“Politics”
and church elections
How does God get His will in denominational elections?
It is popular among some to decry “church politics” and to condemn any sort of discussion of “candidates” for denominational offices or discussion of who is :running” or “leading” in elections. It is an easy shot—it all looks so secular. But this is a free ride for people who don’t have a vote anyway, and it makes them appear so spiritual and superior. My own denomination is in the process of selecting a new General Superintendent and I’ve been reading lots of stuff on it and I note there are generally three different views that I’ll outline in a minute.
First, a word about theology and politics. Most American denominations have “votes” to decide things. Some of this is rooted in our own history of democracy where we believe that the “majority rules” and “everyone makes a better choice than anybody.” But some of it is theological too. Most of us believe that the Holy Spirit actually works through the church to guide us into a decision. If the church were a family-owned business we’d just let the owner who put up the money to start the business decide what to do and if people didn’t like it they could take their business elsewhere. But the church is not a business but a body. We believe (most of us, at least) that when seeking God’s will there is “safety in numbers” and people should vote on things. We believe the Holy Spirit actually reveals His will through these votes—assuming the people are in tune with His will. The assumption is that lots of people voting on relocation of a church or hiring a new pastor gives us a safer decision than letting the church boss (lay or minister) decide it for everyone. (This assumption can be challenged, and Catholics do it best, but for our purposes here let’s assume the Holy Spirit does work through the voting of a group.)
So I’ve noted that there are three general positions when it comes to God’s involvement in denominational elections.
1. God picks
leaders ahead of time—our job is to find the one God has already chosen.
This point of view assumes that God in His sovereignty has already chosen my denomination’s next General Superintendent and our job is to discover God’s choice and elect that person as GS. With this point of view the General Board of Administration (the elective body) would pray individually and corporately seeking guidance from God and then they’d cast their votes. If they had all heard the Lord’s voice clearly the vote should be unanimous, but some might not get a name or they might even hear different names. This position offers lots to the church and is deep in our denominational history (especially the Pilgrim Holiness side that was influenced by Quaker “consensus” methods of elections. If you take this position you probably prefer prayer to interviews, and straight up balloting to any sort of nomination “process” that smacks of politics. Most of my students prefer this position for it is very similar to many of their view on marriage—that God has pre-selected the one person they should marry and their job is to find that person and marry them. For years this was the dominant position in our denomination and they shunned any “nominating ballots” or “interviews” or forcing a person to decide ahead of time if they’d serve if elected. In those days everybody prayerfully took a plain piece of paper and put one name on their ballot—and they [eventually] got an election. The system appeared more spiritual than it was—there was plenty of “prayerful discussion” on breaks and in the rest rooms between the balloting. And the system favored incumbents and those with the highest visibility in the denomination. That is, the most famous people’s names always seemed to emerge no matter what their strengths or weaknesses. But this point of view has the longest history in my denomination and still is often called for at the general level by pastors (though they do so less when their own church is electing local board members). If you’re a GBA member and have this position you are seeking from God the name of the person He has already selected and you fear being ‘out of God’s will” or will have “taken God’s second best” if that person won’t take it or someone else is elected instead.
2. God guides us on the kind of leader we need—we get to pick which one.
This position is held by most of the people who actually get to vote on such things. It argues that God has not picked any one particular person to be our next GS but leads a denomination through prayer to know the kind of leader we need. In their view God lets us pick which actual individual we want to elect. (It would be parallel to a few students I have who do not believe there is “one and only one” person God has chosen for them to marry—they think God has given guidance on the kind of person but the student is free to chose the individual meeting these general requirements. If you have this position (and have a vote) you have been praying to get guidance from God the kind of person the church needs at this point. Then you’ll judge the several potential “candidates” compared to that list of qualities. Most of the folk I know who serve on boards and in conferences in my denomination have this point of view. Thus they can be easily divided. Some come to the voting absolutely convinced that “God wants a conservative leader who will block any more liberalizing in our denomination” while others are equally convinced “God wants an open-minded leader who will loosen up the remnants of legalism in our denomination to we can reach the lost.” But having already chosen to select our leaders by Holy-Spirit led voting this view end up being might-makes-right. That is, when the majority votes for one person it is assumed that God has led the process and the “losers” submit to the “will of the body.” If you’re a GBA member and have this position you are seeking from God guidance on the kind of leader we need next and then you’ll examine the candidates to see which one is closest.
3. God has delegated the choice completely to us—He
will anoint whomever we appoint.
Not many leaders will publicly admit they believe this third position but a number do privately and some elections (local through denominational) actually operate under this third point of view. This position says that the church is a human organization with human leadership and human methods of selecting leaders and it is our job to select our leaders. They argue it is up to us to decide what sort of leader we need and elect her or him and God will anoint and use whomever we appoint. This position puts God after the process not before it. It argues that God has used all kinds of leaders in the past—some good and some bad—and He will do so in the future. If you’re a GBA member and have this position you are going into the election of a new GS about like you’d go about the election of a President, the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice or the hiring of a new company president. You are especially interested in the resume, the references, the positions and the “track record” of the “candidates” whom you will “interview” to determine who would be best for the job. It looks like a completely secular process but you will “surround the decision with prayer” though prayer will not be the means to the actual choice but supportive. You believe God has delegated this to you and the other voters and as the duly elected representative you should use your own sanctified good sense.
__________________________
Perhaps there are other positions but these serve the purpose of recognizing that when we speak of church elections our point of view may differ.
So the questions are:
-Which position do you lean toward?
-What abuses of other positions have you seen in the past?
-How else could we pick leaders? Cast lots? Apostolic selection? Pray through like Quakers?
-Is the first position to most spiritual and the last the least?
-So, what do you think?
By Keith Drury,
To respond or discuss this
issue with the writer and others click
here