What stands out to me in this interview are the words “governing”, “in charge”, and “authority.”  Why is an Elder’s description so described?  Why is there such an obsession with men’s authority in the church, instead of describing them as “caretakers”, “guides”, etc?  Why is so much focus put upon an Elder’s authority?
 
Having been in a situation where pastors over-extended the bounds of their “authority”, I guess I’m oober-sensitive to anyone desiring to control another in the name of God.  Maybe too sensitive.  I just wonder why so much attention is placed on a man’s title or position, and less on his need to love and gently guide the people he feels called to lead. I know this must be a subject of concern for others who have been in my shoes.

Hebrews 13:17 talks about a leader’s authority.  The Greek word used there is “hegeomai” (guides), which Frank Viola describes in this way:  “…watching over rather than bossing, superintending rather than dominating, facilitating rather than dictating… a shepherd who cares for an supervises the sheep rather than one who drives them from behind or rules them from above” ( WHO IS YOUR COVERING, pg. 35-36).

Maybe I wouldn’t be so scared to “follow the leader” if I knew that the leader focused more on loving and guiding the sheep instead of his position of being in charge, or his desire to control so that everything is neat and tidy.  Many of us who have left SGM are so scarred by the control aspects of leadership that it’s very hard to trust again.  Doesn’t the bible say that we should not rule like the Gentiles?  And doesn’t it say that Christ is the head of all things?  So why did my SGM leaders move so little in love, and so much by force and intimidation (though they would not admit this)?  Why didn’t they give me the freedom to hear God for myself, even to the point of smirking at me when I explained my heart?  Do you know how awful and confusing that can be?

I guess I’m venting my spleen, here.  I just need to know how to wrap my brain around the talk of Elders in the church and church polity, when I and many others experienced such emotional abuse from their hands.  Even if there is a plurality of Elders, if they don’t have God’s heart for the people, the people are screwed (can I use that word?  It’s so appropriate!).  Is there any plan in the works to talk about this?

Thanks, Jim.  You’re doing a really great job!

Is Sovereign Grace a denomination?

We prefer to describe ourselves as a family of churches. The distinction is not simply semantic. Denominations are often seen as being defined, in large part, by specific legal or organizational structures that join individual churches together. At the heart of Sovereign Grace Ministries is not structure, but broad doctrinal agreement growing out of a shared passion, especially among our pastors and other leaders, for the centrality of the gospel. Our unity arises from a pervasive passion for starting, establishing, and strengthening local churches with the gospel, for God’s glory.

And apostolic oversight is about “care” and “relationship”.

And, they are NOT episcopal!

Next, you guys are so right that the apostle designation causes them problems.

I have questioned SGM friends about their acceptance of the apostle thing, despite the fact that three years previous, before they were poached from the other churches in the area, they would have probably affirmed their belief that the office of apostle was no longer in play and that they had never heard of “apostle” as a current office.

But the Kool-Aid concept applies:  if you are convinced that your pastors are right about everything, and they affirm apostleship, then they must be right.   Long time SGMers have no idea that the majority of evangelicalism wouldn’t come alongside on the apostle thing, especially apostles that oversee the pastor-led model–and, in fact, that SGM’s insistence on the apostle label causes others to look on them perplexedly.

But a couple of SGMers that I know simply nod their heads knowingly when confronted with the fact that SGM cuts across its sister denominations on this issue:  it only confirms their suspicions that the rest of us just don’t do church as well as they do

I don’t know who it is. Given Adrian’s respect for SGM, and his association with New Frontiers, I would guess it’s one of their big dogs.

Except for within the lunatic fringe of the hyper charismatics, SGM, and NFI, the modern day apostle concept is extremely unpopular.

Are you hinting that you know who this person is?

Great quotes from Grudem-another example of how SG picks and chooses what it likes from authors, who would not agree with their conclusions.  Interesting that Grudem feels that both lay people and ordained ministers should be open to governing in the church as oppossed to the dualistic model that SG has adopted.

It’s good to hear Dr Grudem address the critique.

Good job pointing us to a great article.

…pk