Blog on the Lillypad
Saturday, October 09, 2004
 | Redeeming the Time?
Another abuse of IFBx pastors that goes under-reported (and yet is the most evident abuse of all) is their abuse of the time entrusted to them. Remember, the pastor has that rare trust of being paid explicitly to study the Word of God. In the early church, when the infrastructure or Christianity was just forming, the elders rejected the duties of "waiting tables" because it kept them from prayer and the study of Scripture. And the congregation agreed with the separation of duties. Deacons were appointed to run the physical plant of Christianity. |
After studying the Scripture to formalize the structure of church office, John Calvin and other theologians agreed that the office of elder also has two parts: the ruling elder and the teaching elder. All elders must be godly men of prayer and comprehensive knowledge of the Word of God. But the elders appointed to teach have their activity among books, controversies, and the speaking and writing of instruction on the Word of God. The ruling elders sit in session with each other to examine matters in the church and render decisions based on the Scripture.
Over time, it has been recognized with the formalization of Christianity that most ruling elders can accomplish their roles without being full-time paid staff of a church. This varies from church to church, and some churches will keep elders on a part time (or even full time) basis, especially if they are dedicated to certain crucial ministries. But usually, nobody makes a career out of being a ruling elder. It is a solemn duty and truly a ministry in that it is most often done unrecompensed with a salary.
The teaching elder, however, because he brings the instruction to the congregation two or three or even as often as five times a week is paid and even given a house in many churches. All this is given to him so that he can focus on study, writing, and speaking to instruct Christians.
In many IFB churches, however, the roles of teaching elder and ruling elder are both rolled into one, and only a single person is called to fulfill it. As I have written before, most IFB churches use sole eldership, an unbiblical model of church government that makes the elder a pope of his own little community. While I recognize that the two unique roles of eldership are derived from Scripture (rather than specifically enjoined by it), it's still obvious that eldership in the New testament is always a plurality of elders. Godly men came together to rule the church. No single man had sole power in any congregation, with the possible exception of Diotrephes, referenced in 3John 1:9, a man in total command of a congregation, who forced his people not to allow the preaching of John and the elders accompanying John.
Needless to say, sole eldership has been the hiding place and fountain head of abuses in IFBx churches, leading to everything from cult-like doctrines to the idolatrous teachings on total loyalty, to the rampant misogyny so typical of these men, to the acceptance (even endorsement) of gross ignorance in the pulpit, and of course to financial crimes ands sexual sins.
And one thing that struck me this week that others have commented on in the past, is the abuse of the paid time of these sole elders.
Go look at the Hyles-Anderson Forum of the FFF for a prime example. This week, as a paid employee of an honest company that allows internet use, I had a series of tasks to accomplish to earn my pay. I had to write a user manual for a piece of "trouble ticket" software that a lot of employees are not using correctly, and I had to create an online, self-paced video of our business and data flow.
Part of the FFF is hopping mad at me (again!) because after Christian Farris started frothing at the mouth about how another preacher is running a cult, I commented that it is ironic for him to say this, as his church advocated the openly sinful, defiant, and downright stupid "100 percent loyalty to Jack Hyles" slogan, and his father, the senior pastor, actually wore the damnable hundred percenter button with pride. And, of course, in open and direct disobedience to Scripture, they brought Dave Hyles into the church membership and onto paid church staff, in a role with authority. And then when Dave committed adultery (or was caught), they shipped him off to another church without bringing him before the congregation.
This reminder about pots and kettles has brought forth a torrent of response, replies, rebukes, railing, and denials from the Farris boys. The fight moved from the Fighting forum down to the Hyles-Anderson Forum. Their old pals in deception and ignorance from Hyles-land are glad to lend a hand to clear the good Farris name.
But what really amazed me this week is the sheer volume of time these fundamentalist preachers are devoting to the ballyhoo. I was putting in 30 minutes before work, my hour-long lunch break, and an hour after work (so two and a half hours each day) on the forum in replying and pointing out where they are still disobeying Scripture.
But I could hardly make a dent. Two and a half hours a day just to demonstrate the error of the nitwit preachers on the HAC forum is too much, as the forum is read mostly by a few men who multiply their screen names into numerous trolls. My time, I realize, is better spent on this blog where 70 - 100 hits a day are recorded on weekdays.
With extravagant claims about my sins (as though I am about to lead a congregation astray into peril of gross sin like they did) the IFBx preachers continue to harp on not being required by the Bible to acknowledge their sin or declare repentance of it. Certainly, my four pointed questions to the Farris boys remain unanswered:
1) Was it a sin for your father to be a hundred percenter?
2) Was it a sin to give Dave Hyles church authority, no matter how your senior church staff renamed it?
3) Did your senior church staff put your own church people at risk by giving Dave Hyles the authority to counsel women? Was that culpably negligent of you?
4) Was it a sin to send Dave Hyles to Tom Neal's church without following the due process of church discipline (bringing him before the congregation)?
Instead of answering, they have poured hours of time each day (with generous help from such lords of doctrine as Guy Beaumont and Marty Breamer) into evading, counter-accusing me, and talking in circles about the issue.
I cannot keep up with all the posts, and the mind boggles at the fact that they are doing this on consecutive days of the work week.
Strategically, their abuse of time does not gain them any advantage, for though I (and any other person putting in an honest work week for honest pay) do not have the time to generate so many posts per day, I don't need to. I can keep asking the same basic question again and again until it is answered. I have a reason beyond my precious name or my status to keep asking if they have repented. I am asking on behalf of the victims of the gross disobedience and ignorance of IFBx preachers.
On the one hand, the image of these disobedient men abusing their offices yet again by spending hours on the internet each day, when they ought to be fulfilling the office of elder, bothers me.
On the other hand, knowing where an IFBx preacher is at all times can be a good thing. If you know he's in his office wrathfully calling a woman names to prove what a godly and repentant leader he is, then at least you know he's not somewhere else getting more false doctrines crammed into his head by another glittering flim-flam man or creating another hearbreaking situation for the innocent and the vulnerable.
