about bellevue...
it was pointed out to me by a friend of mine that i may have left an inaccurate impression in my "warrenism" post, and after re-reading it for myself, i tend to agree. i was surprised to hear that there was a terrible rift threatening to tear bellevue baptist church apart, and so i was checking things out to see what was going on, and after following a number of links, found myself at a site called stateofthechurch.com. this site is solely devoted to trashing purpose driven, rick warren and what's come to be known as the "church growth movement." it was at this site that i found a particularly disturbing page that misrepresented the truth (and even told several out and out lies) concerning what happens when a church is transitioned to a purpose driven church. that was what i intended to be the sole focus of the "warrenism" post.
anyway, the way i made the leap from talking about the situation at bellevue baptist, to talking about the lies against purpose driven made it seem that i was lumping the folks that are at odds with their pastor at bellevue in with the anti-warren crowd at stateofthechurch. i dont have a dog in that race over at bellevue, and i dont know any current members there. however, i do have a huge amount of respect and admiration for the late adrian rogers, and considering he pastored bellevue for over 30 years, that sentiment sort of carries over to the church as well. also, it grieves me whenever ANY local church goes through such turmoil, regardless of who may be in the wrong.
however, i'm learning that in such a public forum as the blogosphere its a whole 'nother ballgame than emailing privately with a friend, and i always want to be accountable for the things i write and how i write them (not that i'd ever say one thing in public and another in private, but because i know many that read the blog wont know my heart that well, i have to be more concise and not assume that everyone knows exactly where i'm coming from).
that being said, i feel i need to retract a statement i made in my last post. while on my way to making my point about the lies against purpose driven, i had said that if the things that steve gaines is being accused of turn out to be true, then he should resign. in all my church-going life, i have NEVER called for the resignation of the pastor of my own church, much less the pastor of a church i have no connection with. the proper thing to do would be for pastor gaines to examine himself and repent if and where repentance is needed. if in this time of self-examination the Holy Spirit impresses upon him that his ministry and the ministry of bellevue would best be served by his resignation, then he should follow the conviction of the Spirit. i dont believe he should resign because of pressure brought to bear by any group within or outside the church, but only at the urging of God's Holy Spirit. repentance where repentance is due should be the first objective whether there is a resignation or not. if reconciliation can be achieved, all the better.
this holds true for the savingbellevue camp as well. i've read volumes from both sides, and without knowing any of these folks, it's hard to say what's what. there's humility and arrogance in abundance on both sides of the issue, and the fact it has blown up in such a public way has not pleased God at all.
so to summarize... my beef is not with steve gaines or anyone with concerns about him. i hope there would be honesty and transparency from both sides, and my prayers are with both. i think it was unfortunate that savingbellevue chose to link to the stateofthechurch website, and i would hope that they'd do a little more research and disassociate themselves from the lies and half-truths being put forth from those folks. after all, i find it hard to believe that a church that has grown from a tiny log cabin to 29,000 members could be anti-church growth!
anyway, the way i made the leap from talking about the situation at bellevue baptist, to talking about the lies against purpose driven made it seem that i was lumping the folks that are at odds with their pastor at bellevue in with the anti-warren crowd at stateofthechurch. i dont have a dog in that race over at bellevue, and i dont know any current members there. however, i do have a huge amount of respect and admiration for the late adrian rogers, and considering he pastored bellevue for over 30 years, that sentiment sort of carries over to the church as well. also, it grieves me whenever ANY local church goes through such turmoil, regardless of who may be in the wrong.
however, i'm learning that in such a public forum as the blogosphere its a whole 'nother ballgame than emailing privately with a friend, and i always want to be accountable for the things i write and how i write them (not that i'd ever say one thing in public and another in private, but because i know many that read the blog wont know my heart that well, i have to be more concise and not assume that everyone knows exactly where i'm coming from).
that being said, i feel i need to retract a statement i made in my last post. while on my way to making my point about the lies against purpose driven, i had said that if the things that steve gaines is being accused of turn out to be true, then he should resign. in all my church-going life, i have NEVER called for the resignation of the pastor of my own church, much less the pastor of a church i have no connection with. the proper thing to do would be for pastor gaines to examine himself and repent if and where repentance is needed. if in this time of self-examination the Holy Spirit impresses upon him that his ministry and the ministry of bellevue would best be served by his resignation, then he should follow the conviction of the Spirit. i dont believe he should resign because of pressure brought to bear by any group within or outside the church, but only at the urging of God's Holy Spirit. repentance where repentance is due should be the first objective whether there is a resignation or not. if reconciliation can be achieved, all the better.
this holds true for the savingbellevue camp as well. i've read volumes from both sides, and without knowing any of these folks, it's hard to say what's what. there's humility and arrogance in abundance on both sides of the issue, and the fact it has blown up in such a public way has not pleased God at all.
so to summarize... my beef is not with steve gaines or anyone with concerns about him. i hope there would be honesty and transparency from both sides, and my prayers are with both. i think it was unfortunate that savingbellevue chose to link to the stateofthechurch website, and i would hope that they'd do a little more research and disassociate themselves from the lies and half-truths being put forth from those folks. after all, i find it hard to believe that a church that has grown from a tiny log cabin to 29,000 members could be anti-church growth!
posted by dean at 10:25 PM
2 Comments:
Dean - I felt that your original statement "if what some are saying he did is true, he should resign" was perfectly acceptable (and, more importantly, concise). The operative word is "should." This implies that a resignation would have been determined (by Gaines) to be the "best course of action," and I don't think you've really "retracted" that statement: you've only qualified it to death.
In the end, advice or not, you've no need to mince words or apologize. You said it adequately the first time, and any reasonable person who can understand your stance from the context need not accuse you of "calling for" a resignation.
Any authority whose continued leadership causes more harm than good "should" step down - that's not an inapporpriate usurpation of the Spirit...it's simply a good, ethical maxim, and, in my opinion, more people should consider living by it.
mark...
i'm glad i've got dictionary.com and thesaurus.com in my bookmarks. you keep me on my toes! i may be the one who isnt so reasonable, because i'm the one that accused me of "calling for" gaines' resignation. my friend (who pointed out to me that my transition - or lack thereof - from bellevue to warren might be confusing) merely caused me to go re-read it for myself. i was the one who decided to go back and address it in a new posting.
i consider it a retraction. my original statement was my carnal and worldly gut-reaction to the things i had read. i didnt think it through in my haste to move from there to what i was really wanting to get to, which was the warren-bashers. only steve gaines and God know for sure if he's done anything wrong or immoral. only the saving bellevue group and God know for sure if their hearts are right and their motives are pure. thats why i need to recognize that the Holy Spirit makes the call on resignations and/or removals from church rolls... not me.
i always appreciate your point of view, mark. your comments make things more interesting around here!
Post a Comment
<< Home