When you make a vow to God, don’t delay fulfilling it, because he does not delight in fools. Fulfill what you vow. Better that you do not vow than that you vow and not fulfill it. Do not let your mouth bring guilt on you, and do not say in the presence of the messenger that it was a mistake. Why should God be angry with your words and destroy the work of your hands?

Ecclesiastes 5:4-6 (CSB)

God takes vows seriously and there are consequences for vow breaking.

This Scripture passage is good to remember because our culture wants to tell us that it is OK to walk away from something that was vowed. In our society, we are no longer astonished by how often marriage vows are broken, even among church leaders. We have too much evidence that a pattern of seeing vows as non-binding has crept into the church.

In the denomination to which I currently belong, all ordained leaders, whether ruling elders (lay leaders) or teaching elders (pastors), take a vow to act in accordance with the constitution of the church.

But there are some in the church who feel that they are not bound by that constitution and can ignore the parts that they don’t like or don’t want to follow. They feel free to assume that the rules were written for a different kind of church or don’t apply to them for some other reason.

And, to my amazement, they ignore those vows seemingly without remorse or pangs of conscience. They cite “reasons” as to why they have the freedom to operate outside the boundaries they vowed to uphold. They claim to be justified in their behavior.

I have one church in mind as I write this.

Large numbers of people have left that church, including over one-third of the elder board because of their inability to bring correction to the problem. It is likely that the general membership does not know that the remaining leaders have such a cavalier attitude toward the standards they claim to uphold. Yet, many members have expressed a sense that “something is not quite right.”

The leaders that remain are trying to hold it together, but how can such a weak foundation support the structure they are trying to build upon it? How can we expect God to bless and grow a ministry that does not hold to its vows? One cannot build something healthy on a foundation of deception.

It seems to me that there are two legitimate options for that church. One option is that the leaders can admit that they do not intend to follow the constitution and bring it to a vote of the membership to withdraw from the denomination. There is no dishonor in acknowledging that they have had a change of heart in these matters.

The second option is to repent and begin to fulfill what they have vowed no matter the difficulty entailed in doing so. This would involve active participation in, and submission to, the local presbytery.

To pay lip service to denominational standards while not complying with them is not a legitimate option, but I fear is the path that will be chosen because it is the path they have been on. Nothing that has been said by the leaders indicates of a change in heart.

I hope I am wrong.

If you would like to comment (pro or con), please use the comment form below to offer your feedback. I enjoy hearing from you.

This morning, I was thinking about the need for churches to have shepherds rather than leaders.

I’ve noticed that in big churches, there is a man or a small group of men that have a “vision” for how the church can grow in numbers. But in all of the big churches I’ve attended, that man or men typically had no plan for individual members to grow in their relationship with Jesus.

I experienced too many leaders and too few shepherds.

But, as I read the Gospels, Jesus always had time for individuals and one has the sense that when he was talking to someone, that person got his full attention.

I’ve never tried, but I suspect that it is not easy to get on the calendar of a megachurch pastor. They look great on stage, are very articulate, and perhaps even helpful in their sermons, but are they truly shepherds?

This is, after all, what the word pastor means. A pastor is a shepherd, or at least, is supposed to be a shepherd. Shepherds care for their flock, not just as a group, but as individuals.

Jesus did it, we have no excuse to do otherwise.

I will leave a meek and humble people among you, and they will take refuge in the name of the Lord.

Zephaniah 3:12 (CSB)

The question that church leaders need to ask themselves and their elders is this, “Am I modeling humility and meekness as a leader?”

Maybe I’m a little bit cynical, but when I look at the worship service videos of many large churches, I don’t pick up a lot of humility. Or, at least, humility is not the first thing that pops in my head when I see them.

Polished, professional, groomed, smooth; these are words that come to me first.

Perhaps we need God to step in and reshape our expectations as to what church should be.

I am reminded of how the Apostle Paul described his own pulpit ministry:

“When I came to you, brothers and sisters, announcing the mystery of God to you, I did not come with brilliance of speech or wisdom. I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness, in fear, and in much trembling. My speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of wisdom but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not be based on human wisdom but on God’s power.”

1 Corinthians 2:1–5, CSB

Can we please have a little bit more of the Apostle Paul and a little less of the flashy, hip, bringer of sermonettes? Can we have the humble servant instead of the CEO? Can we have a shepherd and not a vision caster?

Please!