Change Dividing Southern Baptist Mega-Church

Ethics Daily ^ | September 22, 2006 | Bob Allen

[hiho hiho]

Rick Warren's "Purpose-Driven" church model is being blamed in a developing split in one of the Southern Baptist Convention's most prominent churches.

Two weeks ago the Wall Street Journal carried a front-page story saying Warren's church-growth methods--which include replacing hymns, choirs and pews with rock-style praise bands and laid-back sermons--were dividing the country's 50 million evangelicals.

Baptist Press defended Warren, a Southern Baptist, by implying the Journal story made a mountain out of a molehill.

"The 2,200-word story cites four congregations where upheaval occurred from a move toward the principles espoused by Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., and author of the best-seller Purpose-Driven Life," wrote a BP staff writer. "The story, however, does not relay any estimates of the extent of problems nationwide stemming from Warren's Purpose-Driven methods."

But a Web site nearing 60,000 visitors criticizes several changes at the 30,000-member Bellevue Baptist Church near Memphis, Tenn., since last year's retirement and subsequent death of its legendary pastor, Adrian Rogers.

One of the largest churches in the Mid-South, Bellevue has been led by just four pastors in the last 79 years: R.G. Lee, 1927-1960; Ramsey Pollard, 1960-72; Rogers, 1972-2005; and since last September, Steve Gaines, former pastor of First Baptist Church in Gardendale, Ala.

Gaines' honeymoon is apparently over for some long-time church members, who criticize what they view as excessive salaries, moving away from congregational leadership toward an elder-led system and unpopular staff changes, including forcing out and replacing a long-term music director.

They also criticize Gaines' leadership style, claiming he is arrogant, uses intimidation and pressed forward with changes instead of giving the church time to grieve following their beloved emeritus pastor's death from cancer in November 2005.

Gaines denied in the Memphis Commercial-Appeal the church is departing from its Southern Baptist roots or is part of the church-growth movement, but acknowledged that some had criticized the blending of contemporary and traditional church music in worship.

The "Saving Bellevue" Web site, however, includes articles seeking assurances the new pastor isn't trying to move the church toward "Warrenism" and quotations from Warren's "Ministry Toolbox" playbook on transitioning a traditional church to a Purpose-Driven model.

"Not only do we need to take a stand for our church, but we--EVERY BLOOD BOUGHT CHRISTIAN--needs to take a stand against this Rick Warren Revolution!" wrote one commenter in a blog section.

"I have been a member of Bellevue since 1952, when I was 17 years old," wrote another. "I have been in the choir since 1960. Every time my mail comes I look for the letter telling me that I am no longer needed in the choir, that I am too old. I do not clap and stomp. I do not wave my hands."

Other grievances include a story about Gaines sending staff to discourage a particular long-time church member from saying "Amen," during worship services. One version of the story says Gaines issued the order after hearing in a dream the man was under demonic influence and needed to be silenced before the next Sunday. Gaines denies the dream ever happened, claiming the "Amens" were a distraction and hurting his concentration.

Other rumors are that Gaines negotiated a salary twice the size of his predecessor, one figure tossed around was $500,000. Gaines and others said the church doesn't disclose salaries, but his isn't nearly that high. Questions about hiring, firing and staff compensation allegedly went unanswered, and church members were refused copies of the church bylaws.

One former deacon and long-time member gave an on-line interview describing how, after asking questions about compensation and other administrative matters, four uninvited visitors, including Gaines, came to his home in a gated community, climbing over a fence marked with a no-trespassing sign.

The four men said the visit was an attempt to seek reconciliation, but the homeowner, Mark Sharpe, who wasn't at home when it occurred, viewed it as intimidation.

He said Gaines called him after 11:00 one evening and told him he was "Hezbollah" and personally sending people to hell by his actions.

"I informed him that I didn't have the power to send anyone to hell," Sharpe said. "I have to admit, I was shaken by the words I heard my pastor speak to me. I was shaken to the bone but reminded that these were not the actions of a pastor."

Gaines said the Web site contains "insinuations and downright falsifications," and he believes it is creating confusion in the church.

The Sept. 5 Wall Street Journal story detailed criticisms of "Purpose-Driven" attempts to attract non-believers with lively worship services, practical sermons and chances to volunteer. Critics question the use of secular marketing methods and simplistic Bible study.

Among churches split after adopting Warren's techniques, the story said, is Valley View Christian Church in Dallas, the former church of failed Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers.

Ron Key, the church's senior minister, was demoted and later fired for criticizing the "Madison Avenue" approach advocated by Warren. Key and about 200 other members began worshipping in a hotel and later a college gym. Miers reportedly attends when she is in town.

Key's replacement at Valley View was Barry McCarty, longtime parliamentarian for the Southern Baptist Convention.

"Our church used the five purposes from the Purpose-Drive Life as the outline for our strategic plan, because they are the purposes for the church that are revealed in Scripture," McCarty told Baptist Press. "It ought to be noted that Rick Warren did not invent these five purposes" [worship, fellowship, discipleship, ministry and evangelism]. "He simply popularized them."

"Rick got these five purposes from the Bible," McCarty said. "Rick's heart is the same place that our hearts are: We want to do what God has assigned us to do as individuals and as a church."

[Binghamton_native]

I have watched the video, and I don't think using the phrase "the things they (Bellevue) do wrong". Poor choice of words.

[Binghamton_native]

I think this speaks to the issue at hand at Bellevue and many other established churches:

Culture crashing occurs when a pastor (or any other staff member) accepts a position in a church with an established culture, and then tries to radically change the culture. This is primarily seen in efforts to make old churches young, traditional churches contemporary, or worship services "seeker friendly. "The intent to draw sinners, not saints, to God is good but should not be in the expense of an existing culture, unless, of course, the church is dying and in desperate need of some kind of change to become effective again. You have every right to develop any cultural church style you want, provided you start your own church. But when you crash an established church, you seriously violate Christ, ripping the garments of his bride. That's sin. Here's why:

First, it is a moral violation to crash a culture. Missionaries have learned the hard way that their job is to take the gospel into a culture, not change the culture. If ethics demand that foreign cultures remain intact, then the same ethics demand that an established culture in any church be honored.

Second, its egotistical immaturity to tear down a culture just because you didn't help to build it.

Third, it's downright stealing to take a salary under the guise of pastoring a certain culture, then violate and trash it. Your work is to root out sin, not destroy culture. It is ruthless ignorance to pound people with guilt for clinging to a thirty-to-fifty-year pattern of life instead of supporting your desire to dress, sing, and worship differently. You must honor the culture in which they learned to follow the Lord Jesus Christ.

Taken from a book called "Firestorm: Preventing and Overcoming Church Conflicts" [Baker Books, 2005] by Ron Susek with a forward by D. James Kennedy

[beezdotcom]

Way too much importance is placed upon music. If classical music is the only way churches think they can worship - there's something wrong.


(I'll take the lyre and sackbut over the pipe organ any day...)

[Binghamton_native]

A couple of more points regarding music in church:

1. It should be participatory, not just a performance.
2. Although I enjoy some of the contemporary songs, I don't think it can be disputed that they are not as 'transportable' as hymns. What I mean is that if you visit another church (on vacation), you will probably not know many of the songs if they are contemporary, as that church's current set may be different than the set used in your home church. Not so with hymns.

[beezdotcom]

you will probably not know many of the songs if they are contemporary, as that church's current set may be different than the set used in your home church.

That's getting less and less true. I have yet to find a church with a contemporary service that hasn't heard "I Can Only Imagine..."

[Claud]

Way too much importance is placed upon music. If classical music is the only way churches think they can worship - there's something wrong.

It's not between classical and pop. Most classical music is *totally* unsuitable for worship. You ever walk into a Church that is blasting Wagner's Ring....time to hightail it out of there.

The difference, rather, is between sacred music and secular music--a distinction that has always been made in every culture. I don't know why we insist on defying that trend.

Suppose some music minister changed the words to Twisted Sister's "We're not gonna Take It" into "Jesus is Our Savior" and sung it on Sunday morning.

If you understand why that is ridiculous, you understand the difference between secular and sacred settings. The music has to fit the text.

[Binghamton_native]

OK, my personal experience. I sing in the choir in both the contemporary and traditional services at our medium to large church. We have a pretty large set of contemporary songs that we draw from. When I visit my son's large Baptist church in the Seattle area, all contemporary, when I was there earlier this year I knew 2 of the 7 songs. Same thing happens when I visit my other son's large church in South Florida.

Now, I'll grant that this problem will resolve IF a particular contemporary song is around as long as some of the hymns so that it becomes as widely known as the hymns.

[beezdotcom]

But does it give the kind of sacred, quiet and prayerful atmosphere that belongs in church? Or is it more conducive to jumping around and emotionalism?

Who jumps more than someone conducting Handel's Messiah? Is there no emotionalism in a chant or a psalm?

Empty emotionalism isn't measured by the tempo, volume, or style - it's measured in how 'feelings' get substituted for true spiritual contemplation and worship.

Meanwhile, "rock" is a pretty broad term. Are you talking about ballads, or heavy-metal-fuzz-clash guitar?

[Mr. Brightside]

A couple of more points regarding music in church:
1. It should be participatory, not just a performance.

I could not agree more.

Most churches have only performance-oriented music. The audience sits quietly while the soloist/duet/quartet sings or performs the song.

I don't see a lot of Biblical examples for that kind of music.

[Claud]

1. It should be participatory, not just a performance.

Absolutely. I can't stand any sort of clapping in church. Although I might add you can also participate by listening and sort of singing along in your head. Not everybody has the chops to sing 4 part harmony. :)

2. Although I enjoy some of the contemporary songs, I don't think it can be disputed that they are not as 'transportable' as hymns. What I mean is that if you visit another church (on vacation), you will probably not know many of the songs if they are contemporary, as that church's current set may be different than the set used in your home church. Not so with hymns.

Yep...there's a certain universality with hymns. Note how popular and well-beloved all the Christmas carols are--most of them are quite long in the tooth now.

[beezdotcom]

It's not between classical and pop.

Hey, I agree. But some folks clearly think that IS the argument.

Suppose some music minister changed the words to Twisted Sister's "We're not gonna Take It" into "Jesus is Our Savior" and sung it on Sunday morning. If you understand why that is ridiculous, you understand the difference between secular and sacred settings. The music has to fit the text.

You and I might be more in agreement about the specific "Twisted Sister" comparison (although I'm willing to entertain specific counterarguments). However, most of the time, the arguments are on the order of "Jesus Loves Me" vs. "I Could Sing Of His Love Forever".

[Claud]

Who jumps more than someone conducting Handel's Messiah? Is there no emotionalism in a chant or a psalm?

No, there's definitely emotion there! I can't listen to Palestrina's Sicut Cervus without getting swept into another world. But it's a different sort of emotional I guess. More quiet...more still..less enervating.

I am talking about the whole of the rock genre...from Chuck Berry to whatever passes for it nowadays LOL.

Sometimes secular music hits on something I guess....Greensleeves back in its day was turned into a beautiful Christmas carol (What Child is This). But by and large ends of the sacred and secular are different.

[beezdotcom]

But it's a different sort of emotional I guess. More quiet...more still..less enervating.

See, now we're starting to delve into personal preferences - which is FINE. I just grow weary of having people tell me how certain music MUST affect ME, and it happens all too often in some churches.

[Claud]

I hear ya. Believe me, I don't pretend to understand all the vagaries of when is such-and-such kind of music okay and when is it not. I guess the ages will sort it all out for us.

I just grow weary of this attitude that because we can't exactly set hard and fast rules, that suddenly everything is as valid as everything else for any purpose.

There's a reason, I think, that things like Gregorian chant have lasted 1500 years...and that things like estampie were only around a couple of centuries. I think modern rock--much I like certain aspects of it--is definitely in the latter category rather than the former.

[Muzzle_em]

Re- the sermon he preached.
This is a serious question.
If one has divorced to marry another, is now married, is NOW considered to be commiting adultery since he/she is married to someone else, then REPENTS, does he/she leave the new spouse and go back to the first spouse? Doesn't repent involve "discontinuing" the sin in addition to asking forgiveness?
I know I sound like a smarta-- for asking a question like this, but I know folks who would ask that type of question and I would have NO answer for them.

[Claud]

Doesn't repent involve "discontinuing" the sin in addition to asking forgiveness? I know I sound like a smarta-- for asking a question like this, but I know folks who would ask that type of question and I would have NO answer for them.

I wouldn't either! I think you're 100% spot on. "Go and sin no more", right?

[Sue Perkick]

I know I sound like a smarta-- for asking a question like this, but I know folks who would ask that type of question and I would have NO answer for them.

I hope not because I've been trying to figure this one out myself. What if the other spouse is married to someone else as well? What if it's been 20 or 30 years? What if all this happened before they came to know the Lord? I believe we can ask for forgiveness but there are some things that just can't be undone. It may be in there, but I'm not sure if this may be moving beyond what the Bible has to say.

[Mr. Brightside]

Way too much importance is placed upon music.

In many churches, this is correct. I grew up in a "traditional" church. And they would have been better off skipping the music, solos, chior, etc. And they would have driven less young people away from the church.

[Mr. Brightside]

First, it is a moral violation to crash a culture. Missionaries have learned the hard way that their job is to take the gospel into a culture, not change the culture. If ethics demand that foreign cultures remain intact, then the same ethics demand that an established culture in any church be honored.

I guess the same principle would hold true for our American culture in general.

Modern music is a part of our culture. Just as missionaries respect the music and culture of the mountain Indians in Mexico, the church should respect the culture and music of our nation.

Thus, if people get saved and bring modern music into worship, who are we to disagree?

[Mr. Brightside]

I don't see anything in your link that supports claims that the Bible prefers hymnal music over modern music. I don't even see any reference in the Bible where the word below has ANYTHING to do with music.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Minister (Noun and Verb) [Noun]

leitourgos denoted among the Greeks, firstly, "one who discharges a public office at his own expense," then, in general, "a public servant, minister." In the NT it is used
(a) of Christ, as a "Minister of the sanctuary" (in the Heavens), Heb_8:2;
(b) of angels, (Heb_1:7 Psalm_104:4);
(c) of the Apostle Paul, in his evangelical ministry, fulfilling it as a serving-priest, Rom_15:16; that he used it figuratively and not in an ecclesiastical sense, is obvious from the context;
(d) of Epaphroditus, as ministering to Paul's needs on behalf of the church at Philippi, Php_2:25; here, representative service is in view;
(e) of earthly rulers, who though they do not all act consciously as servants of God, yet discharge functions which are the ordinance of God, Rom_13:6.