To Talk is to Walk-ism reigns in the CGGC to the degree that repenting of it and turning from it has been impossible in the past, though some have attempted to bring about change.
My understanding of the demise of my ministry in the ERC is that the Talk-ists crushed me like a bug because I attacked the Talkism of ERC officials because they defy our polity.
In the day, my message was, and it still is, that the ultimate human authority in the CGGC Body is the Conference, what we once called the Eldership.
To use the $100 theological words: Our polity is Presbyterial.
According to our talk, when the Eldership speaks, Directors, even Executive Directors are required to submit to its authority.
My contention is that it was ERC office holders, not I, who are insubordinate.
I take the Eldership's claim that the Bible is "our only rule of faith and practice" seriously and literally. I submit to the CGGC Mission Statement and its claim that we "establish churches on the New Testament plan."
Whether ERC leadership will continue to be insubordinate to the authority of the Eldership under Nick DiFrancesco remains to be seen.
But, and I want to be clear about this: I am truly and genuinely hopeful.
------------------
I've been watching a situation that's been developing concerning an ERC congregation with which Evie and I have a long and personal connection.
------------------
As I see it, a type of hypocrisy has functioned in the ERC since before I entered the Eldership in the 1970s. That particular hypocrisy may be challenged.
For generations, the ERC has been hypocritical with regard to its polity in a disastrous and dysfunctional way.
The CGGC claims that its human authority rests in the Eldership the Conference.
Yet, the office holders...the Directors and Executive Directors, even Commission Chairs and members...of the ERC have often behaved as if we are Episcopal and that they possess the authority of Bishops and Popes.
And, curiously, at the same time, defiant and rebellious congregations are permitted to act as if we are conregational...so long as they pay their tithe to the Conference or, at least, a substantial part of it.
Eldership authority is defied in the ERC by staff, and by congregations, as a matter of course.
So, it may be that the first important test of Nick DiFrancesco will be how he handles this form of ERC Talk-ist dysfunction.
-------------------
As I say, I've been watching what's taking place in an ERC congregation that we know fairly well.
Currently, the congregation is doing what many ERC congregations have been doing since I've been around, that is, behaving as if our polity is congregational and the congregation has the authority to do as it pleases without regard to the remainder of the ERC body.
According to numerous well-placed sources, Conference staff intervened and offered rather specific direction on how the congregation should go forward...
...and, the congregation, under the direction of its credentialed minister, defied the direction of Conference staff.
From what I know from several sources who have connection to these events from different perspectives, this is the case.
Based on what I know, and am convinced is true, the congregation defied CGGC polity and behaved as if the ERC is congregational.
(What I don't know is if the Conference behaved as if Conference staff members are bishops and popes or if they functioned as servants of the Body.)
------------------
Here are some things I do know from a big-picture perspective:
1. Prebyterial polity is unstable. In my opinion, of the three options in polity, Presbyterial polity most closely resembles the New Testament. But, that type of church government tends to break down in exactly the way it has deteriorated in the CGGC. The body becomes institutionalized. The people in the hierarchy quickly come to think of themselves as leaders of the institution, not servants of the body. Clearly, that happened in the past in the ERC. And, congregations lose spiritual connection to the body and begin to behave as if they operate under their own authority. That has been the case with many ERC congregations for generations.
2. Cynicism begins to rule the body. Staffers disrespect many of the congregations and local churches become anti-Conference.
3. The mutual submission described in 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4 & 5, and the love for one another commanded by Jesus in John 13 disappear.
4. Chaos reigns.
5. Spiritual decay takes place.
6. The Spirit refuses to bless due to disobedience and lack of repentance.
7. Numerical decline often results.
8. After a culture forms around these realities, many of the people who are a part of it, accept the dysfunction as a given, even a good thing.
9. Efforts to behave in any other way are resisted.
10. Attempts to actually change the system are regarded by many to be an abomination...in spite of the reigning cynicism, chaos and spiritual decay.
------------------
And, that is where the ERC is.
Yet, the ERC may be at a moment in its history at which change may take place.
It's hard for me to see, in the ERC, fruit of the godly sorrow that produces a repentance that leads to salvation, at least not yet.
But, disgust with the failure of the old ways did result in the selection of an Executive Director who breaks the mold and he may provide what leadership gurus call the "disruptive innovation" that, in time, leads to genuine godly sorrow...and repentance...and, as Paul describes it, salvation.
------------------
I have no direct involvement in the conflict between church and conference that I've described.
But, many people I know, and care for, and respect, are involved. And, I'm watching, hoping that a longstanding ERC hypocrisy will be attacked and defeated.
No comments:
Post a Comment