairs.  That is why Part 4, ended with the beginning passage of Romans 13.

Remember, some offences are sins, some are crimes, some are both.  Not all sins are crimes, and not all crimes are sins.

So, if a believer, even if is he or she is a minister, offends another person and that offense is a crime, whether or not it is also a sin, one rule applies before any other rule.  I cannot emphasize this enough:

Call the police!

Why?  Because the police are trained and equipped to investigate crimes.  Most congregation members, ministers, or staff may have some training in this, but it is likely not to be enough to discover the true facts of the case.

Now, I am aware that not all law enforcement officers are competent, and some are corrupt.  Some ministers curry favor with local law enforcement agencies, so an investigation could be biased in favor of the offender.  In a situation like that, go to a higher agency, such as the county, state, or federal level.

Is this Scriptural?  Doesn't Paul warn believers not to drag one another into court?  Yes, but he was talking about civil lawsuits, not criminal cases.  Peter does speak about criminal behavior:

1st Peter 4: 12 - 19 NASB95

Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal among you, which comes upon you for your testing, as though some strange thing were happening to you; but to the degree that you share the sufferings of Christ, keep on rejoicing, so that also at the revelation of His glory you may rejoice with exultation.  If you are reviled for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you.

Make sure that none of you suffers as a murderer, or thief, or evildoer, or troublesome meddler; but if anyone suffers as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed, but is to glorify God in this name.  For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?  AND IF IT IS WITH DIFFICULTY THAT THE RIGHTEOUS IS SAVED, WHAT WILL BECOME OF THE GODLESS MAN AND THE SINNER?

Therefore, those also who suffer according to the will of God shall entrust their souls to a faithful Creator in doing what is right.

Peter wrote this letter to believers who were facing persecution from the government.  The first persecution that early disciples faced came from the Jewish religious authorities, but the Roman government came to place their own pressure on the believers.  No matter where the persecution came from, he uses legal terminology to describe it.

So, obviously, whenever someone commits an offense, if it is just a sin, then the Body of Christ can deal with it internally.  But, if the offense is a crime, then the proper authorities need to be called first.  Let the police and the courts deal with the crime, and disciples handle the sin.

Still more to come...

RESTORING FALLEN MINISTERS - THE PROCESS (Part 4)

This process, so far, has become quite involved, so a review of Scripture and what is required for a fallen minister to be restored.  We need this, because things will get complicated in this part.

I need to bring up some early Christian history.  When Jesus and the Apostles taught on these matters, the traditional church organizational structure did not exist.  The closest organizational structure existing at the time was the synagogue.

I'm not sure where or when the first synagogues formed.  The Old Testament does not  mention them, but the foundation of their structure might have been laid in Ezra, the 8th chapter, where Ezra read the Law to a large assembly of people in Jerusalem at the (ahem) Water Gate.  Levites were scattered among the people to interpret the Law from Hebrew into Aramaic.  This was because the Law was written in Hebrew and the people spoke Aramaic.  They picked up that language when they were in exile.

Synagogues are not structured like churches in the traditional model.  The Jews might have modeled the synagogues after another practice they had, the 'minyan.'  A minyan was a group of ten men that would meet together for prayer and study.

A group of Jews of any size may start a synagogue.  Once they decide to do that, they elect a president to lead the group.  Then they select other officers as needed.

Cantors lead synagogue services, not the rabbis.  A synagogue does not need a full time rabbi, but they can hire one if they wish.  As far as I know, no organization appoints a rabbi to a particular congregation.

Jesus didn't want his followers to form synagogues.  If He did, He would have used that word when He spoke about His assembled disciples.  He used another word instead.  I believe when He talked privately with His disciples, they spoke Aramaic.  Whatever word He used, Matthew decided the best Greek word for what Jesus said was the word 'ekklesia.'   That word refers to people, usually citizens who have been called out to assemble for a purpose.

So, the first assemblies didn't have much of a visible organizational structure, like we see today.  The first assembly grew to 3000 people in one day.  The only visible leaders were the Apostles.  How could this small group lead so many people?

This is where we can connect some dots.  First, the Apostles remembered the concept of the minyan.  Then they remembered when they assisted Jesus with the feeding of the thousands, and Jesus had them seat the people in groups of fifty.  They knew they had to get these new disciples into smaller groups.

Acts 2: 42 - 47 NASB1995

They were  continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.  Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe; and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.  And all those who had believed were together and  had all things in common; and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need.  Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people.  And the Lord was adding to their number day by day  those who were being saved.

Notice the phrase, "breaking bread."  It appears twice, and the second time, Luke adds "from house to house."  They set up home fellowships, plus they had large meetings in the outermost court of the Temple.   I can see the Apostles recruiting the others that were with them in the Upper Room to lead these fellowships.  These home fellowship leaders later became known as elders.  Elders are also pastors or shepherds.  Since most towns and cities had only one congregation that included home fellowships, each congregation had more than one pastor.  These pastors were not paid to lead.  Actually, if the pastor was hosting a fellowship in his own house, and these fellowship meetings involved food, he was providing some of that food.

In these groups, if an elder or another minister fell, the process that Jesus outlined in Matthew would apply mostly the same.  However, since most Christians today follow the traditional church model, and from other changes in society and culture, the restoration process for ministers has become more complicated, but still must follow Scriptural requirements.

At this point, I must bring up another passage that applied then, but applies now too.

1 Timothy 5:17 - 21, 24 - 25 NASB1995

The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.  For the Scripture says, “YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”

Do not receive an accusation against an a  elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.

Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning. I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality...

The sins of some men are quite evident, going before them to judgment; for others, their sins follow after.  Likewise also, deeds that are good are quite evident, and those which are otherwise cannot be concealed.

First, Paul upholds the honor of eldership.  Some peach and teach equally.  Some do one more than the other.  Some, counsel as well as preach and teach.  Some counsel without speaking to the group or in public.  But all elders have the responsibility of ruling, and it is a shared responsibility.  Those who rule well are worthy of double honor.

Because of the honor due to elders, if one doesn't measure up to the standards for ministers and elders, charges made against an elder must be confirmed by at least two witnesses.  Once this has been done, then the congregation can act.

But today, especially in the United States, the issue can get more complex.  At this point, I must point out something that most Christians don't understand, mostly because most leaders don't know it, so they don't tell others about it.

Sin and crime are not always the same.  Many sins are also crimes, but some are not.  Many crimes are sins, but some are not.

What is the difference?  What do they have in common?

Both are offenses.  The difference lies in who is offended.

Sin is an offense against a person.  That person can be God, an angel, or a human.

A crime is an offense against society.  Government is the mechanism by which society deals with offenders.

Romans 13: 1 - 7 NASB1995

Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.  Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.  For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil.  Do you want to have no fear of authority?  Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good.

But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.

Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also a  for conscience’ sake.  For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.  Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

We will examine the application of this in Part 5.

RESTORING FALLEN MINISTERS - THE PROCESS (Part 1)

Matthew 5:6-9 NASB1995

“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.  Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.  Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.  Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."

Matthew 5:21-24 NASB1995

“You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’  But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.  Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering."

I included that second passage in a previous article, RESTORING FALLEN MINISTERS.  In this article, I add the first passage to enlarge the context.

Jesus began the Sermon on the Mount with the Beatitudes, a pronouncement of blessings upon those who hold certain attitudes, or possess certain characteristics.  This is in contrast to the Torah, the Law of Moses, which contains blessings and curses.  Blessings for those that kept the Law, curses for those who didn't.

Jesus was not overturning the Law.  In the verses that immediately follow, He says as much.  He also adds that our righteousness must exceed that of those who were the experts in the Law, the Pharisees.  Their righteousness was based on their actions and not their attitudes.

I point this out, because in the circles that seem to produce the most fallen ministers not only emphasize healing, miracles, signs, and wonders, they also focus on blessings.  Most of the blessings they talk about are material, carnal, and earthly.  The blessings Jesus spoke of tend to be spiritual.

We do see fallen ministers in all kinds of Christian groups, not just those that emphasize supernatural experiences.  This shows us that experience based, or experience driven religion is not the only factor that causes ministers to fall.  It could be one of the strongest.

The experience oriented groups do seem to be the ones that most often call for their fallen ministers to be restored.  They often claim that the fallen minister had produced so many healings, prophecies, etc. and they assume the world, or the body of Christ, needs that to continue.

Really?

Jesus never pronounced a blessing on those who seek after miracles, signs, wonders, healings, prophecies.  He did promise satisfaction to those who seek righteousness.  And those who seek signs, He called wicked and adulterous.  

We could say that the theme of the Sermon on the Mount is righteousness, not "blessings."  Look at two other passages, the ends of Matthew chapters 6 and 7.  "Seek first the kingdom of God," and, "Depart from me, you workers of iniquity..."

So when Jesus was talking about the Torah, He was speaking of righteousness, not just in action, but it heart.  This becomes obvious when He equates hate with murder.

But then, He seems to say something contradictory.  You would think that He would immediately tell us to forgive those we hate.  As well, we should.

Instead, He says if your brother has something against YOU, YOU go to him and seek reconciliation.  You are not the hater, but the hated.  Why should YOU be the one who seeks reconciliation first?

For righteousness sake.

If someone has something against you, then YOU are the offender.  YOU might not feel like it, but you are.  This is the major problem I see with the majority of these fallen ministers.  They never admit to their offense.  Some might even feel entitled or justified to do what they did.

But until the offender admits to what they did, no reconciliation is possible.  This is not to say the offended one is justified in not forgiving the offender.  The offended one must forgive to maintain a right relationship with God, even if the offender never admits anything.  And the offended one does not have to wait, and should not wait until the offender confesses.

So, the biblical process to restoring a false minister begins with reconciliation, but reconciliation is not possible unless the offender seeks it by admitting the offense and expressing remorse to the offended party.

The goal should not be to place a person into a position, or to allow them to resume an activity that seems desirable, but to establish righteousness where it is lacking.