About seven years ago, I was ordained and sent out by a local Baptist church where I had trained and served as the associate pastor for a couple of years.
Soon, they will be rescinding that ordination.
The charge? “Departing from sound doctrine.” This recent Sunday, the sole pastor there concluded a two-part series on the topic of yours truly. I didn’t hear the sermons, but I was informed by a friend that I was the focus of the pastor’s sermons due to my apparent departure from sound doctrine. Today, I learned that he told the church that he will “deal with my ordination in the near future, but for now, [he’ll] give the church time to grieve.”
The worst part about this? I haven’t even been brought into the conversation. Though I have my guesses, I don’t know what the reasons are for saying that I’ve “left sound doctrine.” To make things worse, a whole church full of people that I love with all my heart is ready to censure me, but not one of them has called me or messaged me in any way. I’m completely in the dark here.
Well, Mostly in the dark
Don’t get me wrong — though I have been left out of the conversation completely, I do have some guesses as to why the pastor is preparing to strip me of my ordination (is that even possible?). Firstly, I have shifted in my thinking regarding the King James translation of the Bible over the years — I no longer believe it is the only reliable translation of the Bible. There is no historical, factual, or evidentiary reason to believe this way, and I’ve gone so far as to record a miniseries on the subject on my podcast, the Equipoise Podcast. But the King James Only movement is notorious for flourishing in echo chambers, and being resistant to truth. It’s tragic, but I genuinely understand why they feel that the King James translation is exclusively the Word of God: I used to believe the exact same thing before I — thanks be to God — learned that this position is inherently, irrevocably, and irredeemably incoherent and irreconcilable with those pesky little things called facts. However, this doesn’t mean I don’t love and use the King James Bible. We still use the King James Bible in our church, and yes, I still love my King James Bible. Always will.
I also consider that there are likely other reasons: I no longer wear a tie on Sundays (and sometimes I don’t even wear a suit!) or insist on a dress code for church. I would like our church to be able to learn some of the newer songs and hymns of the Christian faith. Also, I have addressed the issue of Christians and alcohol consumption on my podcast. I take the position that it is Biblically permissible for a Christian to drink alcohol in moderation, which is consistent with the position of Christians all through church history right up until the recent abstinence movement in America over the last 150 years or so. To my sending church, this might be considered leaving sound doctrine. I don’t know.
what are we talking about here?
So what is “leaving sound doctrine?” For men, is it growing your hair past your collar? Getting your ear pierced? For women, is it wearing pants? Praying aloud in church? For everyone, is it reading an NIV? Is it listening to Toby Mac or Matthew West? Getting a tattoo? I do not believe that it was the intent of any Biblical author to say that any of these things — or their own contemporary equivalents — are to be considered “leaving sound doctrine.”
In my mind, the term “sound doctrine” resonates with concepts such as the deity of Christ, his death and resurrection, the final resurrection of the dead unto life eternal, the authority of the Scriptures, the virgin birth, the way of salvation by grace through faith in Christ, and so on. You know, stuff Jesus and the apostles taught. You could also include some positions on cultural issues such as human sexuality or maybe even gender roles with regards to church leadership. They could be packed into what it meant by “sound doctrine.” But surely not preferential issues such as whether or not a Christian drinks alcohol in moderation or goes to see a Marvel movie once in a while. I’m impelled to say that that’s splitting it too thin.
So really, to say that someone has “left sound doctrine” when they, in fact, haven’t (at least, by any orthodox or historic metric), is slander. And that’s quite a bit more dangerous than enjoying a cigar from time to time or not wearing a tie, according to the Scriptures.
What’s the Point?
So what’s the point? Did I just write this to vent? Maybe. But there’s a lesson here nonetheless — in seeking to please God, it matters not how noble your actions or motives are if you’re violating Scripture in the process. Biblically, if I’ve really left sound doctrine, don’t I need to be confronted? Asked about where I’m at? Doesn’t anyone care that an accusation is being brought against an elder here (I Timothy 5:19)? Does no one desire to hear my end of things, or is my sending church really so controlled by a cultish mentality that they’re actually not allowed to give me a call? I genuinely don’t know what folks at that church are thinking about me right now, but I’d like to hope that there’s at least some who would be kind enough to reach out. Instead, I hear what I hear as though I’m back in grade school — a friend of a friend. It’s silly, the whole lot of it all.
I suppose I should be thankful; All emotions and nostalgia aside, I’ve really no interest in an ordination from a church or pastor that does not care enough about me or the Biblical process to even reach out to me. I don’t say that with a hard heart — I say it with a sorrowful one.
So I suppose my answer to this whole incident would be as follows: Don’t grieve for me — save it for the others in this story who’ve yet to be freed by the truth.
