Tullian Tchividjian Back in Active Ministry

[Darrell C]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
Just for the record, I have run into "staff" which has expressed a disrespectful and domineering attitude towards Pastors, which should not be the case. As far as I am concerned, there is an authority granted to Pastors which is commanded to be obeyed by God, and those who sit on councils and think they are going to "set the Pastor straight" sin against God. Now you take that sin and compare it to adultery...are you going to say one is worse than the other?

No PASTOR rules over the congregation.

You think not?


Hebrews 13:7

King James Version (KJV)

7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.



17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.



24 Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the saints. They of Italy salute you.


I, and the Writer of Hebrews, would disagree.

So would Matthew:


Matthew 2:6

King James Version (KJV)

6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.


And that is something, as I said...I have a problem with: the lack of respect for Church Discipline in these liberal times.

The pastor is to guide as a shepherd Christ's flock.

Ideally the Pastor is a God ordained shepherd himself. Ideally he is led by Christ and should be afforded the honor of such a hard position.

They are NOT the pastor's sheep, nor does he have authority over the sheep.

Sure he does:


John 21:15-17

King James Version (KJV)

15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.

16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

He is to "preach the word" and he may need to bring matters of discipline before the congregation.

I wouldn't argue with that, as Church Discipline should involve the entire fellowship, however, that does not mean that the leadership of Pastors does not go without an authority over the sheep.

And just to remind you and those proof-texting their position with passages dealing with leadership...why do you think one must rule his own household well before being appointed?


1 Timothy 3

King James Version (KJV)


4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)


Do you think the command here does not demand the head of the household rule? And all that implies with rule? Protection, provision, but also authority?


1 Thessalonians 5:12

King James Version (KJV)

12 And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you;

13 And to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake. And be at peace among yourselves.


And I see that as a two-edged sword, really, being a division of those who do not honor the role of Pastor, and those who idolize them.

But, these are issues that were present in the Body since the First Century, hence Paul's exhortations and rebukes.

However, NOWHERE in Scriptures is the pastor even hinted at being the supreme rule over the building and grounds or the people.

Well, at least try to recognize what is said.

Because your view is that the senior pastor is to be obeyed as if they speak for God, it may skew your thinking.

If you say so.

Just do me a favor and show my thinking in regards to the above passages is skewed.

I will say this. A staff member who does not follow the Scriptures will not remain on staff.

Relevance?

If a senior pastor finds a staff member not following Scriptures, that person is to be confronted by at least two others, and either changes in thinking and acting are made, or that man is dismissed by the actions of the assembly. This goes for "councils" also.

Could you tell me who Paul appealed to when he said...


1 Corinthians 5:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,

5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.


Has that changed?

It is a Biblical pattern to see men of God acting alone in authority. But the point is simply that the Pastor holds a unique position in the Church Body, and that he has an authority that should be both recognized and honored. Quite possibly the toughest job in the world...

The Scriptures are to be followed, not the person, and certainly not the councils.

So who establishes the Doctrinal positions of a Church, usually?

And to imply that I advocate a tyranny for Pastors is ridiculous. I have never intimated this. The Body is a single Body, but, perhaps you forget that most bodies...

...have heads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
And you let your personal experience determine your view, apparently.

If my views are not Scriptural, then show me by Scriptures where they are wrong.

If by Scriptures I am incorrect, I will most certainly recant.

But will you repent?

You demand it of others, do you demand it of yourself?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
But, there is a God in Heaven who has a track record throughout the history of man of making the unclean...clean. And using lesser vessels.

But there is NO track record for human kind of that ability.

Relevance to my statement?

Did I say there was?

At best all schemes of human generated ability fail because they are built upon frailty.

I made that point already in this thread. Actually...over and over and over, lol.

What this person is doing may seem right in some eyes (moving geographically, getting away from scorn and rebuke by others...), but it is not.

You have not made that a valid point, nor substantiated it with Scripture.

You esteem your judgment above that of leaderships actually involved. Perhaps, if you actually knew this man, you might take a different position.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
But if one is looking to the Church to handle this situation, and that is what appears to be the theme of some of these responses, then you will likely get the results such action necessitates, and restoration is likely not to be forthcoming.

There will be no true restoration with out the church that was offended and the hurt dealt to the original family(ies) being resolved - and that resolution publicized so that any future inquiry can be shown to be resolved by all effected.

Again, before there is internal repentance on this man's part, all the external showings mean nothing. And that is what is questioned about this man, whether he has repented or not. The leadership of his current fellowship seems satisfied he has, at least to some extent, repented and is remorseful. All we can do is wait to see how it unfolds, and it seems to me he is in a good place for restoration to occur.

And here's an "original" issue no-one seems to think relevant: the man's wife cheated on him as well. According to another member, she was the first to transgress.

How did that impact this fellow's actions? Is that relevant? Or, as the other member said, does it not matter?

HE cheated on his wife and it doesn't matter that she cheated first

So give it time, and perhaps even pray for the fellow and his family.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

:smilewinkgrin:

DoG......:wavey:

Could you be a little more specific and point out how this is relevant to the discussion at hand?


God bless.

 

[Reformed]

Spot on! :thumbs:

This quote from the article is insightful:

Further, what is true of the state is in this instance equally true of the church. In the absence of a righteous polity we get Driscoll, but where righteous polity is administered by unfit men we see instead Tchividjian.

I am not exactly sure how Mr. Tchividjian's session (local board of elders) and his presbytery failed, but there is no doubt that the the session and the presbytery of Willow Creek Church (the church where is now on staff) failed woefully. They knew that Mr. Tchividjian was deposed from ministry and still hired him. What good is it to have a solid form of church polity if that polity is not enforced?

 

[blessedwife318]

I was talking to my husband about this thread and I realized there is another issue that has not been discussed.
God is very clear in passages like James 2 about not showing favoritism yet is that not what has happened to Tullian.
If any Joe Shmoe cheated on his wife and then filed for divorce the chances of him being hired in another church are slim to none. We can see that with the many many pastors who have had to step down in light of the Ashley Madison scandle. But we have here a big name getting a new job in a church less then a month after filing for divorce. That reeks of favoritism to the world and as James says causes the name of Christ to be blasphemed.

Darrell I will respond to your post later.

 

[agedman]

You think not?

Throughout your responses, it all boiled down to basically the poor man is being vilified by some on the BB who just don't have personal experience in what he is going through, therefore they can't empathize and their judgment is too harsh.

The man was not Baptist, nor is he. He is Presbyterian, ordained by the hierarchy of that group, and served under the authority structure of that group.

When found out, he did not submit to the authority structure, his credentials revoked, and REQUIRED to stay at that church for discipline and restoration processes.

He did not. Rather, he cut and ran.

Another Presbyterian church took him in as the "director of ministry" who DOES have authority over others.

Some PCC churches have started using "directors" to escape what they might consider the rigid control of the Presbytery over the hiring and firing of pastors and their staff.

However, the man is not qualified to be a "director" of anything.

Here is what I gathered from all that you have written:

1) you don't see the move as escapism or problematic - I do.
2) you don't see the mater of confession, forgiveness and restoration as a process that must include all that were impacted - I do.
3) you want to focus upon what I may or may not have done/do as if that is authoritative to the determining my level of import to the thread - it is irrelevant and a mere distraction from substance.
​

From all the accounts that I have read on line, it seems that the man had moral failure in the family and himself from the onset. Rather than him stepping back and bringing himself, his family, his living under accountability and structure, there was cover up, misdirection, and blame assignment to distract from the truth. This problem did not start with "Coral Ridge" but far earlier.

The pattern that he is now following is a continuation of that same type of characterization - avoidance, pressing forward in the desire to not have diminished influence, and to mis-characterize, misdirect, and blame the shame.

With all his education the man certainly must have missed this one vital lesson:

"Sin will take you farther than you wanted to go, keep you longer than you want to stay, and cost you far more than you wanted to pay"
​

The sin of excess in his youth, that he thought that he could control with little releases along the way, cost him far more than he is willing to pay.

 

[Reformed]

I was talking to my husband about this thread and I realized there is another issue that has not been discussed.
God is very clear in passages like James 2 about not showing favoritism yet is that not what has happened to Tullian.

The majority of pastors and elders minister in small churches. They are not basked in the light of celebrity. The temptations that go with celebrity are numerous.

 

[Jerome]

A good article by Tom Chantry that warrants a read:
Mark Driscoll, Tullian Tchividjian, and Reformed Baptist Polity

Spot on! :thumbs:

Yeah, didn't I cite that article way back in post #43?:

Reformed Baptist historian Tom Chantry:

"Mark Driscoll, Tullian Tchividjian, and Reformed Baptist Polity"

the church Tchividjian formerly pastored and the one in which he has now been established in semi-office are both part of the Presbyterian Church in America.

That “THUD” you just heard was the sound of a lot of Presbyterian rhetoric abruptly hitting the ground.

In the absence of a righteous polity we get Driscoll, but where righteous polity is administered by unfit men we see instead Tchividjian.

The comparison of the two scandals ought to serve as a lesson to Reformed Baptists. The temptation for us (I wonder how many of us have already said this) is to repeat the error of last year’s Presbyterian apologists – to loudly insist, “Nothing like this could ever happen in a Reformed Baptist church!” If that is so, the reason is that we don’t have any churches large enough for the broader evangelical world to notice when we fail

Along the way have been plenty of mishandled and un-handled scandals which – mercifully – the wider evangelical world has simply ignored. I don’t imagine that we couldn’t have a Driscoll or a Tchividjian in our ranks; we’ve in fact already given those two a run for their money in our own small corner of the Christian

 

[Darrell C]

I was talking to my husband about this thread and I realized there is another issue that has not been discussed.
God is very clear in passages like James 2 about not showing favoritism yet is that not what has happened to Tullian.
If any Joe Shmoe cheated on his wife and then filed for divorce the chances of him being hired in another church are slim to none. We can see that with the many many pastors who have had to step down in light of the Ashley Madison scandle. But we have here a big name getting a new job in a church less then a month after filing for divorce. That reeks of favoritism to the world and as James says causes the name of Christ to be blasphemed.

Darrell I will respond to your post later.

Don't bother, I think we are finished in this one, at least...I am.

And speaking of favoritism, could we see that in a statement like this...

HE cheated on his wife and it doesn't matter that she cheated first

...?


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Throughout your responses, it all boiled down to basically the poor man is being vilified by some on the BB who just don't have personal experience in what he is going through, therefore they can't empathize and their judgment is too harsh.

The man was not Baptist, nor is he. He is Presbyterian, ordained by the hierarchy of that group, and served under the authority structure of that group.

When found out, he did not submit to the authority structure, his credentials revoked, and REQUIRED to stay at that church for discipline and restoration processes.

He did not. Rather, he cut and ran.

Another Presbyterian church took him in as the "director of ministry" who DOES have authority over others.

Some PCC churches have started using "directors" to escape what they might consider the rigid control of the Presbytery over the hiring and firing of pastors and their staff.

However, the man is not qualified to be a "director" of anything.

Here is what I gathered from all that you have written:

1) you don't see the move as escapism or problematic - I do.
2) you don't see the mater of confession, forgiveness and restoration as a process that must include all that were impacted - I do.
3) you want to focus upon what I may or may not have done/do as if that is authoritative to the determining my level of import to the thread - it is irrelevant and a mere distraction from substance.
​

From all the accounts that I have read on line, it seems that the man had moral failure in the family and himself from the onset. Rather than him stepping back and bringing himself, his family, his living under accountability and structure, there was cover up, misdirection, and blame assignment to distract from the truth. This problem did not start with "Coral Ridge" but far earlier.

The pattern that he is now following is a continuation of that same type of characterization - avoidance, pressing forward in the desire to not have diminished influence, and to mis-characterize, misdirect, and blame the shame.

With all his education the man certainly must have missed this one vital lesson:

"Sin will take you farther than you wanted to go, keep you longer than you want to stay, and cost you far more than you wanted to pay"
​

The sin of excess in his youth, that he thought that he could control with little releases along the way, cost him far more than he is willing to pay.

Apparently you have not bothered to even read what I have said.

In no way have I sought to justify the man's actions, but have sought to simply discourage premature judgment which smacks of Pharisaical self-righteousness.

I have said, to you sir, on this subject...all I have to say. When you can address all of those issues and all of the Scripture presented, perhaps it might interest me to stay in the conversation. The last response was a deflection from what I have already said, and it lacks a detailed response by which we might actually work through the differences we have.

So until such a time...think what you want.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Huh?

R.C. Sproul Jr. remains an elder at 'Heritage Church':

https://heritagecenterville.org/leadership

You seem to be unaware of R.C. Jr.'s being defrocked in previous scandal, and popping up as an elder in another Reformed denomination after a few months?

I was not aware of this, but excellent point.

R.C. JR. is in fact currently teaching with Ligonier Ministries, and my hope for this man is that he will prove to be a good teacher like his father, though he has some big shoes to fill, lol.

Not that I don't have some issues with some of R.C.s views, but hey, honor where honor is due, right? When it comes to certain things R.C. stands out as a teacher. He has commented that he has thought about starting a new denomination, but knows it wouldn't really change anything. And he is an example of the differences we can find even among those of the same denomination.


God bless.

 

[blessedwife318]

Don't bother, I think we are finished in this one, at least...I am.

And speaking of favoritism, could we see that in a statement like this...





...?


God bless.

This tread is not about his wife, its about him. I'm sorry you think that her sin justifies his sin but that is not true.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

could you be a little more specific and point out how this is relevant to the discussion at hand?


God bless.

doctrines of grace.

 

[Darrell C]

This tread is not about his wife, its about him. I'm sorry you think that her sin justifies his sin but that is not true.

You are free to quote me "justifying his sin" based on either his or her actions, but the only one you will find justifying sin is the one who said...

"HE cheated on his wife and it doesn't matter that she cheated first"

...and that attitude does display a bias.

And this thread is in fact about his wife, as well as his former congregation, as well as his new congregation, as well as all onlookers.

And that is why you present posts that are irrelevant, you are having a hard time discerning all relevant aspects of this issue.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

doctrines of grace.

Okay, thanks.

You said...

Is this going to set a precedent for the Whole of The PCA? Tell you why I'm asking.....I've got two PCA churches in my area. One of the pastors has told me point blank that doctrine will not be taught. I see them gravitating to a more liberal easy going stance in their scriptural delivery. The other pastor, tells me anyway that they will hold to doctrine. The 2nd guy is the ones church I've been attending. Now if they morph into PC USA apostate types, I don't want to be there. Any insight?

...but I am not sure if by DoG you mean a derisively coined term for grace or if the Pastor does. If that is in view, meaning a "greasy grace" (sorry, lol, that is a derisive term used by some) in the sense that it removes all measure of responsibility on the part of the believer then I could understand the Pastor's sentiment.

What I would say is that what the fellowship or church organization "morphs" into will likely be dependent on the leadership there, rather than expressly impacted by outside influences. In other words, if the leadership is solid, you have nothing to worry about. If it is not, maybe you do.

I wouldn't sweat it until it becomes an issue.


God bless.

 

[blessedwife318]

You are free to quote me "justifying his sin" based on either his or her actions, but the only one you will find justifying sin is the one who said...

"HE cheated on his wife and it doesn't matter that she cheated first"

...and that attitude does display a bias.

And this thread is in fact about his wife, as well as his former congregation, as well as his new congregation, as well as all onlookers.

And that is why you present posts that are irrelevant, you are having a hard time discerning all relevant aspects of this issue.


God bless.

Wow its biased to say that people are responsible for their own sin regardless of what those around them have done.
I guess all the sermons I've heard talking about how Adam was wrong to blame the women God gave him for HIS sin were biased then.

Yes she sinned by having an affair.
Yes he sinned by having an affair.

They are each responsible for their sin.


Who would have thought that the above would be such a contentious statement, unless one wants to try to justify one person's sin by casting blame on the other.

It's okay for women to cheat on their husbands? There is no possibility this man's sin is a direct result of that betrayal?

Where have I said it's OK for anyone to cheat?
But the fact that you and Tullian keep bringing it up and even say that his sin is a "direct" result is sad and is no better then Adam blaming the women God gave him.
One person's sin is never an excuse for another person's sin.
Everyone is responsible for their own sin.
I'm sorry that this is such a hard concept.

 

[Darrell C]

Wow its biased to say that people are responsible for their own sin regardless of what those around them have done.
.

Deflection.

"HE cheated on his wife and it doesn't matter that she cheated first"


Admit your error.

It does matter that she cheated first, that is something that impacts this situation as a whole. Even if he was not aware of it, her actions surely impacted the relationship.

Or do you think that a wife can cheat on her husband and the family will be unaffected?


God bless.

 

[blessedwife318]

Deflection.

"HE cheated on his wife and it doesn't matter that she cheated first"


Admit your error.

It does matter that she cheated first, that is something that impacts this situation as a whole. Even if he was not aware of it, her actions surely impacted the relationship.

Or do you think that a wife can cheat on her husband and the family will be unaffected?


God bless.

No I will not say that he has any excuse.
He is responsible for his sin. She is responsible for her sin. It's a very simple concept.

Of course of wife's sin affects her family but that is no excuse for the husband to sin in return.
Stop trying to excuse his sin.

Deflection is Tullian making sure everyone knows about his wife affair to excuse his own. I see you are joining in with him on that. But he needs to take responsibility for his own sin.

 

[Darrell C]

No I will not say that he has any excuse.

Agreed, you simply ignore what impact her sin may had in his actions.

He is responsible for his sin.

No-one said he wasn't.

She is responsible for her sin.

Not according to you...it doesn't matter she cheated first.

It's a very simple concept.

No, it is not a simple concept, nor is it a simple matter.

You are missing what I am saying in all of this, which is why having a discussion with you is pointless.

Of course of wife's sin affects her family

Now factor that into the equation.

Do you still think it doesn't matter she cheated first?

but that is no excuse for the husband to sin in return.

No-one said that.

Stop trying to excuse his sin.

You bear false witness...again.

Now quote me excusing his sin...or admit your error.

Deflection is Tullian making sure everyone knows about his wife affair to excuse his own.

But it is not his deflection we are talking about...it is yours.

I see you are joining in with him on that.

False witness.

Quote me where I have excused his sin.

But he needs to take responsibility for his own sin.

And you need to take responsibility for yours.

Unless bearing false witness is not a sin in your book either.

The point you are missing is that all of these things should be considered, both of their sins.

Now do you think there is restoration in the wife's future? Shall we pray for her?

And that is it for me in this discussion with you, unless you can quote me and substantiate the charges you have falsely levied.

I think it's simply a matter of you wanting to argue with someone, and that is not going to be me.


God bless.

 

[agedman]

The IMPACT of sin in the family brings sorrow to the whole family.

There is no excuse for what the wife did, but that is not the issue. It is a deflection of the man's problem for him to even mention his wife as an excuse. So she had an affair. Hosea's wife was a harlot, too, and it did not excuse Hosea from sin or following God's purpose in his life.

Some "what if" questions:
Could it be that the ministry to the local assembly, by example of what the wife did, was ruined because the man did not follow righteousness?
Could not have the wife's sin(s) resulted in God demonstrating judgment, justice, truth, mercy, grace as a living example before the assembly had the man not brought shame upon himself and then sought to excuse?

What a lousy example for his children in the home of the relationship of Christ and His bride. The bride sins so Christ sins? Really?

He apparently had very little Godly SELF control - that is a fruit of the spirit, is it not?

The hedonism of his youth had laid seeds that could no longer be kept underground. Rather than rely upon the grace, mercy, judgment, justice, truth ... of God, the man CHOOSE to sin. His own pride, his own lust, his own sin brought death to his leadership.

There is no excuse what the man did - that IS the issue because he is continuing in the ministry as the "Director of Ministry" which places him in some level of authority over others.

 

[annsni]

The IMPACT of sin in the family brings sorrow to the whole family.

There is no excuse for what the wife did, but that is not the issue. It is a deflection of the man's problem for him to even mention his wife as an excuse. So she had an affair. Hosea's wife was a harlot, too, and it did not excuse Hosea from sin or following God's purpose in his life.

Some "what if" questions:
Could it be that the ministry to the local assembly, by example of what the wife did, was ruined because the man did not follow righteousness?
Could not have the wife's sin(s) resulted in God demonstrating judgment, justice, truth, mercy, grace as a living example before the assembly had the man not brought shame upon himself and then sought to excuse?

What a lousy example for his children in the home of the relationship of Christ and His bride. The bride sins so Christ sins? Really?

He apparently had very little Godly SELF control - that is a fruit of the spirit, is it not?

The hedonism of his youth had laid seeds that could no longer be kept underground. Rather than rely upon the grace, mercy, judgment, justice, truth ... of God, the man CHOOSE to sin. His own pride, his own lust, his own sin brought death to his leadership.

There is no excuse what the man did - that IS the issue because he is continuing in the ministry as the "Director of Ministry" which places him in some level of authority over others.

Very well said. His wife sinned. That would be enough for the man to ask for a time of a sabbatical or leave of absence from his church to work on his family and marriage. This I would respect. However, instead of doing anything like this, the man went out and had his own affair showing a lack of self control and a lack of maturity in his walk with Christ and then he files for divorce. His heart was not turned towards God but instead towards his own fleshly desires. This really speaks volumes.