I read an article the other day on Calvary Chapel and Chuck Smith in Christianity Today entitled
Day of Reckoning. To say that I was concerned after reading the article would be an understatement. The article was alarming in many ways. But first and foremost was Smith's misinterpretation of scripture and misunderstanding of power and authority. The purpose of my writing this article is not to condemn or judge Chuck Smith or Calvary Chapel, but rather to shed light on a gross error within the Body of Christ today evidenced by Smith's own words.
I have a friend and we have a little ongoing joke where we state that "everything comes back to power and authority." I am firmly convinced of this. Everything comes back to power and authority. All of the evil in this world can be traced back to a misunderstanding and abuse of power and authority. The misunderstanding began in the garden, and Satan has continued to permeate its abuse throughout history. This flawed ideology has found its way into the doctrine and theology of today's corporate church.
I must admit that I do not disagree with all of Smith's views on authority, nor do I have full knowledge of what he believes. I'm simply going to address some of what was posted in the article.
How Accountable was Moses?
Chuck Smith's experiences in local churches led him to place great authority in the office of senior pastor. Smith believes denominations stifle ministry growth. He also rejects control of local church affairs by a governing board of elders.
I believe that denominations can and sometimes do stifle ministry growth. However, the answer is not to place great authority in the office of senior pastor. Remember that true authority flows down, from God. The purpose of the power and authority that we have received is to set the captives free. It's purpose is not to set men up in the position of lords and kings over others. The head of the church is Jesus Christ, not the senior pastor. Smith states that he also rejects control by a governing board of elders, which too is a dangerous position. It is not wrong nor unbiblical for church affairs to be overseen by a board of elders. However, it is our inability to understand the role of those in power and authority that has fostered unhealthy models of this form of church governance. The problem is not in principle, but rather in application.
Early in his ministry, Smith left an independent church he founded in order to pastor Calvary Chapel. The issue was micromanagement by elders, who confronted him when he arranged chairs in a circle before opening Bible study.
The elders told him not to do it again. Smith told CT he recalls thinking, "I've got to establish a church on a little different basis. I really felt that was probably the finest Sunday night service that we had." It was then he accepted the offer from Calvary Chapel.
It appears as though Smith was offended by the correction of the elders. And while it appears that the elders clearly did not understand their role or position, Smith's conclusion to eliminate the position altogether is not the answer. The elders offered Smith their opinion. Opinions are just that - opinions. Did it really matter how Smith arranged the chairs? No. But yet there were two differing opinions on the event. The elders opined that it was not good. Smith opined that it was. Were the elders wrong for offering their opinion. No, of course not. Where they may have been wrong, was to use their authority and power to enforce their personal preferences. Smith has a valid complaint if this was the case. However, eliminating elders is not going to solve the problem. Many times the problem is our inability and stubborn refusal to embrace any opinions other than our own.
Though Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa had (and still has) an independent board of elders, Smith's book Calvary Chapel Distinctives teaches that senior pastors should be answerable to God, not to a denominational hierarchy or board of elders.
Now here is where I see a major problem. Senior pastors are answerable to God, as are we all, but they should also be answerable to men. Senior pastors are not supreme beings. They are people, just like you and me. This is a major problem in the church today. Pastors feel that they should not have to answer to the people they lead. That they are somehow above the people. I've been advised many times in so many words, "Who do you think you are questioning me? I'm the pastor. I'm in charge here. Who are you?" My response was just the same, "Who do you think you are that you are so superior to me?"
Just the other day I listened to a sermon that gave this very illustration. Where someone new came into the church, and wanted to rebuke the pastor. It was all played for laughs, but the problem is the message it sent. It very explicitly communicated that the Holy Spirit would not send someone like this to correct the senior pastor. The senior pastor was to look for any truth in what the messenger was saying, but overall was just supposed to dismiss the incident. After all, this messenger could not have been sent by God. You don't question the pastor. You don't make suggestions to the pastor. If the pastor says something, it is final. Don't even ask "Why?" You see if a dialogue were to take place, then it would be with someone higher in the ranks then a mere parishioner. Sounds a little like the pope instead of a pastor to me?
Please show me one Biblical reference that supports this model of leadership. Oh, I know what you're going to say:
Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor. (Romans 13:7)
If this isn't one of the most misquoted passages, I don't know what is. This verse is clearly stating that we are to give honor to whom it is due. Just because someone has a title does not mean that they are due honor. If we've got to remind people that they need to honor us, then are we really due any honor? Nowhere in the scriptures do I find a principle where we are required to honor dishonor. Let me ask a question: to whom is honor due? Honor is due God (
1 Timothy 1:17.) Honor is due our fathers and mothers (
Exodus 20:12.) Honor is due the elderly (
Leviticus 19:32.) However, is there ever a time that a father or mother would not be due honor? Maybe we should ask the kids who's father walked out on him, and whose mother chose drugs and alcohol over her own children? Would there ever be an elderly person who would not deserve honor? Are we due honor simply for getting older? These are hard questions, and I won't try to answer them here, but let me ask one more question. When is God not due honor? The answer is: never! He is always due honor, and more honor.
So are we to honor a man who as a senior pastor is an adulterer and thief? Is he due honor simply because of his title? Maybe we can honor his office, without honoring the fallen man?
"We take the model from the work that God established in the nation of Israel," Smith says. "Moses was the leader appointed by God. He took 70 men, and they assisted Moses in overseeing the mundane types of issues that developed within the nation. There was the priesthood under Aaron." Similarly, he says, "we have assistant pastors, and they look to me as the senior pastor. I'm responsible to the Lord. We have a board of elders. We go over the budget. The people recognize that God has called me to be the leader of this fellowship. We are not led by a board of elders. I feel my primary responsibility is to the Lord. And one day I'm going to answer to him, not to a board of elders."
"The people recognize that God has called me to be the leader of this fellowship?" What? Excuse me. Did I catch that correctly? Since when did the senior pastor become the head of the church. I thought someone else already laid claim to this title?
For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. (Ephesians 5:23)
Christ is head of the church. We are to follow the lead of the Holy Spirit. We are not to blindly follow the leading of any man. Whether he be Chuck Smith, Martin Luther or the Pope! We are to follow Christ. Further we are only to follow men as long and as far as they follow the Lord. The reason the people followed Moses, was not because he was a great leader, but rather because he was a great follower. Moses acknowledged continually that it was the Lord who was leading the children of Israel, and not by his own hand.
I have a problem with the statement that "I am responsible to the Lord, . . . not to a board of elders." This paragraph implies that while the senior pastor is responsible only to the Lord, the rest of us are responsible to the senior pastor. The senior pastor can question and hold accountable the people he is called (by God) to lead, but they cannot return the favor. Does God show this kind of favoritism?
But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. (Galatians 2:6)
God doesn't look with partiality upon those in leadership. If anything he holds them to a higher standard then he does those who are not in places of authority.
We are all responsible to the Lord. He alone will judge us for our works. His judgments are sure. However, none of us are above being questioned yet even rebuked by our brothers. Whether they be a recognized authority within the body or an average Joe. As leaders we are not above those we lead. We are to follow Christ's lead and lay down our lives for the sheep. That they might become more than we ever could. We should live our lives in transparency with all humility before God and others. We should submit to one another - even you senior pastor. Yes that means even to a mere sheep!
submitting to one another in the fear of God. (Ephesians 5:21)
Likewise you younger people, submit yourselves to your elders. Yes, all of you be submissive to one another, and be clothed with humility, for “ God resists the proud,But gives grace to the humble.” (1 Peter 5:5)
Sadly, one day these men who view themselves as some kind of Superman before the Lord, superior to the people will be held accountable for their actions. They will have to answer to the Lord for every word and deed. What will the answer be if the Lord asks: "Who told you that you were not answerable to anyone but me?"Critics say this "Moses model" produces pastors who refuse to let their authority be challenged. Such pastors often resist accountability measures such as financial audits and providing detailed financial statements. Some curious Calvary Chapel attendees, who have sought financial information from their churches, say they were ostracized.
Sadly, this "Moses model" produces more than pastors who refuse to let their authority be challenged. It produces spiritual abuse. I creates an atmosphere ripe for pride to take root. It allows for provisions that enable men to abuse the power and authority that they have received from the Lord. The "Moses model" is a dangerous model, because we are men who do not understand power and authority as Moses did. Moses did not think highly of himself. He knew he was a man under authority. Moses was acutely aware of what it meant to fall into the hands of an angry God. Oh, but that's right, God's not angry anymore! That was the Old Testament. I forgot!
Other churchgoers say Calvary Chapel pastors also don't like to be questioned. During the investigation for this article, Smith cautioned CT's reporter: "The Lord warns, 'Don't touch my anointed. Do my prophet no harm.' I think that you are trying to do harm to the work of God. I surely wouldn't want to be in your shoes."
This is perhaps the most disturbing part of this article. Smith's self-proclamation to be God's anointed and God's prophet. This is another one of those verses that is often misquoted. Think about the men (and women) you hear most often reciting this passage. Is it not those who refuse to be held accountable for their actions? The passage that Smith is referring to here is a reference to God's deliverance of the Children of Israel to the promised land. This is a very specific reference, and not a blanket statement. It was God's promise to protect His people. It was not a warning given to men per se, but rather God's covenant with His people.
10 And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,
To Israel as an everlasting covenant,
11 Saying, “To you I will give the land of Canaan
As the allotment of your inheritance,”
12 When they were few in number,
Indeed very few, and strangers in it.
13 When they went from one nation to another,
From one kingdom to another people,
14 He permitted no one to do them wrong;
Yes, He rebuked kings for their sakes,
15 Saying, “Do not touch My anointed ones,
And do My prophets no harm.” (Psalm 105:10-15)
This was a promise for the Israelites. God permitted no one to do them wrong. He even rebuked kings for their sakes. It was as if he was saying "Do not touch my anointed ones, and do my prophets no harm."
While I think we should be very careful in the way that we judge men and women who claim they are working to promote God's Kingdom, that doesn't mean we can't question them or hold them accountable for their actions. That is different from what this verse is talking about. This verse is talking about trying to destroy and injure God's people. Something that He would not permit. And while its application is still in effect today, it does not mean what Smith implied it to mean. Smith (and others) have used this verse in order to protect themselves. To elevate themselves to an untouchable status regardless of their actions. This is not what this passage meant. After all, when the Israelites refused to keep their part of the covenant, did God not remove this covering? Were they not carried away captive more than once for breaking the covenant?
Wake up people! Think for yourselves. God has eliminated the need for a mediator between Himself and you. His new covenant includes a priesthood for all who believe. Priests who are not bound to go through any man in order to be justified. However, the fact that we are justified by God alone, does not excuse any of us, including you senior pastor, from being held accountable for our actions by our fellow man. After all, God requires us to submit ourselves one to another. Why then are you trying to elevate yourself above your brethren? Why then do you justify your actions by claiming that you are not accountable to a board of elders? Why then do you have to appeal to ignorance and fear by twisting the scriptures to protect yourself?
The reason is simple. We don't understand power and authority. We don't understand it's purpose. We have embraced a lie, that has led to the downfall of many. May Truth arise, and may his enemies be scattered!
*NOTE* Passages in blue text are taken from an article entitled Day of Reckoning found in Christianity Today.
