JackHammer

First, we should be very clear that this post is not talking about a pastor who yields to temptation and stumbles into sin. The Bible is very clear that in such a case, when a pastor is overtaken in a fault, the spiritual are to restore such an one in the spirit of meekness.

But our confusion often begins at this particular juncture. How are we to know the difference between a pastor who uses his position to prey on people, and a pastor who genuinely was overtaken in a fault? For starters, the pastor who stumbled in the heat of the moment will not be demanding forgiveness and restoration. Nor will he be insinuating or implying that we ought to be thinking restoration. Nor will he wait to get caught. He will come forward with his sin himself. His first desire will be to come clean, to make himself accountable, submitting to the church, and making things right. If his sin has disqualified him either temporarily or permanently from ministry (and he will not use semantics for a covering — see Psalm 51 for a sample of true confession), then he will step down immediately. It is absurd to argue that a pastor who refuses to confess his sin, who demands forgiveness and demands that we ignore his sin, who refuses to step down, should be restored to anything.

When a pastor sins and immediately does the right thing, submitting himself to the Word of God and to the spiritual authority of the church, then Galatians 6:1 comes into play; restoration can take place to the extent allowed by Scripture. In this case, we are not dealing with a “Predator Pastor.” But when a pastor is busily (and overtly) attempting to cover his sin, to diminish it, to rationalize it, and to force your hand through demands for submission, forgiveness, and/or restoration, then we have a predator on our hands. How then do we deal with such an one as this?

First, we must remember our Scriptural duty to maintain the purity of the church, and as with our children, we must not let our soul spare for his crying. Because of their position, pastors have a particularly potent ability to manipulate. We must not be manipulated. When we combine the trust normally vested in a pastor with the position of authority inherent to pastors, we get a dangerous mixture, and any attempt to go against that pastor can be fraught with danger, full of confusion and difficulty. In such a case, our love for the truth must trump any loyalty to a man.

Any charge of sexual misconduct must be taken seriously. We must examine evidence. Churches often make the mistake of ignoring the obvious in favor of feelings. Church members rarely feel that their pastor is capable of sexual misconduct. But our feelings about the possibilities say nothing about the facts of what actually happened. We must weigh evidence, not feelings.

But weighing evidence, unfortunately, is not always an exact science. As has been mentioned previously, cases of sexual misconduct can be difficult or nearly impossible to investigate by their very nature. Sexual sins rarely have witnesses. Establishing two or three witnesses could require waiting for two or three victims to suffer abuse and to come forward. That can be next to impossible. Certainly, if there is more than one accuser, or if witnesses do come forth, their testimony should be heard, and if their testimony agrees, let every word be established.

Some will insist that “if you didn’t see it happen, then you can’t know.” Not so fast. Other evidence must also be considered. For instance, we often overlook “boundary violations,” those violations of space and time and appropriateness and ethics that always accompany any sort of sexual misconduct, and particularly are always present in the case of a predator pastor. Those investigating allegations of misconduct must always be alert to inappropriate contact and conduct on the part of the accused. Boundary violations must not be taken lightly, and certainly cannot be ignored. Does the accused admit to “inappropriate contact?” Are there witnesses who can establish unethical behavior? Have witnesses observed procedural violations? While certainly not conclusive, these are or should be obvious warning signs, and must be taken seriously.

During an investigation, church leaders should also pay attention to the way the accused answers questions. Rather than thinking that we will be able to detect a lie, based purely on feelings, we should instead look for deflections masquerading as answers. Above all else, predators wish to escape detection. We should note that goal. They do not want you to find the truth. Predators want to continue with their behavior. They want to protect themselves. They don’t care about the truth.

This means they are good liars. Not that lies can ever be good, but that they are practiced and polished in the art of lying. They are not novices in this area. And being skilled liars, they know what you are looking for. They know that they must keep their gaze steady. They have heard all about the “gaze aversion” secret, and they will avoid that mistake at all costs. Their body language will exude confidence, nor will they show any sign of nervousness. They have practiced the poker face, and the innocent routine. Go ahead! Try to catch them changing their story! But they have an explanation for everything, and you will need providential aide to catch them in a lie.

Rather than looking for the “obvious” signs of lying, which do not actually exist, we should pay attention to the more subtle signs of deception that are common amongst liars. Much has been written about this already, and a thorough discussion would take some time, but we should look briefly at a couple of indicators. One would be what psychologists call “emotional leakage.” Essentially, this indicator surfaces through odd emotional contrasts. For instance, a person is very warm and friendly, and suddenly shifts to cold and unfriendly. Another person goes out of their way to flatter, and suddenly insults you. Or, the happy suddenly becomes angry; Mr. Nice Guy inexplicably changes to Mr. Hateful. These Jekel and Hyde changes indicate deception.

A second subtle sign of deception is deflection and evasion. When the question is asked, does the suspect answer directly, or does he attempt to deflect and/or evade the question? There are many ways that liars will use deception. For instance, when asked, “did you touch her in any way?” he might respond by saying, “I would say no.” On the surface, an answer like that seems straightforward enough, until you consider that he did not actually say “no.” He only said that he would say “no.” Trite as that seems, it is a world of difference to a liar. Another example of deflection or evasion would be feigned shock and outrage that the question is being asked, or that anyone would think such a thing. A good liar uses very subtle changes to deflect or evade questions that he does not wish to answer. Anna Salter lists several ways, which I will include below:

1. Unfinished business: “That’s about all.” “That’s pretty much it”; “That’s about all I can remember.”
2. Answering the question with a question: “Why would I do something like that?”
3. Maintenance of dignity: “Don’t be ridiculous.”
4. Commenting on the question: “That’s a hard question.”
5. Projection: “Someone would have to be sick to do that.”
6. Denial of evidence: “You have no proof.”
7. Accusation: “Are you accusing me?”
8. Qualifiers: “I can’t say”; “I could say”; “I would say.”
9. Answers: “My answer is…”; “The answer is…”(1)

Note that none of these answers directly answer the question. Although these kinds of answers do not prove that the person is lying, they are warning signs, red flags waving furiously back and forth, bidding you to look closer.

In the absence of conclusive evidence, and when suspicion lingers and evidence is lacking, the Bible gives us another way to find the truth, one that we often overlook. Consider Exodus 22:10-11:

If a man deliver unto his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die, or be hurt, or driven away, no man seeing it: Then shall an oath of the LORD be between them both, that he hath not put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods; and the owner of it shall accept thereof, and he shall not make it good.

Numbers 5:11-21 also tells us what must be done in a case when there are no witnesses. Namely, the accused must swear an oath in the name of God that the charges are not true. Now, some no doubt will object to this advice. The Bible says “swear not at all.” But the Bible is not forbidding oaths. Instead, the Bible teaches that we should not need to swear an oath in order to tell the truth. God’s people love truth. If we only tell the truth when we swear an oath, then we are miserable liars. Rather, the truly honorable man swears to his own hurt without needing to change his story.

Whenever we have a lack of evidence but a persistent accuser, the investigators must explain the gravity of the situation, along with the serious nature of swearing an oath in the name of God. They should then require the accused to take such an oath. In doing so, we trust God to expose any lie. In other words, we put the case in the hand of God, asking God to bring the truth to light.

Above all else, we must remember that allegiance to the truth is our first allegiance. No pastor should ever put his own personal reputation or his own ambitions for position above the truth. No deacon or church leader should put his loyalty to a man above his loyalty to truth and justice. I would rather step aside one hundred times than allow justice to be perverted, or shelter a predator.

According to Anna Salter, only about three percent of sex offenses are ever caught. Only about five percent of offenses are ever reported (1). All things considered, there are hundreds, probably more like thousands of sexual predators on the loose. If this is the case among all predators, and I have no reason for doubting these numbers, then one has to think that the number of Pastors or Clergy who have been caught or even reported for such crimes must be even lower. After all, who would believe a pastor to be capable of such crimes? Even with the recent arrests and prosecutions of high profile religious leaders, we still don’t want to believe that a Pastor could or would do a thing like this.

We trust a Pastor. We want to trust a Pastor. We want to believe that if we couldn’t trust anyone else, we could still trust our Pastor. I for one do not wish to undermine this inherent trust that we have in Pastors. For, after all, I am one. But like it or not, there are men who have found that the ministry is the safest place for them to conduct their sexual misconduct. They use the position of trust that they have in a community in order to gain greater access to children.

Unfortunately, we as church members often unwittingly play into their hands. For example, in the case of John Price, the Predator Pastor which we have been exposing on this blog, those on John’s side will normally argue that since he is not in jail, we should be quiet about it. In their defense, let me say that I understand why they think this way. If John was in fact guilty as we claim, then he should be in jail. And I agree. He should be in jail. But should be and would be are two entirely different scenarios. Research will support the argument that in the case of sex offenders, guilt will not normally be reflected by jail time. Is says nothing about ought, and ought does not necessarily follow from is.

Predators escape detection for several common reasons. These reasons are universal among all predators, no matter their status in life, whether a plumber, a doctor, a grocery bagger, or a pastor. But these reasons apply especially to Pastors who prey on children.

Predators escape detection because these crimes, by their very nature, are committed privately. There are no witnesses, besides the victim. The Bible demands two or three witnesses, but that is impossible in this case. That is why, when a predator is arrested, the police will often ask other victims to come forward. If other, separate victims come forward, then the prosecution can collaborate testimony. If not, then it is a case of the victim’s word against the perp’s. And in those cases, a tie goes to the perp.

Predators escape detection because they prey on the vulnerable. Though certainly not unheard of, predators usually steer clear of girls who have a strong and secure relationship with their father. Predators normally work on the insecure, the unprotected, the needy children. Experts tell us that predators will begin grooming a potential victim, often taking months to build a bond with the victim before even attempting any sort of sexual contact. Only when the bond is built does the predator proceed with the abuse. In the case of John Price’s victims, all have confirmed this modus operendi. Price chose girls whose relationship to their father was not strong, telling them that he would be a “father” to them. Then later, as he groomed them for his designs, Price began to tell them that “God made them for this purpose.” “Everyone has some purpose in life,” Price said. “You were made for me.” Then later, after they had fallen prey to his deceptions, Price again used their insecurity and vulnerability against them, promising to embarrass them if they tell, promising his devotion if they will keep silent.

Predators escape detection because their victims suffer from shame and guilt so severely. Often when a victim will not come forward, it is because they feel that they were equally responsible for what happened. They feel ashamed of what they did, ashamed that they enjoyed it. Predators know this. They know that if their victim feels pleasure, if they can get their victim to enjoy the act, then that is insurance for later. Because the shame and guilt will silence the victim. Churches and pastors do little to help this situation. Often, we insist on blaming the victim for what happened. I’d ask all who read here to consider the irony of this. The victim, who is not responsible for the sin, because of the guilt and shame she feels, keeps quiet about what happened, taking the responsibility on herself. Meanwhile, the perpetrator feels no guilt or shame, relying instead on Christian culture to keep his victims from telling. It seems to me that we’ve turned the proper use of conscience on its head. Churches should be teaching diligently where the responsibility lies, and making it clear that victims need to come forward so that they can put away their guilt. But often, we pile the shame on top of the shame, shaming the victim rather than offering comfort and help.

Predators escape detection because their victims fear them. Especially when the predator is the victim’s pastor. Almost universally, once the sexual contact commences, the grooming changes from an emotional bond to a more sinister nature. Predators notoriously make their victims feel important and wanted before contact, and regularly threaten them afterwards. Beforehand, they promise love and affection. Afterwards, they promise exposure and shame. Beforehand, they promise pleasure. Afterwards, they promise pain. Beforehand, they promise friendship and security. Afterwards, they promise physical harm. Predators threaten their victims, once they have committed their crimes. They threaten to expose them, to embarrass them, they threaten that nobody will believe them, they promise to deny everything, and sometimes, they threaten physical harm. Thus, the victim does not come forward.

At this point, it should be noted that “Biblical convictions” will not normally cause a victim to come forward. In a home where the father teaches his children diligently, it certainly is true that the children are less likely to become victims (though this is not unilaterally the case). We certainly could argue that taught children are more likely to come forward if they become the victim. But predators know this as well. They often check out the relationship between parents and children, looking specifically for closeness of communication. Predators are cowards. They avoid situations where they might get caught. Since victims are often weak and insecure to begin with, it is unlikely that their knowledge of God’s Word will motivate them to come forward.

That is not all. Predators often escape detection because of who they are. This is never more true than when a pastor turns predator. We want to trust our pastors. We do not want to believe anything bad about them. And rightfully so. Not wanting to undermine this natural trust we have for people in general, and specifically for pastors, we need to think instead of the demands of justice. Justice requires us to lay aside our feelings about the people involved, and instead to weigh the evidence. In determining who we will believe (and don’t think that predator pastors forget who we are most likely to believe), we must examine the evidence in the case, following Scriptural standards of justice. Since it is unlikely that there will be any witnesses, we must look instead for signs of deceit. Disharmony will sometimes be the best indicator of this. Lies of omission are more common than lies of commission. Deceptions often take the form of deflection. Almost always in a case like this, there will be situations where the predator invaded the victim’s privacy and violated normal standards of behavior. All of these things need to also be considered.

Predators escape detection because they are good liars. When dealing with a potential predator, we must always remember this. Of course, we all know the signs of lying… gaze aversion, shifty eyes, nervousness, shaky voice. So, we figure we will catch it. But we overlook the fact that the liar knows what the signs of lying are, just like you do.
Finally, predators escape detection because we are afraid to believe such a thing about them, because we are afraid to lose their friendship, because we are afraid of confrontation. Don’t think that predators never thought of this one either. They know that we will most likely believe them over a child. Especially if that child has been in trouble, or has a troubled past.

May God give us wisdom in dealing with this problem in the future.

Footnotes:

(1) Anna Salter, Predators, Pedophiles, Rapists, & Other Sex Offenders: Who they are, How they Operate, and How We Can Protect Ourselves and Our Children (New York: Basic Books, 2003), pp. 11-12.

Some no doubt have followed my postings at another site, dealing with the issue of Predator Pastors in general, and the issue of one Predator Pastor in particular. Recently, I was interviewed by a reporter from the Associated Baptist Press about those articles, and she has written an article that was published here. I wish you would read it, and feel free to comment here at JackHammer. The Baptist Standard has published a series of articles on this issue, which you might find interesting.

Over the course of this month, I hope to write one or (maybe) two articles on this issue, which I will post both here and on my other, not so regular anymore, site. Meanwhile, I trust that God will use these things to help us learn to deal with this important and unfortunate issue.

Many men do not trust the way God has said and, continues to say, how He works today. They have become cynical of church authority. Many of the same men do not show the same doubt about non- or un-Scriptural institutions. Ultimately, the nature of the flesh manifests itself in rebellion against God-given authority. When a church makes a decision, many men do not equivocate that with God making a decision. If our churches do not represent God and do not know, and perhaps even can not know, the will of God, they should get right with God or close down. Disrespect of a church decision is disrespect of a church itself, and if that church obeys the Bible, disrespect also of the Head of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ. Godly men and churches should not fellowship with this unfruitful work of darkness.

God “calls” through the recognition of a legitimate, New Testament church. God does not circumvent the church to inform a man of his ordination by God to the office of a pastor. God has given the church authority to judge in matters as the “pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).  In 1 Corinthians 6, Paul tells the church,

“Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?  and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?  Know ye not that we shall judge angels?  how much more things that pertain to this life?  If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church” (vv. 2-5).

God has equipped the church with the necessary ability to make right decisions.

How can a church decide for God? The key to understanding this is in Ephesians 4. ”There is one body, and one Spirit . . . one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all” (vv. 4-6). When a characteristically obedient church unifies on a matter, this is “the unity of the Spirit.” A church full of saved people, “sons of God,” are “led by the Spirit of God” (Romans 8:14; cf. Galatians 5:18). Previous to the baptism of the Spirit in Acts 2, the Lord Jesus Christ had taught His disciples the importance of agreement of the church in discerning the will of God (Matthew 18:17-20). The Lord promised to be in the midst of these agreeing brethren. Church members should come to agreement. When a church does agree, this is the means by which God guides His people in His will in matters. In Acts 13, even the apostle Paul submitted himself to the decision of the Godly men of a church.

A church is the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:27). Christ is the head of His body (Colossians 1:18). Therefore, Christ decides through His body. He is above, through, and in the members of His church. When a church moves, He moves. The church is a supernatural organization headed by Christ and led by the Holy Spirit. When a church says that a man is qualified to pastor and sets a man apart for that office, that man is ordained by God. This does not occur when a man unilaterally says He’s called and relates an experience, but when a church agrees there is a desire and that the man fulfills the qualifications. The church can also disqualify a man either temporarily or permanently.

I hate to say this is the alternative to the weird or spooky call. The other is an imposter and the faux alternative to this, the Scriptural doctrine of the call of God. We should all notice that it is through a church that God decides. A pastor can show leadership, but the church makes these types of decisions. Even when a pastor wants to move, it should be a church agreeing that he should move and then sending him to greater ministry by the grace of God. Until the church agrees, the man should stay put.

A whole other thread in this discussion is how a church is led by the Spirit. Churches should learn to make decisions based upon Biblical principles. First, the church understands God’s Word, rightly divides It. Second, the church accurately applies what God said in the decision making. Godly leadership toward right decision making would include careful exegesis of Scripture, looking for thoughtful consideration of the text of Scripture. This too is how God will be glorified in the decision made (1 Peter 4:11).

The fact that he had no business being in the ministry never even slowed him down. He loved mammon, loved to have the preeminence, loved pleasures, especially the pleasures of sin. He sought his own, not another’s. Far from blameless, he had had only one wife at a time. If he was sober, he was vigilant… vigilant to end that condition. When it came to the neighbor’s wife (or the deacon’s for that matter), he certainly was given to hospitality. He was apt to teach, for by it he seduced many. Never had he been given to wine, though plenty had been given to him. No striker could match his tantrums. He was not greedy of filthy lucre. He liked the clean kind, which was why he insisted that money always be laundered. When it came to getting an angle, he was the most patient of men. Give him his way, and he wouldn’t be such a brawler. He was not covetous, he just wanted lots of things. His children all followed in his footsteps, of course. Just that they weren’t so sly about covering it. You can believe that this man was not a novice. His chicanery came from years of experience. He had a good report card, though. Back in first or second grade – he couldn’t remember which. But hey, he desired the office of a bishop. It had filled his coffers, and made him fat.

You might be thinking that it obviously is not God’s will that this man be a pastor. But then again, you could be wrong. Sometimes, God brings these men to such positions. After all, God chose Saul to be the first king of Israel. God called Judas Iscariot to be a disciple. Sometimes, God chastises a nation with such men. God raised up Pharaoh. God gave Israel ungodly preachers (I Kings 22:22-23). Joseph’s brothers fulfilled God’s will, even as they didn’t. Surely, this reveals something about God’s will.

This reminds us that men often displease God even as they do God’s will. Was God pleased when David committed adultery with Bathsheba? Yet David’s act most certainly fulfilled God’s will (consider Matthew 1:6 with Psalm 119:152; Isaiah 46:10-11). It pleased the LORD to bruise Christ, and God was displeased with those who bruised him. Even so, a man may advance to the pastorate without the call of God, and may displease God through his grasping, and this may be according to God’s will. I dare say that if the man is in the pulpit, that means it is God’s will that he be in the pulpit, even as it isn’t.

Those who seek a pastoral position must be concerned about this. Yes, you can take a pulpit without a divine call. But that doesn’t mean God will be pleased. God uses usurpers, though not usually for their own good (see Jeremiah 14:14-15ff and Jeremiah 23:21-22ff). Disqualified pastors are a scourge on a nation.

Sadly, stubbornness keeps men in pastoral ministry who long ago disqualified themselves. They destroy and devour the flock (Jer 23:1-2, 9-15), and by them many are devastated. And despite the carnage, these wolves in shepherds garb will smugly insist that the “gifts and calling of God are without repentance,” demonstrating that God’s Word is to them a lever for gaining advantage over God’s flock.

Jack Hyles taught us that repentance is not necessary for salvation. And his “preacher boys” learned their lessons well. If salvation comes without repentance, then so does “the call.” And once you get “the call,” this too is without repentance. The smart ones connect the dots well. They can live like the devil and still go to heaven. So they do (live like the devil, at least). Ironically, if one gets caught, all one needs to do is “repent.” Not that repentance is necessary. Just that if he wishes to keep preying on the sheep, it is.

Whether God actually calls a man to pastor who later disqualifies himself or not is a discussion for another time. For now, we can be sure that this too was God’s will, and according to his plan. In other words, it was God’s will that there be a First Baptist Church of Hammond, that Jack Hyles pastor it, that he found Hyles-Anderson College, and that this college produce graduates like John Price. It is God’s will that Jack Schaap pastor that church today. And that should bring us to repentance if nothing else does.

We’re called to salvation.  We receive Christ, having counted the cost.  We volunteer for some realm of service in and through the church.  We desire the office of the bishop.  We’re not called to pastor; we desire it.  “But isn’t that just a matter of terminology?”  Of course, but we base our doctrine on terms.  “Desire” and “call” are different.  When a man talks of a call, it should be ignored unless we see a desire.  Desire is what we’re looking for.  It’s what the Bible says to look for (1 Timothy 3:1). 

When a man desires the office, others will know it.  They are the ones responsible to make sure that the desire is legitimate.  Who are they?

1 Timothy 4:14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

The Presbytery.  Who are they?  Older, Godly men.  Elders, which would for sure include any other pastors.  The word is presbuterion.  The word is used only three times in the New Testament and only once like it is here in 1 Timothy.  Related words and usage demonstrate that they are older, established, Godly men who bear witness of the adequate existence of the qualifications for a bishop in a man, rendering him fit for the office.  Many of the qualities have to do with character.  Some hint toward some observed ability.  I will expand on a few.

Not a Novice

HALOT says a novice is a new Christian.  The novice hasn’t proven himself in the ministry.  There’s not enough of a resume to know whether the desire is there or not.  He hasn’t displayed the qualifications long enough to make a decision on him.  Another potential complication that the text mentions is pride.  Axiomatically, 1 Timothy 5:22 says:  “Lay hands suddenly on no man.”  As a rule, someone should be seasoned first.

What does seasoning look like?  It should look like what a pastor is supposed to do.  A man should have already been involved in the work of the ministry.  Why?  That is what Ephesians 4:11-12 says the job of the pastor is–”to perfect the saints for the work of the ministry.”  I would hope that he understands the ministry first.  I often say in our church that the ministry in a technical sense is “making disciples.”  That’s what I conclude from what Jesus said in Matthew 28:19-20 among other places.  Is this young man involved in making disciples?  Does he do the work of the evangelist (2 Timothy 4:5); does he love preaching the gospel to every creature?  You can’t perfect others if you are not doing it yourself first.  A man with the desire should hunger to reproduce himself through bold evangelism and persistent instruction of the new saint.

Sadly, most churches today don’t even know what the ministry is. Young men cannot grow up in those churches with even a rudimentary understanding of it.  Many learn that some program organized in the church is ministry–youth, seniors, school, children, music, ushers, clean-up, decoration, etc.  At most, these young men learn how to run to McDonald’s for the orange kool-aid, air up a big ball, give an object lesson, and sing a special number.  They have never made a disciple.  They wouldn’t even know where to start.  Even in a sense of Scriptural, corporate ministry, they do not regularly provoke anyone to love or good works (Hebrews 10:24, 25), warn the unruly (1 Thessalinians 5:14), or restore one who is overtaken in a fault (Galatians 6:1).  Every one of these are the duty of the rank-and-file church member, let alone someone who will lead them.  If a young man is not to be a novice in the ministry, he’d better know what it is.

Sober, Temperate

Someone sober is restrained in his conduct, stable, and level-headed.  The temperate is self-controlled.  A young man should have a disciplined life who says he has that desire.  He needs to finish things on time, not procrastinate, and be someone who can be counted on to get a job done.  He must show some tenacity.  You have to be able to take him seriously.  He can’t be so silly that you don’t know when he’s being for real.  He can’t become easily distracted from finishing a task.  He should be someone you wouldn’t at all mind hiring as an employee because you know he will do a good job.

Apt to Teach

The pastor must be a master teacher.  This man will show his desire by developing the skills and acquiring the knowledge necessary to teach.  He must have a solid handle on his doctrine, know his way well around the Word, and understand how to rightly divide it.  He must have the ability to break down a passage and explain what it means and how it applies to someone’s life.  The one who rightly divides the Word of Truth is a workman.  The man apt to teach wants to teach as well as He can.  He will be willing to get whatever tools in his life that will take.

Lover of Good Men

Does he hang around the right type of people?  Does he like being with Godly, disciplined men who will challenge him?  Is he only a user of men?  Someone ready to pastor will pick high quality friends.  He won’t look for people that make him feel good or with which he can just have a good time.  He won’t shy away from those who have a convicting and holy presence.  He loves solid, good men, even if they don’t have his type of personality, loves them for their character and holy work for God.

A man will strive for these and other qualities (the lists are in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1) if he desires the office of a bishop.  You won’t have to call him to develop these traits; he’ll call you.  Whatever gauntlet you want to run him through to get them, he will be ready.  He isn’t striving for a temporal crown, but an eternal one, which he knows works a far greater, eternal weight of glory.

The first sign of the heavenly call is an intense, all-absorbing desire for the work. In order to a true call to the ministry there must be an irresistible, overwhelming craving and raging thirst for telling to others What God has done to our own souls; what if I call it a kind of στοςγη such as birds have for rearing their young when the season is come; when the mother-bird would sooner die than leave her nest. It was said of Alleine by one who knew him intimately, that “he was infinitely and insatiably greedy of the conversion of souls.” When he might have had a fellowship at his university, he preferred a chaplaincy, because he was “inspired with an impatience to be occupied in direct ministerial work.” “Do not enter the ministry if you can help it,” was the deeply sage advice of a divine to one who sought his judgment. If any student in this room could be content to be a newspaper editor, or a grocer, or a farmer or a doctor, or a lawyer, or a senator, or a king, in the name of heaven and earth let him go his way; he is not the man in whom dwells the Spirit of God in its fulness, for a man so filled with God would utterly weary of any pursuit but that for which his inmost soul pants. If on the other hand, you can say that for all the wealth of both the Indies you could not and dare not espouse any other calling so as to be put aside from preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, then, depend upon it, if other things be equally satisfactory, you have the signs of this apostleship. We must feel that woe is unto us if we preach not the gospel; the word of God must he unto us as fire in our bones, otherwise, if we undertake the ministry, we shall be unhappy in it, shall be unable to hem’ the self-denials incident to it, and shall be of little service to those among whom we minister.

Read the rest of this entry →

In the year that King Uzziah died, God commissioned Isaiah the prophet. Isaiah’s commissioning service was unlike any other, before or since. Isaiah saw Adonai. He saw the Sovereign God. He saw dominion and power enthroned in the heavens. He viewed that throne, high and lifted up. He saw the majestic train of the most high God, and that train filled the temple.

Above that majestic train stood the winged serpents, the burning ones of heaven, the celestial dragons, six-winged, and crying out to one another,

Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.

Symbolizing God’s presence, the thresholds shook at the sound of his voice, and a cloud like the Shekinah filled the house. Isaiah saw God in all his glory, in all his splendor. Isaiah saw a vision of the holiness of God, of the sovereignty of God, of the power of God. And unlike many of the Bible College students of our modern day, he did not begin to feel that since he had a superior knowledge of God, and had experienced God in a more real way than the average Christian, he must be called to preach. No, Isaiah saw the Lord in all his glory and holiness and power and dominion, and Isaiah cried out

Woe is me! For I am undone…

This was not simply textbook knowledge with Isaiah. His cry came, not from the thoroughness of his courses in Systematic Theology, but from the weight of guilt laid on his soul. Isaiah cried out in sorrow and wretchedness, and made full confession of his sin.

…because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

And I say, Woe unto us! For we have Ministerial students who have never known God outside of a textbook, whose knowledge of the holy was memorized for a test, who know their own worth better than they know God. A bona fide call to the ministry will come, must come after a bona fide glimpse of the King, the LORD of hosts.

When God calls a man, he first smites that man with his unworthiness, with his failings, with his sinful and ungodly ways. God shows that man His holiness, and reveals that man’s wickedness. Are you called of God? Then you have seen God. And you have seen yourself.

When Isaiah cried out because of his sin, one of the burning ones, the winged serpents flew to him, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar. He laid that live coal on Isaiah’s mouth, and said,

Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged.

When God calls a man, he convinces that man of his wretchedness, and then God himself cleanses that man, takes his sin away, and purges him. God uses clean vessels. But not all those sparkling examples of piety that infest the modern Fundamentalist Bible College. Those guys are holier than thou art, and too holy for the work of the Lord. They are too right, too righteous. Their piety exceeds that even of the pious in Christ’s age. They have washed their own garments, made them ever so white. They are fundamental pharisees, too good to be true, and certainly too good for the ministry.

God showed himself to Isaiah in a powerful way, and Isaiah was broken by the view. God convinced Isaiah of his sin. God himself purified Isaiah. And then, God said,

Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?

God caused Isaiah to volunteer for the ministry. We should not be surprised at the number of people who misinterpret this particular call. We should not be surprised at the rates of “volunteerism” that prevail among Independent Baptists. After all, we value free will above God’s will. We say that it is all of grace, when it actually is all of man. We volunteered, we say. We are humbled to do so, in a proud sort of way.

Isaiah 6:8 is not a proof text for volunteerism. God revealed himself to Isaiah, convicted him, cleansed him, and called him. Isaiah’s response was one of submission, not usurpation. God called, Isaiah responded. God called, Isaiah surrendered. God called, Isaiah obeyed. When God calls a man, God does the calling. The man who calls himself is not called of God. He has not sent them.

When God called Isaiah, God also commissioned him.

And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.

God called Isaiah to preach, not to be successful. In fact, God called him to preach, and promised that he would not be successful. Some would hear, most would not. With some, the preaching would turn them. With most, the preaching would harden. And yet, God sent Isaiah to do a work of hardening, to make them fat, their ears heavy, their eyes blind. How long? Until God was done with those people.

Why is it that Youth Conferences and College chapel messages sound so different than Isaiah 6? Why do we preach the calling of God with such a different tone? We make it sound exciting, romantic, cool. Preaching is neither a burden, nor a flowery bed of ease.

I like the name of the lawyer’s entrance requirements:  the bar.   Have you considered that the only realm where we reward lowering the bar is limbo?  In everything else we, um, like the higher standard as a means of evaluation.  Imagine the commentary for high jump at the Reverse Olympics:

They have lowered the bar now to five feet seven inches from the previous height of seven feet six and this high jumper from Albania is beginning his approach to the bar.  This Albanian jumper uses his own unorthodox style that looks very similar to runners in the high hurdles.  Oh my!  He cleared it with ease and this is a new low in these Olympics!

Why should a restaraunt be closed just because of a microscopic e-coli bacteria?  Kind of stiff isn’t it, especially when these wonderful restaurants have received certificates of authentication from special associations designed for this purpose?  As a digression, I remember a certain Smorga-Bobs where upon entering I heard someone declare:  The chicken doesn’t seem done!  I wished I had remembered that statement.  I was only able to recall those words as I bowed before our white porcelain household appliance, practicing my own unique brand of limbo.  The filets were even more tender the second time.   And can you imagine these advertisements?

We are proud to announce that our pilots were able to pass their requirements according to our new affirmative action policies.

In light of the difficulty of finding enough surgeons to meet the demands, we are pleased to inform our patients that we were able to fill all of our vacant positions by simply lowering the qualifications this year!  We hope you enjoy your stay!

We keep a garage full of trained mechanics by guaranteeing you at least twelve per cent more engine trouble!

To infiltrate these Islamic cells, we’ve lowered our Arabic requirements to minimal levels.  Come and enjoy a lifetime of service in our new CIA!

In most areas of life, we don’t give out the yellow ribbon for participation.  “I realize that you massacred that root canal, but we’d still like to give you this special token of our appreciation for drilling!”  Not happening.

Well, except for preachers, oh, who have been “called.”  Boys go to Bible college.  They got “called to preach.”  You don’t even need to get that out of a box of cereal or Cracker Jacks.  You just need a testimony.  I can write one up for you if you don’t have it.  And if not, well, google.  At a lot of institutions of higher learning, you have to pass a sophomore check to continue on in your speech or piano minor.  Education majors go through student teaching, and perhaps someone can “not recommend.”  Um, perhaps I shouldn’t go there.   I digress again to say that I have found that a majority of teachers get trained by the Christian school who pays them.  Christian colleges, on the other hand, often get paid in order to give these same people what we call a diploma.  Diplomas cost a lot of money.   They will get you a Christian school job where you will then be paid (not much) to be trained.  By the way, if you stop liking teaching, you can always just say that you found out that you weren’t called to do that.

The college shouldn’t subject preachers to a preaching platform because they’ve been called, and who can doubt that?  When I was in college, this was a common conversation in the dormitory:

You taking Greek?

No way.  It’s way too hard, and I don’t need it anyway.

Think you’ll go to grad school?

I don’t think so.  I’ve heard it’s really hard.  I want to just get out and get started in the ministry.  I’m tired of school anyway.

We would sit in homiletics class and listen to one horrible message after another from these called individuals.   As a speech minor, if I had ever done a speech like they preached for my sophomore platform, I would have been looking for a different minor, perhaps something easier so that I could get my diploma faster.  So much more is at stake in the training of a pastor.  Sure, we need more of them, many more of them, but we discredit the office and God when we lower the bar just because they’re called.

Next week, I’ll continue along this train of thought, considering these themes:  Who Is Qualified, Who Qualifies, The Ordination, and Maybe More

When it comes to The Call to full-time ministry, we get some seriously goofy ideas. Almost always, the silliness takes root in the notion that God calls through feelings. Slick evangelists aggressively recruit young people in Youth Conferences around the country, massaging the emotions until, bingo! The teen gets The Call. And we’re all amazed at how God works…

In my few years of Pastoral ministry, I have encountered more than a couple of young people, college-aged, who were obviously dedicated to work full-time in ministry from their youth. (for the sake of clarity, by full-time ministry, I mean a full-time job serving the church, perhaps as a school teacher, secretary, pastor, assistant, etc.) Not that these young people showed any kind of particular aptitude. Nope. They clearly didn’t show that. Nor that these particular young people were especially dedicated. Nope. They clearly weren’t that either. Nor that their local church considered them to be enormously dedicated either. Nope. Not at all, in fact. But they were dedicated, none the less.

Their parents dedicated them. From their earliest days, their parents reared them up to live off the church. These parents intended for the church to supply all the needs that their children would incur, and in exchange, these dedicated young people would offer their services in the classrooms, in the offices, in the ministries of the church. They were Called. They were Chosen. They were Committed. Or at least, they should have been.

I have been surprised on more than one occasion to chance upon young people who obviously had no aptitude for full-time Christian work, but were pursuing it, nevertheless. I interviewed (twice I think) one young man who had dedicated several years to pursuing a degree in Secondary Education, teaching PE. I looked at him. I looked him up and down. I looked again. Maybe it was his five foot ten inch frame encased by three hundred and twelve pounds of pure bulk that threw me. Maybe it was those super soft, callous-free hands - that handshake that reminded me of a very large sponge - that caused me such confusion. Or, maybe it was just me.

“So, what sports do you like to play?” I ask, innocently enough. He replies, “Football.” I nod my head approvingly. Seems right to me. “What position do you like to play?” I ask, guessing center if he can bend over that far. But I am wrong. So very wrong. “Oh no, I don’t play center. I play quarterback. Madden ’07. PlayStation 3. Top score in the house.” Well…

He wants to teach PE. In a Christian school. This should be good. His thumbs do seem to be, shall we say, toned… And I betcha he’ll get in your face after he scores a touchdown too. “Do you do pushups?” “Yea, buddy! But not too often. Most of the time, I just stay near the table.” I move on.

“How did you do in your PE class?” I ask. “Well, that’s something I needed to talk to you about. See, I haven’t actually passed my classes yet. I’m hoping that this next year I’ll get it done. But I really love sports. And I love the Lord, and want to work in a Christian school.” And I’m sure he does. Just not in mine.

I interviewed another young person, a Music Major. I asked this one what instruments he played. He didn’t. I asked him if he liked to sing. He giggled. “When I’m by myself in my room.” I giggled too. “So you don’t sing in special music or anything?” He didn’t. I asked him if he enjoyed composing. Never tried it. Never really looked into it. Knew people did that (those numbers we sing have to come from somewhere, don’t they?), but never thought about it for himself. I asked him if he had studied any composers or compositions, styles of composing or histories of music. Strike four. He thought he might like to. Maybe.

“So, what do you intend to do with this degree of yours?” I asked (politely). (Yes, it was politely, okay! Quit whining about the tone already). He answered me, seriously. “I want to teach!” he said. “Teach what?” I asked. “Music!” he replied. I’ve put him on my list.

I hate to make too much sense here, but I hope you won’t mind if I point out that he wasted four years of college. He and the PE major both did, in fact. And some poor, misguided principle would waste a lot of good parent’s money hiring either one. These young men were dedicated. Someone, no doubt, dedicated them. I’m questioning their dedication, but apparently, their parents dedicated them none the less. God calls for the best of the flock, but one man’s treasure is another man’s trash.

You see, we’ve recently raised a generation of young people whose only hope is that they will get hired by a church. No one else would have them. They can’t imagine doing anything else. They don’t want to do anything else. In fact, they would rather do no work at all. But if they must work, they’ll work the church. Which is why they feel called to full-time ministry of some sort.

And we wonder why our Christian school graduates can be so very worthless.

Whoever God calls, He enables. That is clear. But does the enabling come before the call or after? Maybe we should say instead that whoever God enables, He calls.