Robert Haldane observed in his commentary on the twelfth chapter of Romans that Paul had a special way of using his authority.
When it comes to authority, we might have some assumptions about Paul. We would assume that Paul would only have a commanding tone in his speaking because he possessed the right of authority. We would expect that his syntax would be always in the imperative mood.
But Haldane observed that Paul didn’t use his authority that way. Paul said, “I beseech you” or “I appeal to you” (Rom 12:1). Haldane wrote:
Those whose authority was avouched by mighty signs and wonders, whose very word was command, strive frequently to express commands as entreaties.
Commentary, 566.
Haldane’s observation is that the apostles were not insecure about their authority, even though their authority had been clearly demonstrated. Yet the apostles could choose to entreat people and appeal to them by way of persuasion, rather than command. They didn’t need to be defensive. They had the liberty to persuade when they had the right to command.
This observation is helpful for pastors to know. Often, according to the authority of God’s word, there is the need to exercise authority and make commands (as Scripture requires). At the same time, the aim of persuading by entreating ought to be the norm.
This is where the pastoral requirement of gentleness comes to the forefront (Ti 3:2). Gentleness is persuading, entreating and compassionate, even when the right to command exists.
Paul would nevertheless urge Timothy, “Command and teach these things” (1 Timothy 4:11). These leaders had the right to command and exercised that right. But when they had the opportunity, they would “express commands as entreaties”.
I drove through the Siksika Nation recently and saw the cemetery named after Paul Little Walker. He was a Christian believer whose testimony of coming to faith in Christ showed the power of the gospel to save and transform a life. I wrote about this transformation before in An Indigenous Testimony to Gospel Transformation.
As I saw the cemetary, I was reminded of Paul Little Walker, or Pokopi’ni’s testimony to the gospel. One of the evidences of Little Walker’s conversion was the way that he discarded the sacred objects, and identifiers that connected him to the false worship he had been immersed in before his conversion. Hugh Dempsey, the historian, writes about Little Walker:
And just as Small Eyes–Paul Little Walker– had turned away from his old religion, so did he now reject the objects that went with it. He quit the Horns and the warrior socieities, gave the marten flag to Bishop Pinkham, and turned the thunder arrow, painted staff and the other holy objects over to his wife.
Pretty Nose (Little Walker’s wife) was aghast at the reactions of her husband. She had joined the Horn Society with him and had taken part in many of the ceremonies. She became angry when he started to give things away, but no amount of arguing would change his mind. She reminded him of the power of the holy objects and the misfortune that had come to others who had desecrated them. But he remained steadfast in his devotion to the new religion.
The Amazing Death of Calf Shirt and Other Blackfoot Stories, 229.
Although many calamities fell on the new Christian, Little Walker did not forsake the Christian faith. When his wife died and his painted tepee was hit by lightning, others interpreted these disasters as signs that Little Walker should return to the native spiritualities. But he refused and continued on zealously as a Christian.
Later, as an older man, respected as a churchman, but also for his growth in graciousness (in contrast to his naturally harsh temperament), he showed that his faith in Christ was a true conversion as he persevered to the end. Dempsey wrote:
His chest still bore the scars of the self-torture ritual [i.e. Sun Dance], and the joint of his finger was missing because of his Native religion, but ever since that night in 1898 when his vision had taken him to God, Little Walker had pursued only two goals in life– to be a Christian, and to bring others to his church.
Ibid, 233.
Like any Christian convert, Little Walker was not instantly sanctified but needed to grow and change. His natural pride, combined with his single-mindedness meant that he could lack grace in dealing with others, even as he was passionate about the truth of God’s word in the midst of his people’s need. But God progressively refined Little Walker to hold fast to truth while at the same time, extending grace to sinners.
There is much to learn from the Christian testimonies of Indigenous people, but what is clear is that Christ’s power to save in the gospel is always the same— a miracle.
In his foreword to Sinclair Ferguson’s book, The Whole Christ, Tim Keller writes:
I learned …that to think the main problem out there is one particular error is to virtually put one foot into the other error.
The Whole Christ, Foreword, 14
Keller’s lesson learned from Ferguson is useful on many fronts. We can often think that there is only one error when there might be more than one. An example of this is how the desire to avoid one trinitarian error can easily lead a person to fall into a different error. It is not a matter of falling into a ditch on one side or another, the whole doctrine of the trinity is surrounded by a moat. We must pay attention or else we’ll slip and fall in.
The specific issues that Sinclair Ferguson’s book are dealing with are the topics of legalism and antinomianism. Keller goes on to expand on what he learned from Ferguson’s book:
If you fail to see what Sinclair is saying—that both legalism and antinomianism stem from a failure to grasp the goodness and graciousness of God’s character— it will lead you to think that what each mind-set really needs for a remedy is a little dose of the other. In this view, it would mean that the remedy for legalism is just less emphasis on the law and obedience, and the the remedy for antinomianism is more.
Ibid, 14
How often in ministry have we seen or practiced this idea of giving “a little dose of the other”. Discipleship is relaxed. Consciences can be bound tighter. Sin is winked at. Or leadership can tightly control behaviour. In the end, we should be able to see the tendencies and temptations toward applying “a little dose of the other” in our lives and ministry.
Keller warns about this strategy of “a little dose of the other” when he writes:
This is dangerous. If you tell those tending toward legalism that they shouldn’t talk so much about obedience and the law, you are pushing them toward the antinomian spirit that annot see the law as a wonderful gift of God. If you tell those tending toward antinomianism that they should point people more to divine threats and talk more about the dangers of disobedience, you are pushing them toward the legal spirit that sees the law as a covenant of works rather than as a way to honor and give pleasure to the one who saved them by grace.
Ibid, 14.
So there is a great danger in putting your foot into the other error, simply by thinking that there is only one. This is the confusing thing for new Christians, and it can be very limiting to the growth of those who have been believers for many years. It is how a person can start to lose their first love (Rev 2:4).
Keller points to the solution or remedy which Sinclair Ferguson offers in this excellent book. Ferguson says clearly:
The gospel is designed to deliver us from this lie [of the Serpent], for it reveals that behind and manifested in the coming of Christ and his death for us is the love of a Father who gives us everything he has: first his Son to die for us, and then his Spirit to live within us… There is only one genuine cure for legalism. It is the same medicine the gospel prescribes for antinomianism: understanding and tasting union with Jesus Christ himself. This leads to a new love for and obedience to the law of God.
Ibid, 15.
This is such good news! The gospel is what we all need, and it is the remedy to our propensities, trajectories, personalities, and most of all, to our sin. We can sin in legalistic ways and antinomian ways, but the gospel cures all.
And if you are worried that “gospel-centered everything” is an error in itself, simply read Ferguson’s book, The Whole Christ. You’ll regain clarity about the gospel and how it remedies legalism and antinomianism, which places the gospel at the center of everything, not in a superficial way, but a God-glorifying way.
The perennial question of the fate of those who have never heard the gospel is addressed by Robert Haldane.
While it is on all hands admitted that the knowledge of the gospel is highly beneficial, there are many who may hold that it is not indispensable to salvation. This opinion is opposed to the whole testimony of the Scriptures, whether they refer to the way of salvation, or to the condition of all who are strangers to the gospel. From every part of the word of God, it is obvious that salvation comes to none of the human race in any other way than through the knowledge, more or less clear, of the Messiah, before or after his advent. “Neither is there salvation in any other for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.” [Acts 4:12] Multitudes, however, are unwilling to admit that salvation should be so limited in its extent as to be confined to those who have enjoyed the advantage of a revelation with respect to the Messiah. They have, therefore, endeavored to show that the benefits of Christ’s death may be available to those whom they term the virtuous in all nations, even although they have heard nothing of the revelation of mercy (emphasis mine).
From Exposition of Epistle to the Romans (1858), 670.
John Bunyan wrote a book called Antichrist and his Ruin. I’m guessing it’s one of his works that are seldom read today. People, at least in the church circles I run in don’t talk much about the Antichrist. They don’t talk about the judgement to come either. Maybe that’s why we don’t share the gospel very often.
Since I’ve been preaching through the book of Daniel, I’ve had to re-engage with the topic of the Antichrist and to consider his ‘ruin’ as Bunyan put it. And although many antichrists have been identified through history (Joe Carter lists over a half dozen), these days fewer people seem to care about the reality of godless, supernatural opposition to Christ and the gospel. We tend to be fixated on politics– good or bad– as the only level of warfare in existence. As American Senator Ben Sasse has observed, “so many of those local tribes of textured meaning [i.e. family, neighbourhood, workplace, local church] are in collapse, and people are looking for substitute tribes in politics. And I don’t think that’s going to work out very well.” So I’ve looked with interest at what a wise guide like Bunyan has to say about the Antichrist, and the spirit of antichrist which is at work “already in the world” (1 John 4:3).
Bunyan’s Introduction to the Identity of the Antichrist
In one of his opening descriptions, Bunyan sets out the way that the Antichrist is the antonym of Christ, yet deceptively so. This sense of being the opposite of Christ, but with a false veneer or duplicitous camouflage, is the character of Antichrist which Bunyan seeks to emphasize. He writes:
Antichrist is the adversary of Christ; an adversary really, a friend pretendedly: So then, Antichrist is one that is against Christ; one that is for Christ, and one that is contrary to him: (And this is that mystery of iniquity (2 Thess 2:7). Against him in deed; for him in word, and contrary to him in practice. Antichrist is so proud as to go before Christ; so humble as to pretend to come after him, and so audacious as to say that himself is he. Antichrist will cry up Christ; Antichrist will cry down Christ: Antichrist will proclaim that himself is one above Christ. Antichrist is the man of sin, the son of perdition; a beast, [that] hath two horns like a lamb, but speaks as a dragon (Rev 13:11).
Works, Volume II, 46.
Consider that according to Bunyan’s reading of Scripture, the Antichrist is obviously against Christ, but less obviously seen to be against Christ. He is against Christ in activity, but presents himself publically as a supporter of Christ (“for him in word”), even “pretending” to come after him in humility, but all with an “audacious” arrogance.
All of this means that Antichrist has a religious connection, engaged with church circles.
Antichrist subverts the church with false support.
Bunyan’s List of Contrasts Between Christ and Antichrist
Another way that Bunyan helps us to understand the Antichrist is by contrasting him with the vast superiority of Jesus Christ. In fact, even Bunyan’s contrasts are inadequate because Jesus Christ the Son of God is in a category by himself, and is utterly incomparable. But for the purposes of giving an introduction, Bunyan suggests the follow antonymic comparisons:
Christ is the Son of God; Antichrist is the son of Hell.
Christ is holy, meek, and forbearing: Antichrist is wicked, outrageous, and exacting.
Christ seeketh the good of the soul: Antichrist seeks his own avarice and revenge.
Christ is content to rule by his word: Antichrist saith, The word is not sufficient.
Christ preferreth his Father’s will above heaven and earth: Antichrist preferreth himself and his traditions above all that is written, or that is called God, or worshiped.
Christ has given us such laws and rules as are helpful and healthful to the soul: Antichrist seeketh to abuse those rules to our hurt and destruction. (Works, Volume II, 46.)
The descriptors which Bunyan uses to describe Jesus Christ are beautiful. Against our cultural moment, Christ is forbearing, seeks the good of the soul, rules by his word, prefers his Father’s will, and gives what is helpful and healthful to the soul. Bunyan saw in the Lord Jesus Christ one who is gratuitous in his help toward his creatures.
By contrast, the Antichrist is the opposite, though he feigns to hide his true intentions.
If we take the Bunyan’s descriptions and lay them up against our cultural moment, the zeitgeist, the spirit of the age, then you can see clearly how much the spirit of antichrist is upon us.
Think about how everyone and everything is so exacting these days. If the Antichrist is, according to Bunyan, “wicked, outrageous, and exacting” then the spirit of Antichrist is clearly evident in our social media. If you misspell something on Facebook, or mess up some grammar, someone will correct you in exacting detail. If you tweet something that is out of line with the prevailing cultural orthodoxies, you’re statement will be parsed, critiqued, and judged with an execution of shame. Twitter can be an exacting platform, that is at the same time outrageous, and not so subtly wicked.
We see that growing tendency for people to turn quickly against leaders, public servants, customer service reps, believers, churches, organizations and anyone else when they feel they have been wronged. It’s as if there is a spirit of revenge that is waiting to burst out at the slightest injury. How strikingly different is the impulse of Christ himself, who “seeketh the good of the soul”.
And of course, the church is wrestling with the problem of whether or not they will follow Christ’s rule by his word, or listen to the spirit of Antichrist which says that “the word is not sufficient”
It is a simple binary. Follow Christ or heed the Antichrist. Christ is Lord. He is God, the Son incarnate. He is above all and over all. The Antichrist would presume to set himself above the Creator. Yet the spirit of antichrist prevails even in such unlikely places as critical New Testament scholarship. For example, Robert Yarbrough documents how critical NT scholars, set themselves above Scripture, rather than under it. As reported from Yarbrough’s lectures in 2018:
Elitism, dating back only a few centuries to Germann scholars, he explained, does not necessarily take the Bible at face value and views the Bible from “a superior vantage point,” often dismissing or reinterpreting claims of Scripture. It is the viewpoint of the academy, Yarbrough said, and is marked by a critical study of the Bible that rejects a doctrinal interpretation of it.
Bunyan would argue that such critical scholarship is an example of the spirit of antichrist, inspiring creatures to set themselves above Christ, to pass judgement on him and his word, and to draw attention to themselves for their cleverness and omniscience.
Of course, this type of spirit is everywhere in society. Yet how different it is to find the humbled, diligent follower of Jesus Christ, who confesses him as her Lord, who enjoys his gratuity with thanksgiving tempered with awe and wonder!
The Illusion of Culture Wars?
If the spirit of antichrist presents the advance claims of “the man of lawlessness”, then we should admit that we might be wrong in our perception of where the battle lines are drawn. We need to admit that we are likely wrong that our primary battlefront is in the culture war. The culture war is the diversion. Rather, the real warfare is against the spirit of antichrist, which aims to deceive the church (Matt 24:4).
As Paul told the Ephesians:
For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
Ephesians 6:12
Therefore, then as now, we need to, “take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm.” (Eph 6:13)
This is a list of resources that you may find helpful. It is a curation based on my own choices, like any curation. Let this be a sieve for you to drain and collect what is useful.
captive by philosophy
There are some philosophies entering into the church which Christians need to be aware of. The philosophies are in a cluster composed of Critical Theory and Intersectionality.
intersectionality
Rosaria Butterfield, the former lesbian university professor, now Christian believer, has written about intersectionality for Table Talk at Ligonier ministries. She says:
How did we get to a place where it makes sense for a person to reject truth not because it’s false but because it hurts? How did we get to a place where we label people—image bearers of a holy God—as knowable primarily by their political and social group, as if that is their truest and most indelible virtue? Under what worldview could my words cause suicide but the genital mutilation that allows a biological man to masquerade as a woman cause celebration and affirmation?
Shenvi says that Critical Theory is a worldview that is antithetical to Christianity. He writes:
The story of critical theory begins not with creation, but with oppression. The omission of a creation element is very important because it changes our answer to the question: “who are we?” There is no transcendent Creator who has a purpose and a design for our lives and our identities. We don’t primarily exist in relation to God, but in relation to other people and to other groups. Our identity is not defined primarily in terms of who we are as God’s creatures. Instead, we define ourselves in terms of race, class, sexuality, and gender identity. Oppression, not sin, is our fundamental problem. What is the solution? Activism. Changing structures. Raising awareness. We work to overthrow and dismantle hegemonic power. That is our primary moral duty. What is our purpose in life? To work for the liberation of all oppressed groups so that we can achieve a state of equity.
The current spirit of the age involves these variations of a cultural Marxism which has morphed into Critical Theory. It relates to issues of ethnicity (Critical Race Theory), gender and (LGBTQ+ advocacy), politics and more.
I have written about cultural Marxism, and the helpful analysis of Albert Mohler and Robert Smith, here.
Paul’s warning to the Colossians is very applicable here:
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
Colossians 2:8
idealized cultures
Some more articles in this vein are Leonardo De Chirico on Pope Francis and his new statement Querida Amazonia. :
Querida Amazonia tends to have a very positive view of indigenous cultures – at times somewhat naïve – and in so doing it lacks biblical realism. According to the Bible, cultures are not to be idealized nor demonized: they are mixed bags of idolatry and common grace in need of redemption. Pope Francis tends to idealize native cultures, seeing them as already infused by the grace of God.
This seems to derive from a similar philosophy to the intersectional/cultural marxist ones mentioned above.
What Does the Bible Say About…
Lust, Homosexuality, Transgenderism? Owen Strachan and my fellow pastor Gavin Peacock have written a trilogy of books that address simply what the bible says about three areas of hot contention. In these areas, some of the philosophies mentioned above are deeply embedded. Highly recommended.
D.M. Lloyd-Jones wrote about the perils of a useless, defective or “eccentric orthodoxy”. He outlined the problem of possessing correct notions, without holiness of life:
…we can be perfectly orthodox and yet our orthodoxy can be useless if we are failing in our lives, if we are disobedient to God’s holy laws, if we are guilty of sin, and continuing in known sin. If we put our desires before him, well, we have no right to expect revival, however orthodox and correct we may be in all our doctrines and in all our understanding. You will invariably find that when revival comes men and women are profoundly, and deeply, convicted of sin. They feel that even God cannot forgive them. They have been in the Church, yes, but they have been living a life of sin, and they have know it and they have done nothing about it. When revival comes they are put into hell, as it were, and they are horrified and alarmed. They may feel so terrible about it that they stand up and confess it. That may or may not happen, but they are certainly convicted. And so sin in any shape or form is ever one of the major hindrances to a visitation of the Spirit of God.
I’ve had a couple of people ask me about an article that I wrote, Move Toward Elder Leadership By Developing Pillar Men. The concern that was expressed was that the article lacked context. Without that context, it could be misunderstood in different ways, such as minimizing the contributions of older men in the church, or offering a sort of disingenuous, ‘fifth column’ approach to ministry. Without the context explained I can see that some of these impressions could be taken. So I’ll attempt to unpack a bit better what I mean.
A Pastor’s Dilemma in a “Revitalization”
If a pastor takes a job at a church, at the minimum, there ought to be agreement on paper with the doctrinal positions that he and the church maintain. However, often in spiritually declining churches, the church body has immature understandings of their own statement faith, or at worst they are a resistant to change, even though such change is argued from Scripture and in keeping with their own statement of faith.
This type of resistance is the normal context of a revitalization. It may be that some churches are more or less resistant, or they are not resistant, but they are unaware of their practical, doctrinal inconsistencies.
A conservative pastor who takes a job in a less than conservative church, will have his hands full in staying faithful to his own convictions, working within the parameters of his doctrinal agreement with the church, and extending grace to the congregation as he has received from the Lord.
Still, pastors will have to make choices. They are limited and they need to know where should they expend their energies in ministry. The priority must be in preaching the Word of God and praying for God to be glorified in the context of the ministry (cf. Acts 6:4). Many pastors will aim to be faithful to this calling, and in the face of resistance, they will not have much more to offer in the ministry. They will feel overtaxed very quickly. They will pray and teach and minister to people as they can. However, in resistant contexts, they can get burnt out in a hurry because they can feel alone in the work, without like-minded support. Many younger men (and older ones) have had short ministries in churches that need revitalization, and they leave that church (and the ministry) disillusioned and exhausted. Often they never knew where to start to address the dilemma of revitalization beyond their Sunday morning ministry.
The Missing Mentorship
Most pastors in a revitalization are exhausted by maintaining the regular ministry work. What tends to be dropped is the command to Timothy in 2 Timothy 2:2, “what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also”. This mentorship of potentially ‘pillar men’ needs to be a high priority for the pastor facing the dilemma of revitalization. It is easily ignored due to the busy demands of regular ministry. However if these men are not invested in, then you are failing to steward your ministry faithfully, and ignoring the long-term view of the church.
Older Men
Some of the misunderstandings of my previous article had to do with my emphasis on younger men, (although I did qualify my statements about older men). Given the context of a revitalization, (which I had not stated in the article, but was the context of the pastor whom I was counselling), the young men need to be prioritized. Why would I say that? Is it because like our culture says, youth is better than old age? No. The reason is based upon the ministry context that I was addressing. A church that has become schlerotic and sick has had its older members participate in promoting the decline, or more likely, watching as the decline occurred all around them.
In spiritually or doctrinally compromised churches, the older men tend to be doctrinally confused, apathetic, or sadly unsaved. Sometimes there will be a lamenting stalwart who has remained at the church despite the decline, but who has prayed and hoped for better things. Often that man can be a great ally for a pastor as he seeks to bring a church back to biblical moorings. But generally speaking, older men who have become set in their ways, are in deep ruts of bad teaching or bad practice, and they can be resistant to biblical change.
Strategic Positions
So assuming that there are not a pocket of older men who are spiritually mature and supportive of biblical change in the church, a pastor will invest in the men’s ministry and the young men in particular.
Over time, as those young men are mentored (2 Tim 2:2), there will be opportunities for various kinds of ministry in the church which they can take up. At this point, the temptation can be for the up and coming ‘pillar men’ to only want to study theology, and teaching or preach publicly. This is where a wise and strategic understanding of the church is critical. According to 1 Cor 12, Ro 12 and Eph 4:15-16, the principle of the church as the body of Christ must be dominant. This means that every believer has God-given roles to play in the body, just as elbows, toes, eyes, lungs and cartilege all have various roles.
Pillar men have roles to play in a church, and it is critical that they are encouraged to fulfill those roles. The primary way for them to do this is to engage in faithful churchmanship. And that means they should start to serve in ‘unglamorous’ ministries. This is where real relationships are developed, where biblical examples of being salt and light (Matthew 5:13-14) can be expressed. Remember, we’re talking about ministry in a church that has been in spiritual and doctrinal decline. Often ministry inside these churches is more like evangelism than the discipleship of believers.
As I counselled my pastor friend, I stressed that ministries or committees that might seem unimportant, are nevertheless viewed as important by people in the church. When pillar men engage in patient empathetic ways with these committees and ministries, they show that they care about the people, but they also care enough to be “speaking the truth in love” (Eph 4:15).
In my article, due to its abbreviated manner and lack of context, it might have given the impression that slotted these pillar men into these ministries is a sort of cynical infiltration. On the contrary, when pillar men (or any godly person man or woman) takes a caring interest in others, they are showing that they care about the people, not just about their picture of ecclesiastical perfection. At the same time, when pillar men commit to engage with ministries and committees, they do so with the aim to bring the thinking and the actions of the church into conformity to Christ, taking even every thought captive to him (2 Cor 10:5). This aim is no dark conspiracy, but is the design of the healthy body of Christ, “joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love” (Eph 4:16).
Culture Before Constitutions
One of the frequent challenges which pastors face is to assist a church to reform it’s governance structures. For example, in Canada, it is surprising how many churches are governed by a board of directors model. This model is not found in Scripture, but is found in the manuals of IBM and General Motors. In the face of these unbiblical structures, many zealous pastors have attempted to instituted structural change rapidly. They push the church to move toward a plurality of elders, or they push to implement meaningful membership and clear inactive members from the rolls. But when they do this, they are attempting a political change in the church without the hard work of applied ministry. As with all sanctifying work, the inside must be changed before the outside can be.
So encouraging the 2 Tim 2:2 men to engage in the various ministries and committees of the church will result in a shift in the church from decline to spiritual life. This is where change must start. Then when it comes time for the annual meeting, the church will have a new desire to reform it’s structures and even its constitution to reflect biblical governance.
The task of revitalization is an important one, but for pastors who take up the challenge, they have the opportunity to patiently see God sanctify individuals, and over time, see the transformation of unhealthy churches into healthy ones.
This is a plan which God has established, and we have the privilege of serving him as he works.
The guiding ideas for bringing change to the leadership culture and structure of the church will be to re-engage with the realities of the Pastoral Epistles. Some quick emphases will be:
1 Tim 3.1-7
Men who are Aspirational (v 1).
Male, not Female
Character qualifications dominate
Well-Ordered Home Life
Not a Novice Convert
Can teach (could be private or small group mostly, not just preaching/teaching).
2 Tim 2:2 “Entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also”
Seek Trustworthy Men
Seek Teachable and Teaching Men
Have in view a Four Generation Ministry
But where do you start?
Here is a simple (but challenging) plan for implementation.
1. Men’s Mentoring Ministry — The Pillar Men
Prioritize the younger men, since they are moldable, teachable, and still have uncluttered aspirations.
De-prioritize the older men who are not already like-minded, since they are set in their views, less teachable, and their aspirations tend to be clouded by other competing motives.
Nevertheless, esteem any older man who is godly since his character will be a living template for younger men.
This is not done to disregard women, but done as the baby step in a process of reformation. Once pillar men are in place, you can work to reform the women’s ministry.
The Men’s Mentoring Ministry can’t be an “Elder-in-Training” ministry because otherwise, you will give men unrealistic expectations.
Yet out of this crop of men, God will raise up the called, qualified men who can be elders.
Those who aren’t elders will be “pillar men”. They will be godly men with healthy marriages and homes, who are doctrinally informed, but maybe lack teaching ability, or are unable to ‘do the work’ of a shepherd (demands of work, family, etc)
Among the ‘pillar men’, you will have your deacons, ministry leads, and general supporters of biblical reformation in the church.
2. Make Pillar Men strong churchmen.
Every pillar man should be
a member (“meaningful membership”)
Serving in a ministry
Joining every committee, consultation, or any opportunity for the congregational voice to participate. (Don’t ignore the handbell choir committee or the quilting committee. These ‘non-teaching’ committees can have massive influence in a church!).
If you can’t insert pillar men to have influence on committees and ministries, then the pastor should personally engage those unaligned committees and ministries, while gradually isolating the influence of those unaligned groups.
For example, a pastor chose to preserve a senior ladies’ bible study on Sunday mornings rather than dismantling it, even though they completely changed their Sunday School set up. He didn’t give it large influence, but isolated it without shutting it down. This kept him from having a needless fight, distracting him from the changes he wanted to do.
3. Turn your like-minded staff into unofficial helpers for committees that they don’t have a right to be on.
For example, the Associate Pastor offers to type stuff up or send emails or bring food for a committee or board meeting that they are not entitled to sit on or influence officially.
The goal is to orient the board toward favourable change by persuading them with hospitality first, and argument later on.
Hospitality toward unaligned ministries/structures is the first plan of approach for soliciting change. I.e. Hospitality accrues relational capital. It prioritizes people first, then persuades them with principles later.
4. Use internships to add to your depth of like-minded pillar men.
One way to bring in men who are potentially elder qualified is to offer internships with financial remuneration.
A single seminary/post-seminary guy can be brought in for an internship that is under one year long. But in that year (or 6 months, or 4 months), he brings youthful energy, support for your vision, and the appearance in the church that the ministry draws high quality men.
Persuading your church to adopt your elder-leadership model, will require them to be excited about the appearance of new life, young leaders, etc. Although ‘youth movements’ can be viewed in mere worldly terms, this practical emphasis might assist you in overcoming opposition from ‘the old guard.’
Target young men from bible colleges and seminaries, even from outside your country.
Recruit from TGC Africa/Korea/ Latin America/ Brazil/ Australia churches?
Recruit from trusted seminaries?
Recruit from bible colleges?
Find the like-minded guy from a church in your denomination?
Why would a young guy do the internship?
If there was enough money for him to eat and pay rent, he would jump at the chance to get church experience with a city church, and a likeminded pastor.
Offer clear learning outcomes to the potential intern.
Highlight the personal investment from the Senior Pastor. This will make the internship worthwhile.
The intern can work at any number of needed jobs in the church, but the investment in him from the pastor will be the payoff.
5. Change the culture of the church to prepare for constitutional changes
More men, becoming pillar men, creates a new voting block in the church.
Pillar men on committees (even seemingly meaningless ones) give organizational support for your vision/plan.
When you go to vote or change the constitution, etc., you may still have a big fight. But you won’t be alone. You won’t be using a constitutional battle as the first attempt to persuade the old guard. Rather it will be the final stroke of persuasion in a systematic approach.
When the constitutional fight comes, you will have many pillars who will personally support you and help you to stick to it. This is essential for big changes like you’ll propose.
And even if you, the Senior Pastor, gets fired, you will have established a growing new culture of pillar men who can support the next pastor to bring the change that is needed.
If you are a man who would like to be invested in to become a ‘pillar man’, then consider coming to Calgary, Canada and joining the church that I pastor. Reach out to me through our website at info [{at}] calvarygrace.ca
We also offer accredited theological education through Union School of Theology, with the Graduate Diploma in Theological Studies and the Masters Degree in Theological Studies. Although we are located in Canada, both degrees are accredited with the UK university system. They are church-based, with pastoral mentorship. Contact me if you are interested in joining us beginning in September 2020.
In 1968 Andy Warhol said that in the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes. Today with Youtube, Instagram, Snapchat, and reality tv it seems that Warhol’s prediction has come true, even if he overshot the fame part by 14 minutes and 30 seconds. In those 30 seconds of modern fame, a person today has the significance of their person, their character, their ability and reputation pressed down into the experience of others. Their fame flees after 15 seconds or so because they don’t have the ability to sustain their momentary glory. So they move from significant to insignificant, influential to irrelevant, and impactful to inconsequential.
The Gravity of Glory
In the Scriptures, the word for this significant, influential, relevant, impactful and consequential emanation is called khavod, or glory. We normally associate this kind of glory with mega-experiences like the first glance of the Rockies, or the seas of the Pacific, Atlantic, or Arctic. These experiences are so massive they feel heavy like we are being overwhelmed with the weight of beauty, expanse, and wonder that is pressing on us. But that is what the biblical notion of that Hebrew word means. Glory is heavy.
The trouble with mountains and oceans and beauty and wonder is that we get tired and even a little bored of feeling the heaviness of their glory. That’s why people go camping and still look at their smartphones. Our fallenness and finiteness make us incapable of sustainable glory gazing.
So when we look at glory, we get bored and self absorbed. And in this way we can quickly take the beauty and glory of creation and turn it into being all about us. Instead of seeing an idyllic lake or rocky cliff pointing us to the greater glory of God, we flip it. As the early Christian leader Paul said, people “worship and serve the creature rather than the Creator” and the result is that we’ve “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images”(Romans 1.25; 1.23).
This means that everyone in this world needs to stop being a gravity-denier. God’s glory, his heaviness has a gravitational pull on all of us. We can say it isn’t so, but we’re denying reality and so denying God.
Getting Glory Crushed
One of the classic examples of an awakened recognition of the gravity of God came to the ancient prophet Isaiah when he had a supernatural vision of the khavod of God. Isaiah saw that God was morally pure– triple deluxe pure so that angelic beings could not view God directly because their creaturely eyeballs would fry if they looked at God’s holy purity. And these angels sang out, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of Heaven’s Armies— the whole earth is full of his glory” (Isaiah 6.3).
That vision of moral purity was not merely significant, it crushed Isaiah. He was crushed under the weight of God’s holy gravity. He had to confess, “I am undone. For I am a man of unclean lips and I live in the midst of a people of unclean lips. For my eyes have seen the king, the Lord of heaven’s armies” (v.5). What was a glory crushed guy to do?
He needed to have his sin taken away by the God of holy gravity. In the vision it was pictured as a burning briquette from a holy-fire-altar. It was touched to his lips to cleanse his sin-spewing outlet (v.6-7).
Fast forward to Good Friday when the holy gravity of God’s moral purity came crushing down on the sin and guilt of the glory-exchangers. Yet those folks weren’t hanging on the cross. Jesus the Son of God was. He took the gravity of God’s holy glory, and actively received its crushing effect in just wrath by substitution for glory-exchangers that should have been hung there. As Paul said, “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor 5.21).
Jesus didn’t stay dead but rose from the gravel bed. He rose and returned to ‘the glory he had before with the Father’ (John 17.5). So now, the gravity of Jesus’ glory in the gospel presses on all who believe through the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1.8). This motives his disciples to see the nations submit under the weight of his holy gravity (Matt 28.19-20), that he might lift them up (Col 3.1; Eph 2.6; Rom 6.4) and ‘bring many sons and daughters to glory’ (Hebrews 2.10).
That’s a weight of significance that will last much longer than 15 minutes.
