Conclusion
In summary, while the idea of opposing a pastor should only be considered with reverential fear, it should not be thought beyond the pale or pariahesque. Like other forms of church discipline, it should be considered prayerfully and applied Scripturally. In summary, I think the following conclusions can be drawn: 1) SBC churches are for better or worse, congregational in governance (and thereby more or less democratic). 2) As democracies, SBC congregations retain the ultimate right to decide who governs them. 3) Implied by the pastor’s presence in the SBC is his acceptance of the congregational nature of the church and the correlated idea that the Pastor derives his authority to govern a specific congregation from that congregation itself (he cannot simply assume the pulpit without the congregation’s invitation and continued consent). 4) The relationship between a pastor and congregation is entered into mutually and freely. 5) Either the pastor or congregation may withdraw from the relationship freely. 6) A majority of the congregation can vote a pastor out of office or overrule him. 7) This should be done with extreme care and sensitivity to the spirit, and then only as a final resort, a reasonable number of other attempts at resolution having all failed. 8) Sides of a congregation divided over the pastor’s leadership may try to convince the other side of its position as long as such attempts are made in a Biblical fashion.
These statements are, so far as I can see, not contradicted by any Scripture, either expressly written or inevitably inferred, and are incontrovertible within the context of an SBC church.
No comments:
Post a Comment