Creating a Secure CHURCH
PART 4 : When Things Go Wrong
Chapter 13 : Secure in Correction – Theory
13.6 Lessons to be Learnt?
The way we view John, and what happened to him, tell a lot about us, in fact what they tell about us is more important than what they tell us about his downfall. You may have fallen into the trap and started to assess John at the various times in the account. Pharisees will condemn him and want to throw stones and put him out of the church, and liberals would say it happens to all of us, so what.
But perhaps Jesus wouldn’t follow either of those courses. In John 8:1-11, which we looked at in an earlier chapter, we saw Jesus accepting that there was sin but refusing to condemn. Instead he sought restoration of life for the woman. For those of us trying to create a secure church there are perhaps some obvious lessons we ought to take on board from this fictitious story above:
1. Corporate failure
The Pharisees in John 8 failed to realise the following crucial things, so eager were they to condemn:
- The potential for failure was in them. We are all part of the same sinful human race, we all suffer from what theologians call ‘original sin’.
- ‘There but for the grace of God’ applies. They hadn’t fallen, simply because their life circumstances had protected them. If we lived in a slum ghetto in one of the larger cities away from the affluent West, we might not feel so strong about our convictions! (not an excuse, just a reason!)
- If the Jewish society had been working properly, adultery should never have happened (see my comments in a previous Chapter). If the Christian church was flowing in the love of God, following the Spirit, filled with the wisdom of God, then many of our failures wouldn’t have happened.
2. Concerned for restoration
Various people have commented that the Christian church seems to be the only army that shoots its wounded. So often we seem more concerned to wreak vengeance or judgment upon some poor, pitiful individual who has fallen to the wiles of the enemy, than to restore them.
The only times Jesus spoke strongly was when he was having to break into the strongholds of uncaring, legalistic, Pharisaical thinking of the religious leaders who should have known better, and the only reason, I would suggest, that he spoke like that was that he knew that they were so hardened that they would not repent. Where there was a sinful but open heart, he spoke with gentleness with the aim of restoration.
When a leader falls there is a revealing of hearts in all those who look on. Consider, if a well known leader falls, how would you react? The heart of Jesus grieves and weeps, but in the twenty first century, it seems, so many rejoice or walk away muttering, “Well it doesn’t surprise me,” The failure of any Christian leader is a loss to the Christian church and our efforts should be focused into gently restoring this person (Gal 6:1). Harsh words of condemnation and a separating away from this ’sinner’ reveals hard pharisaical hearts, hearts that deserve the discipline of God as much as that of ‘the sinner’.
This is so important we need to stay with it for a bit longer. David knew this experience, as we find it recorded in Psalm 35. Speaking about those who came against him he said:
“when they were ill, I put on sackcloth and humbled myself with fasting. When my prayers returned to me unanswered, I went about mourning as though for my friend or brother. I Bowed my head in grief as though weeping for my mother.“ (v.13,14)
This was how he had been when others had been in need. He had poured himself out for them. Now see what follows:
“But when I stumbled they gathered in glee; attackers gathered against me when I was unaware. They slandered me without ceasing. Like the ungodly they maliciously mocked; they gnashed their teeth at me.“ (v.15,16)
Somehow he stumbled and immediately all those he had cared for turned on him. And these people were his people, not the ungodly! But they behaved just like the ungodly. It should not be so! It must not be so! Yet it seems that even in the church today, supposedly the bringers of grace and mercy to the world, we still fail in this way. It should not be so! It must not be so!
3. The Inadequacy of the Law
The Law struggles to be applied in grey areas. The truth is sometimes difficult to discern. Setting boundaries, unless firmly set by God (such as “Thou shalt not commit adultery”), becomes an arbitrary human past-time for the sake of trying to condemn. At the end of a fruitless exercise, all we may be left with is that we are all guilty, we’ve all failed, it’s just a case of a bunch of sinners trying to pin down a lonely sinner. Do I hear the creaks of consciences shifting uneasily? Do I hear someone saying, “It sounds like you are saying it’s all right to sin, then?” No, I’m not, but it’s giving me hope that I may be in good company (Rom 6:1). They do say that whenever you are preaching grace correctly, someone will accuse you of heresy! No, this chapter is about correction, the fact that we need it, and the fact that it is so difficult to determine when it is needed and how it should be brought!
Some Conclusions
What have we considered so far in this complex subject?
- Categorising sin is sometimes difficult.
- When the Bible is specific about certain wrong behaviours, we can likewise declare them unacceptable There is a distinction between wilful and unwitting sin.
- A lot of things we do seem to have no moral content.
- Correction is obviously needed when there is obvious sin, but we need to be careful where the nature of the actions are not so clear.
- ‘Correction’ can be a disguise for leaders working out their own visions and bringing the people in line.
- Because we all fail, none of us has the right to be condemnatory.
- When there is failure we should be looking more for restoration than for bringing judgment.
Some Conclusions Applied
Let’s go right back to the beginning of the book, to Chapter 1 where we envisaged a Pastor, again by the name of John, who walked into a church business meeting only to find the entire group of leaders walk out on him after demanding his resignation. What would have been a far more caring and graceful approach to that?
Well, first it is to recognise that Pastor John is on his own and, quite obviously, it’s been like that for some time. Surely what is needed here is for other leaders to try to come alongside John before it gets to crisis point, to build relationship with him and then, from a position of trust to start talking about some of the concerns being expressed? If it has got to a point of no return and John has reached burnout but doesn’t recognise it, surely the caring and compassionate approach is to offer him a paid holiday or sabbatical, so that he can recharge his batteries and regain perspective? If we are seeking to be a caring and compassionate church, then that must be extended to John as well? As we noted above, the outcome of correcting this situation should be the restoration of John, not casting him out?
