Question:
I'll try and keep this short and to the point. I attend a small baptist church of 100 or so members, and after 18 months searing for a pastor we voted in a husband & wife team last July. 8 weeks after they commenced our church building was burnt to the ground in an arson attack. Not a good start!
The local Baptist College were good enough to open their doors for us and they have provided us with temporary facilities until we rebuild. In recent month they have also offered us a block of land on their premises for free. The trade off is that we make our facilites available to them during the school week when we don't have anything on. The Baptist College and block of land is approximately 2km from where our old church building stood.
Where to rebuild? We now have two options, both with their good and bad points. I was asked to join the re-building committee last September, and was looking forward to debating the practical and financial issues of both options, and being able to convey this information to members to vote on.
However, the new husband and wife pastoral team wrote a letter to the congregation in March, explaining that after much prayer and fasting, they believed God's call upon the church was to rebuild where the old building stood, and they then went into great detail explaining all the new welfare and social ministries they envisaged the church introducing into the community.
As a church we have always offered social / welfare based ministries to our community, like counselling, food parcels, playgroup, op-shop, and drop-in centre in the local shopping centre. However, the new husband and wife pastoral team have over 30 years experience in government / non-profit orginasations setting up and running social programmes. They definetly have designs to take our community outreach to a whole new level, and without consultation with existing ministry leaders, have thrust their vision for the church upon the members, and used it to justify building at our old site, which would be closer to the main population than the Baptist College.
While the above two paragraphs really only touch the surface in terms of what has taken place, we now have a pastoral team, and 2 of our 3 elders, publically saying God has called us to rebuild at our old site so we can more effectively implement all the new ministries. While many in the church are happy with this and will follow them, i would guess maybe 40 - 60% of members have taken issue with the fact that they have spiritualised the rebuilding process, and have not consulted the church members regarding our vision and ministries, and have then used them to justrify where we should rebuild. Many feel that this is actually spiritual abuse.
Letters have been written, meetings have been had, but at the end of the day we have a pastoral team who are only interested in bringing people about to their way of thinking. People feel like they are not bring heard, and while this happens the elders sit in silence and watch the church in conflict.
The delimma for myself is two fold. As a member of the rebuilding committee i have tried to remain neutral and work on facts and figures, even though i persoanlly think the offer from the Baptist College should be explored fully. However how can i do that when the pastor has told us that God's call is for the church to rebuild on its old site? Why even have a committee, shouln't we just do what God says????
Also, i play guitar in our worship team, and am finding it increasingly difficult to lead the congregation to a place of worship when i am in disagreement with the pastoral team, and many in the congregation believe that i am not only in disunity with them, but also with God, thanks to the writing of their letter. I feel i have been unfairly put in a very difficult situation.
The worship co-ordinator, bassist, and one drummer have already stood down because of the growing conflict. I too am at the point where i feel i need to step down from worship team, and the rebuilding committee.
Have others dealt with similar situations? Appreciate your prayers and any advice
Thanks
Cable
Answer:
Hey buddy!
Hows it going!!
Well it seems you have asked a lot of questions, ill try my best to give some advice that applies to the situation.
Firstly do you beleive that above all, God appointed and placed this couple in your church to pastor over it?
If you do, here is my advice:
No matter what anybody else in your church thinks, feels, claims, in the end your pastor is the spiritual head of the church. If he believes that God has called your church to rebuild on that specific land, then you need to go with it.
As you mentioned it seems to have upset some that that rebuilding process has been "spiritualised". I find very often this comment is used in a degrading way. Your pastor has said he feels God has called your church to rebuild on the old side, the comment that this is spiritualising the process is a weak criticism from someone who is having trouble justifying their opposition to your pastors decision. Honestly, if something like a building project is not spiritualised to a certain degree your church has major problems.
Honestly Church's should not be a democracy, it is an unbiblical model for a church to be. That being said a pastor needs to surround himself with a board of good solid men and women christians. However in the end the decision should be his.
There is not point for you to have a look at the facts and figures of the other site to try to justify going there. If your pastor firmly believes God's call to a particular place, the church must follow. What God does, doesn't always make sense, you might find the other site would be much cheaper, more fesible etc, but perhaps there your church will never flourish, your community will never be impacted and your witness may be useless.
Go with your pastor. If you can't leave. He is the one appointed by God, if God has given him direct instruction, who are you to stand against Him?
Answer:
I'm not gonna try to solve your (or your church's) problem. Instead, I'm just gonna try to give you some things to think about.
1. Is there anything wrong with your pastoral team's vision? I mean with the vision itself, aside from the fact that it is not shared by the congregation.
2. Does the pastoral team's opinion on where to build make sense from a practical standpoint?
3. Does the ministry of a church ultimately depend on the people or the location?
4. Should every decision we make be based on faith? You say that members are taking offense to the "spiritualization" of the rebuilding process. Is it wrong to base church decisions on spirituality/religion?
5. If you could control how the pastoral team responded to the letters and meetings, what would you have them do?
6. Is your pastor a Godly man? Would he be doing what he is doing if he didn't think it was best?
Answer:
Honestly Church's should not be a democracy I've been thinking about that . . .
Then why do we have business meetings? I couldn't care less if the pastor decides whether or not to "accept" the new member's letters or to "grant" letters to other churches....why do we hafta vote on it? Why do we have those hour-long BORING "business meetings" just so that we can all agree on stupid stuff like the color of the paint or the amount of money spent on the TV ministry
Answer:
Because we're Baptist?
Answer:
I somewhate disagree, I mean it is very hard for us to decern what it is that "God is calling us to do" ect.
It could well be that the colledge free land is a gift from God that should not be ingnored.
While the biblical was non democracy, you already used deomcarcy to elect the new pastor so I see no reason why not to have a colaberation of experaince there.
Answer:
Originally Posted by Simo Honestly Church's should not be a democracy, it is an unbiblical model for a church to be.
Hey Simo
Appreciate your thoughts and comments. As a baptist church we do operate as a democracy, and that very fact is central to why many at our church do not agree with the Pastors dominating the ministry vision and the rebuilding process.
I was always taught to test the things of man, are they consistent with scripture? Are they bearing good fruit? I can honestly say i would never just follow the lead of a man purely because he holds the title of Pastor.
Answer:
Originally Posted by 4Glory It could well be that the colledge free land is a gift from God that should not be ingnored.
And many in the congregation believe this to be true. After sharing this belief with the Pastor, we got a sermon the following Sudnay on David & Saul. How David's men encouraged him to kill Saul in the cave, God had delivered him into their hands. But David said no he is the King and and now is not the time. The anaolgy drawn was that just because the land is there as a free gift doesn't mean that it is from God. This sort of "preaching at issues" has been rampant in recent months, when we were supposed to be going through the book of Mark.
Answer:
Since my original post, the leadership (Pastors, Elders & Deacons) had a meeting and it was decided that they will hold a reconciliation meeting with the whole church, where the contents of all the letters will be made public. The majority of the night was spent preparing conter-arguments and scripture to back them up. The leaders were then all asked to confirm that they were in agreement with Pastors, and that they could count on their loyalty throughout this process. One of the Deacons walked out and resigned on the spot, as he could not support such a process and would not be bullied into agreeing.
The contents of those letters were in many cases addressed to only the pastors, or the pastors and elders. Surely there is a need for confidentiality when sharing with a pastor or elder? To make their contents known to Deacons, let alone the church body is unwise and unethical in my opinion. Yet another dissapointing "highlight" in the history of our church......
Answer:
Originally Posted by bobthecockroach 1. Is there anything wrong with your pastoral team's vision? I mean with the vision itself, aside from the fact that it is not shared by the congregation.
No. Many do share the vision, or at least parts of it. It actually isn't that different from what we currently do, it's just taking it to the next level.
Originally Posted by bobthecockroach 2. Does the pastoral team's opinion on where to build make sense from a practical standpoint?
No. Old site = debt and small building. new site = no debt and large building. 2km difference in location, use of school facilites and resources as well. Seems a no brainer to me.
Originally Posted by bobthecockroach 3. Does the ministry of a church ultimately depend on the people or the location?
I'd say the people first and foremost. Location and facilities may dictate logistics but without the people u have nothing!
Originally Posted by bobthecockroach 4. Should every decision we make be based on faith? You say that members are taking offense to the "spiritualization" of the rebuilding process. Is it wrong to base church decisions on spirituality/religion?
I believe that a task such as rebuilding a church defiently needs prayer and seeking God's will.
Originally Posted by bobthecockroach 5. If you could control how the pastoral team responded to the letters and meetings, what would you have them do?
Listen rather than talk. They are so busy defending their beliefs and fighting for their vision, that they are not listening to the people.
Originally Posted by bobthecockroach 6. Is your pastor a Godly man? Would he be doing what he is doing if he didn't think it was best? After last night's meeting i do not believe he is truely in tune with God on this one. I am not going to say he is not a Godly man, because lets face it, we all make mistakes and screw up. I think he is fighting for what best suits him and his wife, and that is a welfare based vision and ministries that rely on their extensive expertise and educational skills.
Im light of Sunday's proposed meeting i have stood down from all my ministry positions, as has my wife. We have not written a letter that will be made public, but we have many friends who have and share some of their concerns.
Sunday will be interesting by the sounds of it.....
Answer:
Originally Posted by marvinranch I've been thinking about that . . .
Then why do we have business meetings? I couldn't care less if the pastor decides whether or not to "accept" the new member's letters or to "grant" letters to other churches....why do we hafta vote on it? Why do we have those hour-long BORING "business meetings" just so that we can all agree on stupid stuff like the color of the paint or the amount of money spent on the TV ministry
Well we don't. Rule by the masses who barely turn up to one service is stupid. Well thats my opinion anyhow.
I've never seen a biblical basis for democracy, especially not in a church setting.
Answer:
Originally Posted by cibvr4 No. Old site = debt and small building. new site = no debt and large building. 2km difference in location, use of school facilites and resources as well. Seems a no brainer to me.
Yeah and Gideon taking all his men was a no brainer. Just because something seems stupid doesnt mean that it isnt what God wants.
Perhaps he wants to show that you need only rely on Him and not on your churches strength, or building size or financial situation. His glory can be shown in situation where the Church can't have done it on its own.
Or perhaps your Pastor is crackers. But my advice is submit or leave, and really unless he is getting the Church to do immoral or unethical things, or God calls you elsewhere there is no basis for leaving.