The recurring theme is that the world is watching everything we do.  They are not looking for reasons to jump on board; they are looking for more reasons to discount our message of hope and grace.

And these headlines give them plentry of reason to shut off anything Christian-no matter how well it's presented.

If we are going to gain respect, we have to do everything in our power to not be a stumbling block. 

If there is sin in the camp, it has to be dealt with.  You should love these leaders with moral failures,  but that doesn't mean they should be in the pulpit next Sunday. Where money is concerned, the books have to be opened. 

Phil is right, if we don't clean up our house –someone else will.

Does anyone else feel like we the goverment and mainstream media want us (Christian ministries) to feel guilty for driving a car without bondo?

I read a recent article in our local paper about Lakewood and that $30MM number was not mentioned with the rest of the numbers.  Are you sure that is a separate item, or is the $19MM in television airtime expense part of that $30MM?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/life/religion/5209200.html

Just wondering… 

What exactly are you saying? 

Are you saying that the size of the ministry provides entitlement to live a bit more lavishly?

Agreeing with Phil, there are definitely different skillsets required for different churches.  Point #2

I have seen it both ways.  To give an example of the other way, there was a pastor that I served under that came from a large church.  There he was a youth minister, with a HUGE youth ministry.  He had a pastoral staff under him that was larger than most entire church staff's.  He had vision, he had drive, but he didn't have financial and interpersonal skills that a smaller church required.  The changes were abrupt, the re-staffing was abrupt, the re-alignment of existing people in the church and their roles was abrupt, and when the attendance had dropped significantly and still hadn't balanced out, he realized he was in over his head, he left, and took his new staff with him.  He was well-meaning, and worked very hard, but it wasn't his place – he needed a larger church, with more support that he could share his big visions with.

Point # 1

You know… There is a people, a pastor, and a place for churches of all sizes.  But no matter the people, the pastor, the place, or the size, Satan is seeking to steal, kill, and destroy.  It can happen where there is a lot of money, and it can happen where there is very little money.  Often, it is easier for men with a lot of power (money normally) to think that they can get away with something.  It is also easier for them to begin thinking that they are infallible.  I believe that the moment we begin to think that we are above a particular sin, we have JUST become more suseptible to it.

One thing that ALL pastors and believers SHOULD share is humility!!!

I know that for myself there are 4 sins that I thought I would NEVER commit.  I was certain that I was above them.  I now know better.  I am now more humble, and I put more effort into guarding my heart against them. 

Pride does come before a fall.

 ________________________________

How do we put a stop to it in the church?  WE DON'T – WE CAN'T

There will ALWAYS be men that fail us.  You must use these times as times to search our own hearts.  The man without sin can cast the first stone.  You can answer questions from others by asking them if their belief is based on man or is their faith in God.  You can tell them that man will fail, but GOD will not.

Now, some might think that I seem a bit hypocritical, because I honestly believe that Richard Roberts should not be functioning in any role at the school any longer.  I am not stoning him.  I am saying that there should be change – and I am not saying that he should "change his policy".  I am saying that ORU should change leadership. 

There still needs to be appropriate action, when a leader falls, they should not be back in the pulpit the following Sunday.  We should not just take their word that they are going to change.  Change should be evident.  It takes time to rebuild trust.  If it didn't then trust wouldn't mean much.

——–

Points #3 and #4

Phil,  I am hoping that you have ideas and not just questions 8o)  I just find a lot of conflict in these two ideals…. How do you build flexibility into a system without increasing complication?  That is a challenge that I deal with every day when I am consulting in the software world – oh I live in multiple worlds… 8o) .  The more flexibility you are building the more complexity you are building.  They go hand in hand.  Either you hide all of the work from the end user (tax payer, organization), requiring little input, and do all the black majic behind the scenes in code, or you allow them control over every factor increasing their work, and complexity, and increasing the number of exceptions that you have to handle in the code.

If it were to be flexible, I think that more tax credits should go to organizations that are more efficient with their money in a measurable way.  If a ministry spent $80M in broadcasting and advertising, and took in $85M total, then they should pay higher taxes than the ministry that took in $100M and only spent $10M on broadcasting and advertising.  Ok these numbers are not supposed to mean anything… I am just saying I think that one of the problems with mega churches and government both is that they tend to be wasteful – they overpay, they use friends to do the paid work, and they generally don't analyze their spending… Churches don't measure their marketing success. 

Speaking to that last point I made.  I think there needs to be a balance.  A church that spends $10k on a small marketing campaign for an upcoming event for instance.  If they could measure that only 100 people responded to the ads, then it cost them $100 per person.  If traditionally 50% of the people make the church their home after a typical event then it cost $200 per person.  Sounds like measureable success.  But I also think that when those numbers are used as a price, it isn't very pallatable…  I heard a missionary say something to this effect once:  "Salvation comes at a price….  It costs us $1,100.00 for each soul that is saved in "  – I won't say the country.  The point is that each soul cost Christ His LIFE!  The missionary had good intentions, and up to that point I really liked him.  I don't dislike him any more, but I couldn't tell you another thing that he said after that… it was like the adults speaking in "Charlie Brown"

Yes there's a huge difference between a church of 100 people and a mega-church or international parachurch ministry.  Informal accountibility exists in the smaller organization and there is more intimate interaction and knowlege between the pastor and the congregation in addition to whatever leadership structure exists.

A mega-church or parachurch ministry has a much greater degree of separation and levels between its leadership and the congregants or contributors.

I'm going to make a statement that might not set well either but I think it is applicable, but have you noticed that much of the issues of late have come out of charismatic organizations?  Obviously it happens anywhere, but it sure does seem to be happening more in Charismatic type ministries and organizations?  Why is that?

 May I suggest that some of the reasons may include:

1.  Charismatic ministries tend to stress a closer tie between a strong leader and God and thus there is a higher deference to that leader and more willingness to follow without asking the hard questions.

2.  Prosperity ministries expect their leaders to live well and model what they are preaching and therefore limits as to what is reasonable are viewed as limitations upon God and over time the incentive to restraint is blurred.

3.  Appeals to authority, and faith in leadership is seen as such a virtue that the opportunity to abuse power is greater.

Moving away from the Charismatics, in America we've put such an emphasis on separation of Church and State that we've created a breeding ground for abuse of privileges such as tax-exemption and little or no reporting, and we have failed in some contexts as religious organizations to regulate ourselves so that abuse of these privileges is further spread and the falls when they happen more spectacular.

Dressing things up with religious language intimidates people and aggressive leaders with good intentions and those without them have a far easier time breaking the rules than those in the secular world.

Shouldn't the Church be leading and modeling these things?  Some are, but it seems like a very large sector of the church, and more in the Charismatic sector than not, is sure showing signs that the system in place is not working. 

1. There are just some things that Joe Q Public is never going to fully, or even mostly, understand the functioning and governance of large ministries. They also won't really get how a large corporation or government works either. This is more due to people taking care of what's right in front of them and not meandering off into off-the-beaten-path subjects like how a large ministry is run.

2. The best PR is keeping a great deal of in-house accountability AND doing selfless things in the community.

3. As much as I hate big "government" within ministries, this is where submitting to a governing body like a denomination actually comes into play. When Peter setup the church, it was with accountability so that heresy would be squashed and fairness in spiritual and social matters would have an ultimate earthly authority.

4. Generally speaking, the preacher driving a media ministry often has an ego. This ego helps draw people to the ministry because people like to follow someone who seems to have confidence in where he/she is going. With ego comes the willingness to risk and go with their gut, which is more conducive to being sensitive to whatever they feelthe Lord is telling them. One of the downsides, however, is that ego also resists bridling, so providing an adequate system of accountability is usually out of the question. 

5. The Federal government is designed to prohibit an easy solution on their end so a sensible solution orginating from them has about the same chance as Golden Compass winning of Dr. Baer's film awards.

6. If these ministries would at least join an organization comprized of like ministries and submit themselves for review on a voluntary basis much like universities do with their sports teams to the NCAA, that could go a long way toward improving public opinion, but I just don't see it happening. Still…with man certain things are impossible, but with God, all things are possible. The NRB might be a good place to start. 

But yes, I agree that we do need to have measurements in place.  I am just suggesting that those be kept somewhat internal!  I think that transparency is important, and is not practiced well in most churches of any size.  But at the same time, the board and staff need to know the efficiencies so that they can make better decisions, and be accountable.  Giving a cost per soul from the pulpit just doesn't sit right with me – especially if it is part of asking for money.  It doesn't bother me in the slightest, and I would encourage it in a church business meeting.

1) it seems to make a science / business out of a ministry

2) it gives a perception that souls can be bought for a monetary price

3) It can easily be used as a sales pitch for giving. 

God wants us to be sensitive to His direction on where we should give.  Anything that is manipulative is unpallatable to me, especially because that is part of what turns so many people off to churches.  The importance of tithe should be taught the church.  The principles of giving beyond a tithe should also be taught.  The opportunities to give toward particular goals should be presented to the church, but a high-pressure sales pitch IMO should not come from a pulpit.  God knows what he wants to accomplish and how much money it will take.  We as Christians need to learn to be sensitive to the nudging of the Holy Spirit in how much, and which ministries God wants us to invest in. 

I can say that many times, I have been in a service with my wife, and an opportunity to give has arisen.  I pray about it, and often a number will pop right into my head.  I write it down, my wife writes a number down, and we compare.  95% of the time it is the same number – it is confirmation.  Sometimes I wonder where the money is going to come frome too…  If the numbers don't match we don't give until we have prayed more and discussed it.  There are also times when neither one of us is prompted to give.  I try to separate in my giving between emotional pulls, and tugs of the Holy Spirit. 

What are you saying, exactly?  Are you referring to mega-ministries, or are you referring to the fact that churches in general aren't frugal enough with their money now-days?