"if the IFB movement is to have any future ... they are going to have to move toward an elder-rule, accountability-focused leadership style"

So I finally took a poke at answering some of the most egregious pro-FBC/HAC/Schaap stuff that a “friend” of mine was putting up on Facebook and replies that were coming in under it – statements to the effect that the devil made this happen, or that Schaap’s problem was that he loved soul-winning too much for his own good and attracted the devil’s attention, etc.

The simple result? I was unfriended. No answer. No reply at all.

I guess they learned from the best. Didn’t Hyles say, “Your friends are my enemies, and I’ve declared war”?

Much like a cult, these folks do not need or give answers. You are either for them or against them, unconditionally, even in a case like this – and they still consider Schaap to be one of their own, and they apparently consider anything or anyone that comes out of FBC to trump the truth of Scripture and the nature and character of God.

Scary stuff, to say the least.

Sometimes you can’t reason with people, Paul. But it was the right thing to do, I’m sure. That’s what is sad in all this. Some people really are gloating in this, and others see it as an excuse to outlaw fundamentalism or to abandon Christianity altogether.

May God help us all in this area of sexual sin. We need a better understanding of the full implications of violating the 7th Commandment. The Westminster Larger Confession questions 138 and 139 are very helpful in this area. It seems to be the place where Satan finds a wedge in the Church. While the Church struggles to stand for Traditional Marriage, the Shepherds fall to lust. The world succumbs to divorce because the Church won’t discipline fornication. The world embraces abortion because the Church won’t preach against abortifacient drugs. We must look within our own hearts and congregations before serious change will occur. If we sit smugly by and think that our little flock of 200 is just fine, we deceive ourselves. I pray often for you brothers that lead churches… may God give you humility, courage, strength and wisdom.

Would a plurality of elders or leadership guarantee this kind of scandal/issue would not happen again?

Seems to me no matter what the style or set-up of church leadership or accountability this type of sin is fully capable of happening again and again because Every one of Us is fully capable of doing this and hiding it from everyone for a long time.

I agree with Alex Guggenheim, Hammond’s church government set-up and accountability system worked. The issue came to light, the pastor was fired, and the church by all accounts is fully cooperating with the authorities.

Fundamentalism is first and foremost a doctrinal position and then a movement. A large segment of Fundamentalism has become doctrinally weak, aberrant, and in some cases heretical. FBCH/HAC is the poster child for that kind of Fundamentalism. Hyles and Schaap are one of a kind. Biblical Fundamentalists must practice biblical separation from ministries such FBCH and HAC. It saddened me to see men like Jim Binney, Frank Garlock, Ron Hamilton join hands with Hammond in recent years. Since I am personal friends with one of those men, I called him personally and warned him not to do so. He thanked me and took the admonishment well. It was wrong for representatives from the FBFI to speak on the same platform with Schaap two years ago. Specific warnings about that were given as well and to the credit of those leaders they humbly acknowledged their mistake and did not repeat it. People like Schaap, Hyles, and their ilk have so dumbed down or misrepresented the gospel, the doctrine of inspiration and preservation, biblical preaching, and true godliness that their example has led to heterodoxy and heteropraxy in other ministries. The amazing thing is that some well-trained fundamentalists do not always recognize or acknowledge the heterodoxy. About twelve years ago I addressed this specific issue at the FBFI national meeting in my Wednesday night message, “The Supremacy of the Lordship of Christ in the Gospel”. My opening statement in that sermon was, “Fundamentalism is not sure what the Gospel is, nor is it sure what the Bible is, other than that we are in great shape!” I also said that “Fundamentalism is bleeding on these issues … Let it bleed”.

I recall a sermon preached by J. Mac after the public demise of Jimmy Swaggert. Mac said, “The tragedy of Jimmy Swaggert was not his fall into immorality, the tragedy is that he had developed an aberrant theology that made him think he could live that way.” I have never forgotten that statement. Though no movement or man is exempt from moral failure, our theology does affect the way we live.

For those who are not familiar, they need to be aware that it is difficult to OVERestimate the impact that HAC has made across the state of Indiana and its surrounding area. (I assume Illinois would be number two, and Wisconsin and Michigan tied for three.)

Much of the “old-time” IFB crowd in these areas has been deeply touched by Hylesism. Ironically, for reasons I won’t develop here, I believe that has left them open to jump across the landscape to the seeker/emergent church model once they tire of Hyles — or realize he is no longer fashionable.

[Mike Harding] It was wrong for representatives from the FBFI to speak on the same platform with Schaap two years ago. Specific warnings about that were given as well and to the credit of those leaders they humbly acknowledged their mistake and did not repeat it.

I take it this acknowledgment of mistake was in private conversations?

I did not grow up as a Fundamentalist. I left classic evangelicalism for fundamentalism partly because of a pastor that came and moved our church from solid Biblical teaching to more fun and games. I was so blessed to be exposed to solid expository preaching after getting involved with MBA and GARBC churches.

I have been blessed to be involved in non Hyles, not KJVO churches since coming to fundamentalism. The problem was that when I first came into the movement I did not know how much difference there was and figured if a church was Independent Baptist and used the same King James Bible I grew up with, it must be good.

Fortunately I started to hear some warnings about Hyles and soon learned there were a lot of other issues to be concerned about. If we just ignore them and say they are over there and we are over here, there is a huge danger of the unsuspecting moving to a new region and being sucked in. Regardless of the percentages of solid fundamental churches vs the unorthodox ones, we must acknowledge that there are many dangerous independent Baptist churches out there and warn people accordingly.

There are many good reasons why I left the Evangelical Free Church (their stand on separation for one) but I would rather go back there than to go to a Hyles type church (I have far more reasons to separate from Hyles- yes, I know he is already dead, but his philosophy continues to live on in churches all over this nation).

• Tear down that ridiculous statue! Penn State saw that to change their Culture that the Paterno statue had to go. Take down all Hyles’ portraits too!
• Turn Hyles’ house (moved there from Tx) from a museum into a utility shed!
• Drop the name “Hyles” from Bible college
• Purge the organization of all Hyles’ descendants (Schaap’s kids who serve on staff. Give them their notice (be fair about it) and give ‘em 1 year to move on.) Assure that the Hyles’ Schaap dynasty ends.
• Purge bookstore of all Hyles’ and Schaap’s books. They’re worthless anyway!
• Teach the errors of Hyles’. Use the Biblical evangelist material as a starting point. Voyle A. Glover’s Fundamental Seduction: The Jack Hyles Case should be required reading for students. Get it for your bookstore.
• Frankly probably most of the pastoral staff needs to go when the new guy comes.
• It’s a joke that your have an annual pastor’s school. Look at your last two pastors! What do you have to give to another? Cancel it for a decade until you clean up your act.
• Call your new Pastor from outside the Hyles-Anderson orbit. (A BJU grad would be a good step) (I recommend Mike Harding! (sorry Mike!) )
• Seek accreditation for H/A. Start with TRACS … you probably won’t make it without serious reforms. Then move up to regional accreditation (may take you 2 decades to get there!)

Be gracious to Mrs Schaap … she needs prayer and support (perhaps even financial)

While important from a Biblical perspective, the style of government employed in a particular church provides no assurance that the dark side of human nature will not prevail at times. Some styles of church government, however, provide increased accountability. The Biblical model, congregational government, when properly employed, provides multiple levels of accountability and empowers the individual member in holding the pastor’s feet to the fire. Churches with congregational polity often have a plurality of elders, with one elder functioning as the senior elder (senior pastor). The senior pastor is worthy of “double honor,” because he labors in the “word and doctrine” (I Tim. 5:17). Thus, he is distinguished from the other elders who serve the church in differing capacities. “Equal elder rule” and a plurality of elders are not the same thing. My church, for example, has a pastoral staff that includes a senior pastor and several assistant pastors. Each serves as a pastor, and each pastor (including me) is personally and professionally accountable to the others.

In addition to being accountable to the other pastors, each pastor is accountable to the Deacons. While not setting the spiritual direction of the church, our Deacons have the responsibility of holding the pastors accountable in matters of ethics and church-related business. This authority does not derive from the fact that they’re Deacons. It derives from the fact that they are members of a church which practices congregational government. As members who have been elected to the office of Deacon, they are naturally on the “front line” of pastoral accountability as far as the congregation is concerned.

The third level of accountability is the pastor’s accountability to the congregation as a whole. Each member has the right to inquire about church matters—including finances. Each member has the right to petition for the removal of the senior pastor by following due process as outlined in the church constitution. Each member has the right to speak in business meetings and to introduce new business from the floor. That’s how a congregational government works.

Could more have been done to prevent Schaap’s indiscretions? I know of no system of church government that can successfully overrule human nature when a pastor is determined to do wrong. It is naive to think that equal elder rule can somehow eradicate the sin nature. If that were the case, I’d adopt it just to be free from my old nature!

And, lastly, just something to chew on: It’s funny to me how many of the professed Calvinists on Sharperiorn are so quick to blame Schaap. Calvinism teaches that God decreed everything—including Schaap’s sin. If you’re going to be a Calvinist, you need to be consistent in your theology and blame God, not Schaap. Now doesn’t that make Calvinism look ridiculous. (I’m not trying to change the discussion to Calvinism. I’m simply amazed at how quickly professed Calvinists forget their own position when matters of practical application arise.)

[Pastor Marc Monte] It’s funny to me how many of the professed Calvinists on Sharperiorn are so quick to blame Schaap. Calvinism teaches that God decreed everything—including Schaap’s sin. If you’re going to be a Calvinist, you need to be consistent in your theology and blame God, not Schaap. Now doesn’t that make Calvinism look ridiculous. (I’m not trying to change the discussion to Calvinism. I’m simply amazed at how quickly professed Calvinists forget their own position when matters of practical application arise.)

Absolutely laughable and not worthy of a response

But the first 4/5’s of your post were very good!

Marc, I was with you right up until that last paragraph. It is well noted that this isn’t a church polity issue.

However, we need to remember, Calvinism (with the Bible) teaches that man is completely responsible for his sin. The view you suggest is driven by a logic, not by revelation. Calvinists are not driven by logic instead of revelation, or logic over revelation, but rather logic according to revelation. Thus Calvinism (whether right or wrong) can fully affirm the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man. Calvinists are (usually) willing to let tensions stand because of Scripture.

Dave,

Those mistakes were acknowledged before the FBFI board. The other incident was in private conversation.

Marc,

God was not surprised by this man’s sin or Adam’s sin. He was not surprised by the sin of those who betrayed Christ and nailed Him to the cross. God is in control and human beings are responsible. Paradoxical yes! Contradictory no! Deny either one of those truths and you are in big trouble.

Jim,

Whatever I have said or done to you in order to merit your suggestion, I absolutely repent!!!!!!!!

JVMD,

What I don’t believe is the validity of the numbers connected to the membership at FBC Hammond, so I take your comment about it versus the GARBC in Iowa to be ridiculous. The membership numbers there are grossly inflated—a point made painfully clear by the presence of only 1000 people at the Wed service mentioned in the paper.

FBCH and HAC have fallen out of favor with many of the folks in the orbits closer to it, let alone with the large number of independent Baptists which have nothing to do with those orbits. Their influence has been on a steady decline for 20+ years, so I think it is a serious mistake to Jack Schaap as a figurehead for the IFB movement (a mythical idea all by itself).