Pastoral Qualification Quandary ??

He could shoot her, do his time, get out and stand a better chance of getting a pastorate in a conservative church than if he were simply divorced. I can tell you of convicted murderers (men who killed in cold blood and should still be in prison) who are now preaching in churches and very well respected. But, let a man's wife leave him and he is marked as unfit for the rest of his life. Something is wrong with this reality. Personally, I'd rather have the divorced man than a murderer who should have been executed or at least still in prison serving 99 to life.

 

Dr. Charles Stanley is a fine pastor and gifted communicator blessed by God. His ministry is reaching thousands for the glory of God. You don't know his circumstance, you don't know the whole story, don't make assumptions.

This is why this whole business gets messy and nasty. We have failed at providing grace first as our default position.

 

Were they a saved, professing Christian at the time of the murder ?

 

He has some pretty articulate critics, who ask great questions.

So now grace means throwing away scripture ?

Funny, nobody can give any biblical reasoning, just slams on those who would rather do what the bible says, without question. I find that the biggest reason of all to cling to scripture, even more.

 

I'm not sure if they were saved or not. That's not the point. They never served their full sentence.

 

Why not ? Did they cheat to get out ? And I would think it did matter. If a preacher kills his wife, then that disqualifies him. I don't get your point.

 

One of them I know of murdered a couple in cold blood in a park for no good reason. And, he was out after just a few years and is now a preacher at an SBC church. Go figure!!

 

Is Paul addressing Christians in general, or pastors in particular, in that verse ?

 

You will not get me to stick up for anything the SBC does, or doesn't do.

 

I even read it before I wrote it.

People are not dealing with what the Bible says, they are giving their pious opinions.

Then respond to my comment about Charles Stanley. If memory is correct he promised to resign as pastor if his wife did divorce him. She did! He didn't! I understand his son left the church because of this.

On this matter I have nothing to answer to God for.

 

YES! But that murderer can give a wonderfully moving testimony of his conversion! In a Baptist church even if a man is divorced before his conversion he is considered unfit for the ministry. So much for sins being cast into the depth of the sea.

 

I don't know the details of either situation. Do you.? I made no remarks about Charles Stanley's abilities as a pastor. I made no assumptions. I simply pointed out that one divorced man is being discussed totally different on this Forum than the second divorced man. One should be denied a pastorate, the second should not. So don't get on your pious high horse.

 

I Timothy 3:2, what does it say? Well it says that a bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife, etc. If we want to take a hard line on that, then we could disqualify every preacher that ever lived. First, how does one define blameless? Does Paul mean we must be perfect, totally devoid of sin. Obviously not, for then only Jesus Christ would be qualified. No, it must mean with respect to men. In other words, one must be living his life in a biblically sound manner, striving to the best of his ability to keep the commandments of God. What does the "husband of one wife" mean? Does it mean one must be a husband? If so then you have disqualified Jesus Christ, Paul, and many, many others. Obviously that wasn't Paul's intent. What about widowers? It isn't as commonplace now, but in the old days it was fairly common that a preacher's wife would die young and he would remarry. Obviously, this couldn't have been what Paul meant. I think it's obvious Paul is writing this in order to dissuade having more than one wife at a time.

Note John Gill's commentary here: "only if he marries or is married, that he should have but one wife at a time; so that this rule excludes all such persons from being elders, or pastors, or overseers of churches, that were "polygamists"; who had more wives than one at a time, or had divorced their wives, and not for adultery, and had married others"

Gill then goes on to point out that polygamy and divorce was rampant among the Jews (and though he doesn't say this, probably among the gentiles as well). It seems that Paul is writing this to disqualify polygamists and men who just divorced their wives for no good reason and married another.

So, here's a guy who obeyed God's call into the ministry. He did his best to faithfully carry out his charge. However, his wife threatened to divorce him if he didn't give up the ministry. What is one to do? According to some he should have left what God called him into just to appease his wife. Folks, doesn't it sound like Satan is attacking a man of God here? Never should a man choose his wife over God. A man should love his wife as Christ loved the church, but not exalt her over God. If he did all he could save leaving the ministry to save his marriage and she still divorced him, I fail to see how he is disqualified. Sounds to me like he is loving God more than son or daughter, and father or mother.

 

RAdam

An exceptionally well reasoned post#54. Thanks!

 

My take on I Corinthians 7, in context, is as follows.

The issues concern Christians and marriage, not qualifications for pastors. That answers #3. Pastors are not "exempt" from I Cor. 7, but as leaders they are held to a higher level of accountability. That answers #2.

Concerning Christians and marriage/divorce, there seems to be two sets of circumstances addressed by Paul.

#1. Two Christians are married. One leaves the other. The one left behind is not to remarry but seek reconciliation. No chance to remarry another person as long as the spouse lives.

#2. Two unbelievers are married. One comes to salvation, the other does not. If the unbeliever will live with the believer, they must remain married. If the unbeliever abandons the believer, the believer is not bound and therefore free to remarry if they desire.

If the believer is a pastor, prudence dictates he step aside from pastoring for some period of time, so as to not cause discredit to come upon the name of Christ.

As far as the OP, the initial posts says both were professing Christians. The pastor must not remarry, but continue to seek reconciliation with his wife.

He is disqualified as pastor, but certainly not for other ministries in the church.

peace to youraying:

 

Have you called on Charles Stanley to step aside? Prudence may dictate but the discussion is what Scripture dictates.

 

Ok, 2 things.
first, I am not a member of his church. I can't tell another church what they should or should not do.

second, I am not Charles Stanley's judge. That was the point of what I said about not answering to God for you or anyone else.

So when are you going to answer my question about where in the world you got the idea of beating a wife?

 

Neither Stanley, or anyone associated with his ministry, asked for my opinion on the matter.

If they would have asked, I would have told them that if he values the truth of the Word of God and the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, he should resign.

Scripture is clear. Concerning the I Tim. 3 passage, the Pastor must be "above reproach" and "manage his household well".

Prudence or wisdom should reveal that a man suffering through a divorce (of which God hates) has personal problems in his life such that must be addressed outside the pastorate, .... and is not "above reproach"..... .....and is disqualified from the pastorate based on the mentioned scriptures.

peace to youraying:

 

The above is supposition, not wisdom!