He told me once that he was considering going to PC, because it was easy and he’d only have to go to school for nine months instead of four years of college, and then he’d be able to work.

I love this kid, he really loves Jesus, really REALLY loves his church, but it was at the point of that conversation that the hair on the back of my head stood up in regards to SGM.

I asked a bunch of SGM kids if they thought nine months of PC was enough, and they thought it was great that their pastors got ‘done’ in only nine months, as opposed to my pastors, who have to slog through college and then 2-4 years of post grad study in some dreary seminary in St. Louis, or some other dreary place.

After I told them that their pastors certainly ‘did college’ first, they seemed doubtful, but did agree that most of the ones they knew had gone to college.

(Sad moment of realization that the future of pastors may involve hard work and intensive study.  Bummer, dude.)

They didn’t know, when I asked them, if there was any study of Greek…they couldn’t figure out why that might be important.  One of them assured me that they broke their course of study up into parts, and then spent two-four weeks on each topic.

I was very relieved to hear all this.

Wasn’t there some plot….back in the sixties….to control a populace by controlling their education, and not allowing them too much knowledge, or teaching them how to attain knowledge?

I think it is sad.  So many people with passion for God, true love for him, but living a controlled, dumbed-down theological life.

Jim: “Do seminary/pc students really need an introduction to an introduction?”

Ditto, Jim.  An “introduction to an introduction,” if that’s what it is, is such an unnecessary, moronic and confusing redundancy; and I think I’ll also state for about the thousandth time in these comments that Church Government, Church Discipline and notes on Scripture Interpretation must be a part of the flock’s core reading.

…pk

Let’s not forget that Grudem’s Systematic Theology is an introduction to systematic theology.

Do seminary/pc students really need an introduction to an introduction?

Ditto… Copy… my thoughts exactly!  I just can’t figure out the reason why the BD book was made to start with, Adam O.’s comment that his professor remarked that bible colleges and seminaries requested a dumbed down version makes some sense, as different denominations could fill in the polity, discpline, etc. gaps… but that’s not all that good, as we have determined here.  Viewing different forms of polity, for example, could have a positive effect on a church that has been using a failing model.  Grudem’s work could help show them the advantages and pitfalls in other forms.  Godd comment Butterfly!

Reformed Teacher: “I vote that we all work together and send PK to PC as a spy to figure out exactly what goes on up there.”

LOL…

They’d figure out my identity inside of a week.

I know that in posts like this, people view it as a back-handed slap at the pastor’s college, when it really isn’t.  I am so thankful we offer something for our guys, but (imho) it seems to be mysterious in its scope, and the little to no information about it on the SGM website… in many ways is troubling to me.  Does anyone know of a blog/diary that a graduate has published that I am not aware of that details the PC experience?

Right now I am re-re-reading Dave Harvey’s booklet on SGM polity (with a small slice of Grudem’s overview on polity for comparison) and… wow.  Wow… and egad… I need more caffeine.

…pk

Your quote: “If Systematic Theology wasn’t short enough to teach at the PC, or if it was deemed necessary that we sheep needed a dumbed down version of a very readable book”

Systematic Theology was the first Theology book I read and it is a very easy read.  I can’t imagine anyone needing a dumbed down version. I can’t imagine anyone in Pastor’s college not wanting the entire book so they could have it as a future reference. Also, this is one book where I really got alot out of the detailed footnotes and I wouldn’t want a copy with them removed. That is really weird to me.  

This is worth repeating:

“Were the whole Christian world to revert back to the original model, how far more simple, uniform and beautiful would the church appear, and how far more agreeable to the ecclesiastical polity instituted by the holy apostles.”
-comment under “polity” in Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language.

I long to see this happen.  Simple, uniform, and beautiful.  What a remarkable statement.

Bible Doctrine is a good introduction because it is readable and relevant to a lot of issues evangelicals think about when the first get into systematic theology. But I would hope that evangelicals would abandon Grudem altogether and go with Erickson. Grudem is too polarizing in my opinion on things that are highly disputable (Calvinism-Arminianism, Womanhood, Spiritual Gifts, Hierarchal Trinity).

One final note, however, is that John Piper (Grudem’s close friend) uses Systematic Theology as a “statement of faith” of sorts… pretty different from SGM’s use of Bible Doctrine.

My quote of the day here, involving #1 on my list in this post:

“Were the whole Christian world to revert back to the original model, how far more simple, uniform and beautiful would the church appear, and how far more agreeable to the ecclesiastical polity instituted by the holy apostles.”

-comment under “polity” in Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language.

Funny the way we live quite contentedly under a Presbyterian form of government in the United States, in a sense:  we elect those in whom we have trust, who represent us in a plurality in Washington (well, ok, we could really open a can of worms right now over this…but just think in the most optimistic and pure sense of the thing).

Yet this form of SGM government is the opposite.  Imagine, in the USA, if those who happened to be in charge because they were the first ones in the door simply chose others to put in charge over the rest of us–and we were without representation. 

We’d call it tyranny.

I vote that we all work together and send PK to PC as a spy to figure out exactly what goes on up there.

Now THAT would be a blog.

Thank you all, but especially PK, for articulating your thoughts so beautifully.

What you are doing is very wonderful.  Reform in the church as a whole would be magnificent.  This authoritarian thing is so wide spread!

I will be praying for your situation.  It has to be very tough at times.  God’s love will keep you, I’m sure.

Reform must happen, or we as an organization will fall.  I know some out there believe that should happen, and would even be happy to see it happen (these folks are rare, but they are out there), but I don’t.  Every time it gets knocked down, I re-plant my flag.  It’s hard to describe what I feel, I simply have to be obedient in God’s governance of my emotions and my battle with sin, and fall into the roads of His holiness and forgiveness that is paved by the blood of the Cross, and feel renewed strength in light of the Resurrection’s statement that death simply does not have final power over me, other saints, this world, this galaxy, this universe, this cosmos.  YHWH does.  He spoke it into existence, and for me to fall at the hands of critics and lemmings within and without SGM is simply a joke, by comparison.  To whine about losing life or limb over the truth and protecting the flock is such small potatoes!   When God tells me to move, I will… but it simply hasn’t happened yet.

That’s the long way of saying, here I stand…  I can do no other.  No, I’m no Martin Luther, but Martin is not the one I serve.  I serve who Martin serves.  Martin changed the world… I just want to protect my church from within and without.

…pk

PK,

I’ve noticed that this happens when people are not living for the Lord but for themselves and their own agendas.  The answer, as you are saying, isn’t to throw out plurality of Elders, but to teach people to do all things with the mind of Christ, and to serve the Body in His love.  When you loose that, you loose the right to govern, I think.  Extremists like SGM come in thinking they must control everything. 

It is sort of like living in the USA.  If we aren’t involved in electing who leads us, we will eventually loose our right to govern ourselves as extremists take over.  Anyway, freedom, if not protected, will be lost.  This can be said for our freedom in Christ, too.

Yes.  A true plurality would reinforce and strengthen the hedge around church leadership.  The so-called senior pastor-led “plurality” that dave Harvey describes in “Polity” (available as a free download on our SGM website, and interestingly enough Harvey tries to fend off critics from the starting gate by placing a rather generic quote by [drum roll] Dr. Grudem!) is completely alien, I believe to holy scripture.  Plurality of elders, or a presbyterian form of government, of course, like anything fallen in this world, is not bulletproof, but I would be willing to bet (and R.C. Sproul would slap me on the hand, justifiably for betting) it is a far superior model to Harvey’s warmed over episcopalianism/authoritarianism trying to fly under the flock’s radar (sometimes succeeding, sometimes not).

Harvey’s general argument early on in ”Polity” is that a true plurality is unproductive, on the whole, and he characterizes it as being too dead or inoperable due to too many hands in the pie.

That observation is (a) a straw-man argument and (b) a steaming dogpile set outside the church office door designed to keep sheep fearful of questioning church government in Sovereign Grace Ministries.

Wow.  Got off on a tangent.

Anyway, yes, Canary.  Me no have enough caffeine.  Me Tarzan.  Me PK.  Me want plurality of elders.  Me think Apostle Paul want same thing too.

…pk

That made me laugh!  Thanks for making it simple!! I agree with Carole.  Thank you for not turning a blind eye.  Maybe there can be reform not only in SGM, but in other authoritarian churches, as well, through this blog and others.  I hear it again, God saying with a passion, “Let My people go!”

Brilliant post!    Thank you so much for honoring us by guest hosting here!

But, even more than that, I want to publicly thank you for your (true) humility, your obvious love and concern for SGM, and your equal love and concern for those who have been hurt by SGM’s errant practices.  You have a very balanced view of the good things in SGM, but also the very wrong things in SGM…  thank you for not turning a blind eye, and calling for reform within this church movement!

I continue to pray for you, and for many more like you!

Sometimes, false teaching also simply results from not teaching the WHOLE – which I think is what is fundamentally wrong with SGM doctrinal stances. It isn’t just what they teach, it is what they don’t emphasize vs what they do emphasize, and the combination of the two that produces crippled, fearful sheep in authoritarian churches.

Yes, yes – very insightful!

PK,
I salute your convictions. I hope posts such as this illuminate peoples’ minds to the information control and backwards practices found in some aspects of SGM. It is my hope and prayer that people come to terms with these things before too many more lives are torn apart.

Amen and Amen!!!!  So be it, Lord Jesus!