it’s an epidemic sweeping the nation these days–pastors leaving their churches under a cloud of controversy often times dealing with sexual immorality. the latest story that has hit the news scene deals with the most influential and (dare i say) powerful evangelical leader in the country, and it certainly won’t stop there–i’m sure it’ll give some guys pause, but nothing more.
why is it that pastors are finding themselves in these types of situations? why is it that they’re able to find themselves trapped in these types of sins? how are they getting to this point, and how is it that they have not set up any safeguards to protect themselves (let alone their churches)?
mark driscoll posted several practical suggestions for pastors and christian leaders to follow and put into place in their own lives to protect themselves and their churches from the difficult and devastating issues that New Life Church (the church Haggard founded) and many others across the country are dealing with.Â
as one that has seen the devastating affects firsthand on a church of a pastor falling into sexual sin, and now reading of and hearing of many others across the country, my heart breaks and i am left perplexed and pondering what it is that brought these men to that point in their lives… and from a selfish standpoint–how i can steer clear of their ginormous mistakes.
let us pray for these men and the devastated families and churches that have been left scrambling and confused in the wake of such tragedy.
Related posts:
- dead youthpastor walking…
- stories of unity.
- why can’t we all just get along?
- cookie-cutter communities?
- why do they do this?
The judgement against a pastor for “adultery” is an odd one to me — by whom do those those who expelled the pastor get their power to judge? I’ve been flipping through the words of Jesus for years and I see nowhere where we can judge this man for his actions.
Is it sinful for him to commit adultery? To God, we may think so, but it is sinful whenever you commit adultery against God — not just in terms of sex but whenever you love anything more than God, even your own wife. The Christians who judge this pastor should focus more on the logs in their own eye than the beam in this man’s eye. Hypocrites, all who condemn! If you love your spouse more than God, you have no right to judge. If you love your home or your kids more, you have no right to judge. How can we not plainly see that this man did nothing worse than we do, so we are powerless in condemnation.
I take some offense in the line that says “the church that Haggard founded.” When did a mortal man create the church? This has never happened — if anything, mortal men create cults of worship for the men who are the founders of those cults. As far as I know, Jesus founded the church within the hearts of the individuals who praise and follow His Ways. There is no single mortal being who creates that — in fact, there is no congregation of mortal beings who create it. It exists as a whole, not as parts. There is only two parts to church: the whole Body of Christ, and the individuals. You can not take a group of individuals and call it a church, you can only look at the whole. Maybe Haggard helped unite a congregation of followers, is that what people meant? If so, many should stop calling it a church — that is so pre-fulfillment of prophecy.
I really don’t see what Haggard did wrong. I see it at a few congregations I attend or serve — spouses who are harmed by adultery or porn or whatever. How? When is a spouse harmed by the sin of another? If someone’s sin affects you, love them more. If someone’s sin causes them to physically harm you, accept that pain and love them more. If someone’s sin causes them to be prideful around you, be humble to them and love them more. If someone’s sin kills you, love them even in giving your sacrifice for God. If your spouse fornicates with another, love them and forgive them as you would want to be loved and forgiven. Your spouse’s sin, if any, is only against God, not against you, hypocrite. How about we start working on the log in our own eye, and stop focusing on the speck in the eyes of our brothers and sisters, spouses and leaders, friends and family?
That is the Kingdom way. Not this hypocrisy of people who pretend and play Church.
I will love Haggard if the opportunity arises. I can not judge nor condemn him.
Dada, I think your reading the gospel through a pretty narrow lens. Didn’t Paul say to “expell the immoral brother among you?” Didn’t Jesus say “If your brother sins against you,a go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.” Evidently sin does affect the community and despite your best efforts to twist Jesus’ log and speck statements, it is possible and even necessary to hold each other accountable for sin. Hebrews says, “Let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds.” Don’t all of the “one another” commands in the NT imply a moral judgment on our part? If we see it fit to spur another brother on towards love, doesn’t that imply that we are in some way “judging” them to be in need of greater love in their life. I’m sorry, your interpretation of the moral calls of the gospel is just incoherent.
I should say however that Haggard’s church does seem to be approaching this whole situation with a spirit of love and reconciliation. They didn’t just cut him lose. They are having him meet with three counselors including Dobson, and apparently Sunday there was a strong call within the church to forgive and love him (even from Haggard’s wife). This is my only observation however. We are often very good about extending love and forgiveness to those among us who have fallen into sin. We are not always as good about extending love and forgiveness to those outside of our community who have a sinful lifestyle. This, I think, is the greater hypocrisy.
He did. Pre-tribulation, pre-fall of the Temple, Old Covenant times. Jesus’ parousia sealed the Old Covenant, so Paul’s teaching to the early church are irrelevant in terms of living under the New Covenant/in the Kingdom. Paul was holding the early church together because the Law was still in effect, as Jesus said to keep the Commandments until He returned.
And? How does public condemnation of Haggard coincide with Jesus’ specific saying here? If you publicly condemn a brother’s sin against you, you’re not listening to Jesus, that’s for sure.
Secondly, how does Haggard’s homosexuality affect anyone but Haggard and God? How does Haggard’s sex with another person (man or woman) affect a single mortal person other than himself? I see no cause for anyone where the other party needs to bring it up. If Haggard beat up his wife, or if he stole from a friend, or if he swore against a follower, or if he lied or defrauded someone in a deal — that is a sin against another. One’s sexual preference seems to me to be only a sin against God, and non-judgeable.
Thirdly, you quote Matthew 18, but what about verse 22 about forgiving seven times seventy times? I don’t see much of that going on in this public condemnation.
Twist, ha. That’s precious.
I understand where you’re coming from, but to me it is incoherent to not realize that Jesus says we should support a brother who is walking with Christ visibly (spur antoher brother on towards love), but we shouldn’t judge a brother who is sinning unless that sin directly harms us. If I was to tell you to encourage those doing good, do you automatically think that means to disparage those doing evil? That’s an incoherent connection and one that isn’t Biblically sound.
I still can’t justify any disparaging of Haggard since he:
(a) Did not sin against me, nor against any mortal — just God.
(b) We are specifically told not to judge another if we still sin.
To me, the Biblical incoherence comes from those who want to attest to pre-tribulation rules set forth by the Apostles who were given warnings by Christ to hold things together until the tribulation that happened within their generation, since it was the tribulation that finalized the binding of Satan and fulfilled the Old Law — completely ending the man-enforced-judgement ways of the Jews.
So you are a preterist too? So how do you pick and choose which New Testament ethics to follow and which ones to reject? Imagine the embarrassment of Christians who reverently preserved these writings for 2000 years only to discover now from enlightened people like Dada that these writings are totally irrelevant.
You are still missing the point. With your interpretation, you are pushing the plank/speck text further than it was intended to go. Does it not actually say, 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
I’m done arguing this point. If you think that sin and ethics is merely a personal matter between the individual and God, then I have nothing more to say. You are just reading a different Bible than I am.
I am not 100% behind Adam’s theory, but I do know Jesus would have loved regardless. No strings attached. No, go to prison, lose your job, be mocked in public, and so on and on. Churches say they forgive but they truly dont most times. True Jesus unconditional love is just that, no conditions. I agree about why are we all lined up with stones in our hands? It’s not twisting anything…Is it a sad thing that happened? Sure, but isnt our shortcomings just as sad? I think so…
in the haggard case, however, the church did none of these things–except the lose the job part, but isn’t that one a given anyways?
the things that came out of it, and ultimately spiraled out of control in the mediaa, were the result of the accuser.
So here’s an interesting question I was asked today somewhat in line with all of this…if the church is so forgiving, and is a true example of love of Christ, why do many large churches require background checks and make people who are divorced step down from leadership….it’s a good question.
I have two kids so I understand why churches try to protect kids, but the pastor sins daily or at minimum weekly correct? He is forgiven…
ah, the old background check question… that’s actually an often misunderstood issue.
we require background checks at our church for people that are wanting to work with the children’s ministry and student ministry. the reason why is because of pedophiles and other predators. there are a lot of people that go into churches and prey on these kids, and it’s the church’s responsibility to protect them and keep them safe. so, we do background checks for sex offenders.
the second part of it is not only to protect the kids, but to help hold the previous offender accountable. we don’t want to put someone in a position where they could stumble and/or fall and devastate not only their life once again, but a childs entire life. we don’t put alcohol in front of an alcoholic–so why put children in front of a pedophile? this issue has nothing to do with forgiveness, but has everything to do with common sense and trust. trust does not come with forgiveness–trust has to be earned. (there is a difference between forgiveness and stupidity.)
as for divorcee’s being forced to step down from leadership–even though Jesus didn’t talk about homosexuality–a hot button issue for the religious right, he certainly talked about divorce and adultery… and was more blunt on those issues than a lot of other things. the church has actually become fairly lax in its stance on divorce, which is probably why the divorce rate in the church has skyrocketed… it’s become acceptable, even though it never was for Jesus–except in the case of unfaithfulness.
i’ve never seen a church force someone to step down because of divorce…
But they’re NOT irrelevant at all! People keeping saying that to me — that the Epistles are irrelevant in my “belief system.” I look at them as relevant as to what the early church had to do in order to provide for the Kingdom as it stands today. I look at them as relevant in understanding the trials (and tribulations) that early Christians suffered in order for the prophecies to be fulfilled. Daniel is awesome when you consider it in a all-thing-fulfilled perspective: it opens our hearts up to loving more and judging less.
That’s fine, but I won’t stop reading the Bible the way I believe it was meant to be read, and I won’t stop trying to show people that there is a different path to follow rather than following something that repeatedly shows it was meant to be followed for a VERY SHORT TIME. I’m getting sick of pastors who are misconstruing the Bible and how it provides for our freedoms today. I’m getting sick of followers who want to be like the Pharisees were, rather than like how Jesus was.
I’ve opened my home and my phone to people to tell me where they see any consideration for the Epistles as an example of life rather than just a similar rendition of the Old Testament. I see 3 Testaments in the Bible: The First Testament (the Law), the Second Testament (the pre-tribulation church), and the Third Testament (the Kingdom of God as exemplified in the words of Jesus).
Since I’ve started reading the old Greek and Hebrew texts, I see more and more dysfunction in the modern Bible translations. The Arminians and the Wesleyans seem to have won what they tried to win 200+ years ago — dominion through the use of something worse than stones.