What is the new pastor to do?

[RAIDER]

On another thread someone mentioned that they had broken ties with FBCH shortly after Schaap became pastor.  They also mentioned that they liked Wilkerson and the direction he is going.  Another poster entered the following comment:

"There has been no public renunciation or repentance of the sin of Jack Schaap and the unscriptural leadership promoted by Jack Hyles."

Here is the topic for this thread.  What responsibility does a new pastor have concerning rumors, facts, and issues with the previous pastors?  Since he was not there, should he start fresh and concern himself with the future?  Should he start an investigation and take his findings to the church?

Hacker Nation, what think ye?

 

[Smellin Coffee]

Nehemiah 9:

Those of Israelite descent separated themselves from all foreigners, and they stood and confessed their sins and the guilt of their fathers.

Leviticus 26:

But if they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers in their treachery that they committed against me, and also in walking contrary to me...

Yes, these verses relate to Israel and not a local church but I think if nothing else, it demonstrates a fresh start and a humility toward those against whom the organization sinned.

 

[Exell]

On another thread someone mentioned that they had broken ties with FBCH shortly after Schaap became pastor.  They also mentioned that they liked Wilkerson and the direction he is going.  Another poster entered the following comment:

"There has been no public renunciation or repentance of the sin of Jack Schaap and the unscriptural leadership promoted by Jack Hyles."

Here is the topic for this thread.  What responsibility does a new pastor have concerning rumors, facts, and issues with the previous pastors?  Since he was not there, should he start fresh and concern himself with the future?  Should he start an investigation and take his findings to the church?

Hacker Nation, what think ye?

The church can't move on until it deals with its past. If there was sin, heresy, unscriptural practices and philosophies present in the church before his tenure, I believe to properly lead the church forward, the pastor should lead the church to recognize and repent of these issues.

 

[RAIDER]

The church can't move on until it deals with its past. If there was sin, heresy, unscriptural practices and philosophies present in the church before his tenure, I believe to properly lead the church forward, the pastor should lead the church to recognize and repent of these issues.

IMO here is the problem.  While there may be some obvious things (i.e. Schaap's sin with the young lady) there are a lot of rumors that may or may not be true depending to whom you talk.  Is Wilkerson suppose to get up and say, "Here is a list of heresies that your previous pastor preached"?  Would a new pastor of a church of 200 do this?  Is he suppose to say, "Here are some things to which I don't agree that your previous, previous pastor preached"?  How deep is he suppose to dig?   

 

[Smellin Coffee]

On another thread someone mentioned that they had broken ties with FBCH shortly after Schaap became pastor.  They also mentioned that they liked Wilkerson and the direction he is going.  Another poster entered the following comment:

"There has been no public renunciation or repentance of the sin of Jack Schaap and the unscriptural leadership promoted by Jack Hyles."

Here is the topic for this thread.  What responsibility does a new pastor have concerning rumors, facts, and issues with the previous pastors?  Since he was not there, should he start fresh and concern himself with the future?  Should he start an investigation and take his findings to the church?

Hacker Nation, what think ye?

The church can't move on until it deals with its past. If there was sin, heresy, unscriptural practices and philosophies present in the church before his tenure, I believe to properly lead the church forward, the pastor should lead the church to recognize and repent of these issues.

And if a church were truly repentant, why wouldn't they want to address these issues to make whatever amends as possible to those who were hurt?

 

[RAIDER]

Nehemiah 9:

Those of Israelite descent separated themselves from all foreigners, and they stood and confessed their sins and the guilt of their fathers.

Leviticus 26:

But if they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers in their treachery that they committed against me, and also in walking contrary to me...

Yes, these verses relate to Israel and not a local church but I think if nothing else, it demonstrates a fresh start and a humility toward those against whom the organization sinned.

Maybe FBCH should go a step further :

Nehemiah 13
23 In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab:

24 And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews' language, but according to the language of each people.

25 And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves.

26 Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin.

27 Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?

 

[rsc2a]

If the church was led by elders instead of a MOG and if transparency was foundational to the leadership style...

 

[RAIDER]

And if a church were truly repentant, why wouldn't they want to address these issues to make whatever amends as possible to those who were hurt?

Where do you draw the line of "those who were hurt"?

 

[Smellin Coffee]

Nehemiah 9:

Those of Israelite descent separated themselves from all foreigners, and they stood and confessed their sins and the guilt of their fathers.

Leviticus 26:

But if they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers in their treachery that they committed against me, and also in walking contrary to me...

Yes, these verses relate to Israel and not a local church but I think if nothing else, it demonstrates a fresh start and a humility toward those against whom the organization sinned.

Maybe FBCH should go a step further :

Nehemiah 13
23 In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab:

24 And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews' language, but according to the language of each people.

25 And I contended with them, and cursed them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair, and made them swear by God, saying, Ye shall not give your daughters unto their sons, nor take their daughters unto your sons, or for yourselves.

26 Did not Solomon king of Israel sin by these things? yet among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God, and God made him king over all Israel: nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin.

27 Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?

Does "plucked off their hair" mean tapered haircuts are to be mandated?  ;D

 

[Exell]

The church can't move on until it deals with its past. If there was sin, heresy, unscriptural practices and philosophies present in the church before his tenure, I believe to properly lead the church forward, the pastor should lead the church to recognize and repent of these issues.

IMO here is the problem.  While there may be some obvious things (i.e. Schaap's sin with the young lady) there are a lot of rumors that may or may not be true depending to whom you talk.  Is Wilkerson suppose to get up and say, "Here is a list of heresies that your previous pastor preached"?  Would a new pastor of a church of 200 do this?  Is he suppose to say, "Here are some things to which I don't agree that your previous, previous pastor preached"?  How deep is he suppose to dig? 

Common Sense goes along way.

 

[RAIDER]

The church can't move on until it deals with its past. If there was sin, heresy, unscriptural practices and philosophies present in the church before his tenure, I believe to properly lead the church forward, the pastor should lead the church to recognize and repent of these issues.

IMO here is the problem.  While there may be some obvious things (i.e. Schaap's sin with the young lady) there are a lot of rumors that may or may not be true depending to whom you talk.  Is Wilkerson suppose to get up and say, "Here is a list of heresies that your previous pastor preached"?  Would a new pastor of a church of 200 do this?  Is he suppose to say, "Here are some things to which I don't agree that your previous, previous pastor preached"?  How deep is he suppose to dig? 

Common Sense goes along way.

I agree, but you are dealing with people.  You would be opening can after can of worms.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

And if a church were truly repentant, why wouldn't they want to address these issues to make whatever amends as possible to those who were hurt?

Where do you draw the line of "those who were hurt"?

I don't. The hurting themselves draw that line. Sometimes someone can say something in innocence that hurts another and not realize it. When he discovers that what he said was offensive, the proper thing to do is to ask for forgiveness and try to make amends if necessary. Make sure the bridge has been opened up for the hurt one to be able to forgive and heal or harbor bitterness.

An example of this would be the Confederate flag issue in SC. It was offensive to a mass group of people as it was a symbol of slavery. It cost nothing to remove a flag off of a flagpole. Political rhetoric of reconciliation of races meant nothing to some in that state until that flag was removed. In essence, the flag removal was another brick removed in the wall of racism. Certainly it won't cure racism but can open up dialogue which can begin to break it down.

 

[RAIDER]

An example of this would be the Confederate flag issue in SC. It was offensive to a mass group of people as it was a symbol of slavery. It cost nothing to remove a flag off of a flagpole. Political rhetoric of reconciliation of races meant nothing to some in that state until that flag was removed. In essence, the flag removal was another brick removed in the wall of racism. Certainly it won't cure racism but can open up dialogue which can begin to break it down.

There are many things that are offensive to a mass group of Christians and others in this nation - pornography, alcohol, etc.  There is no effort or mention of getting rid of those.  Why?  Because it's not on the agenda of a bunch of unGodly liberals.  Legalizing homosexuality and taking down a flag is more important.  I wonder where God's vote would be?

 

[RAIDER]

I don't. The hurting themselves draw that line. Sometimes someone can say something in innocence that hurts another and not realize it. When he discovers that what he said was offensive, the proper thing to do is to ask for forgiveness and try to make amends if necessary. Make sure the bridge has been opened up for the hurt one to be able to forgive and heal or harbor bitterness.

Ok, in your opinion, what should Wilkerson do?

 

[rsc2a]

Alcohol is offensive to a very tiny minority...not a massive group.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

An example of this would be the Confederate flag issue in SC. It was offensive to a mass group of people as it was a symbol of slavery. It cost nothing to remove a flag off of a flagpole. Political rhetoric of reconciliation of races meant nothing to some in that state until that flag was removed. In essence, the flag removal was another brick removed in the wall of racism. Certainly it won't cure racism but can open up dialogue which can begin to break it down.

There are many things that are offensive to a mass group of Christians and others in this nation - pornography, alcohol, etc.  There is no effort or mention of getting rid of those.  Why?  Because it's not on the agenda of a bunch of unGodly liberals.  Legalizing homosexuality and taking down a flag is more important.  I wonder where God's vote would be?

Prohibition certainly didn't work, neither do drug laws. Though I am very anti-porn, I don't see how its being censored will make a difference other than creating another black market.

FYI, homosexuality has not been "legalized" like you suggest (assuming you are referencing same-sex marriage) but rather individual rights for gay couples are now available to them across the nation whereas that civil liberty had not been afforded to them because of their sexual orientation. Concerning the flag, I hardly think the government buildings of communities that have a significant amount of Jewish people should fly the Nazi flag either. But this is getting off on a rabbit trail that has nothing to do with your original idea.

It would be in accordance with the teachings of Jesus, in an act of humility, to confess the sins of previous generations of whatever institutions and try to repair as much damage and soothe as much hurt as is possible. If you can't see that, not sure how much more I can add to the conversation.

 

[RAIDER]

It would be in accordance with the teachings of Jesus, in an act of humility, to confess the sins of previous generations of whatever institutions and try to repair as much damage and soothe as much hurt as is possible. If you can't see that, not sure how much more I can add to the conversation.

Would it be sufficient if Wilkerson stood up and said to the church, "There have been some wrong things done and taught by your 2 previous pastors and for this I am sorry".  Would he need to name exact sins done and exact errors taught?

 

[RAIDER]

The big question is this - How is this confession and repentance of the sins and wrong teachings of the previous 2 pastors suppose to take place?  What is Wilkerson suppose to do?

 

[Smellin Coffee]

I don't. The hurting themselves draw that line. Sometimes someone can say something in innocence that hurts another and not realize it. When he discovers that what he said was offensive, the proper thing to do is to ask for forgiveness and try to make amends if necessary. Make sure the bridge has been opened up for the hurt one to be able to forgive and heal or harbor bitterness.

Ok, in your opinion, what should Wilkerson do?

I can't in all honesty say. I left in 1988 so I don't know what all went on after I left. What I do know is that a public acknowledgement of sin, a public discourse of verbal repentance, a public game plan as to how to make necessary changes to limit similar situations, an open door for the hurting to make their grievances known and personally apologize for them, and try to repair bridges of people through honest discourse.

My guess is that would be a start.

 

[IFB X-Files]

Would it be sufficient if Wilkerson stood up and said to the church, "There have been some wrong things done and taught by your 2 previous pastors and for this I am sorry".  Would he need to name exact sins done and exact errors taught?

That would be difficult unless he himself were faultless in his teachings.  I wouldn't make any direct reference to Hyles but would speak to the Schaap issue as it is so fresh.  Has that ever happened since Schaap left?  Then I would, on occasion, make it clear that my policy of dealing with sexual offensives would be swift and not tolerated.  Openness is key and it will take years for trust to be established.

Lastly, old staff that turned a blind eye to the past evils must be replaced.