Chapter Thirteen

Helping and Hurting Christians As God's Family



This is an extremely complex time in which to develop and nurture personal godliness. That does not imply that it was ever easy to be godly. However, some sets of circumstances make it more convenient to be godly than do other circumstances. In a time of enormous personal opposition to godliness and a time of enormous convenience for self-indulgence/physical exploitation, people (including Christians!) need a lot of encouragement and little rejection. Christians have enough enemies without having to fear their own brothers and sisters.

If you doubt the above assessment of difficulty in a commitment to personal godliness, consider an actual person and event. A few years ago I was preparing to direct an interactive session on recovery. These sessions did not focus on a specific form of recovery, but on attitudes that must exist regardless of the kind of recovery sought.

A person who actively assisted in the sessions came to me to tell me another person we hoped would come was outside the building, crying, and would not enter. After she was encouraged to come in and talk, she said, “I could not force myself to come in. In my past experiences, I have learned churches are places you go to get hurt.”

What a horrible image of those in Christ! What a horrible personal experience! If a person should know anything about Christians, that person should know Christians are helpful people who encourage because they seek to represent a helpful God Who encourages.

Elders need to guide a congregation into a clear understanding of who they are and what their mission is. Before you answer reflexively that Christians exist as congregations to evangelize (in our typical concept of evangelism), read Acts 3:1-10. The same Peter who was the spokesman in Acts 2:22-36 went with John to the Jewish temple to pray. The text gives no reason to think that their mission was not prayer, nor that the miracle Peter performed was not spontaneous.

Peter used the event to declare what God had done in Jesus Christ (Acts 3:13). God’s movement which began in Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob reached completion in Jesus’ resurrection. The objective was to produce faith in Jesus (verse 16) and repentance (verses 19, 26) in that Jewish audience.

Also read Acts 5:12-16. People from the entire region were bringing the sick and demon-possessed and placing these people in Jerusalem’s streets, hoping that Peter’s shadow would fall on them. Why? So the sick and demon-possessed would be healed. The objective was to do good to people who needed the good.

This certainly fits with Peter’s statement to Cornelius and the group Cornelius assembled in Acts 10:38. In Peter’s description of Jesus, he declared that Cornelius knew Jesus was a man who went about doing good. Those who belong to Jesus Christ go about doing good. It is the good they do that attracts to the Savior they represent.


Recognition # 1: We are all in this together.

There needs to be a common understanding that a godly congregation and a godly eldership are NOT by nature in opposition. There must be an overriding sense, even when there is disagreement, that people in Christ have the same primary objective. There may be disagreement concerning the route to take in Jesus Christ to “magnifying/praising God” (Acts 2:24, 33, 36; 3:8, 13, 18; 4:10, 19, 20, 24, 31; 5:4; 6:2; 8:21; 10:34, 38, 40, 41, 42, 46; 11:17, 18; 17:22-31 with John 3:16; 3:34; 5:19, 30; 6:38; 8:28; 12:49, 50; 13:20; 14:10; 21:19). However, there must never be doubt that Christians exist as congregations to magnify and praise God for what God did and does for us in Jesus Christ.

All in the congregation are included—new convert and spiritually mature, young and old, men and women, the culturally different, and followers and leaders! We exist to praise God Who created and Who recreates in Jesus Christ! Never must our primary reason for existing as congregations be lost in our disagreements! We always must remember that how we handle our disagreements and problems greatly will impact our influence for God in our community.


Recognition # 2: Appointed leaders have spouses and children, too!

Two standard criteria in appointing a person to leadership in a congregation are (a) stability in marriage and (b) stability in being a parent. Stated simply, a man who has multiple marriages and who is a questionable parent will not be considered for appointed leadership in a congregation (1 Timothy 3:4, 5; Titus 1:6). Stated in an opposite way, men who are appointed as congregational leaders are successful in marriage and are successful parents.

It should make no sense to anyone in a congregation to take a man who is successful in marriage and as a parent, appoint him to leadership, and then stress his marriage and his relationships with his children to the point of failure. Sometimes Christian wives are not able to support their husbands as congregational leaders because the congregation is so thoughtless and unreasonable in its expectations. It is deeply troubling to a wife who has been in a successful Christian marriage to see it becoming impossible for her husband to be a godly husband while meeting the congregation’s leadership demands.

Sometimes his children feel cheated because he has no time to be with them. The choice never should be between congregational leadership and godliness in marriage and parenting!

Leading in a congregation should be reasonable in expectation and include times of joy. It should not be a burnout experience that turns a man against his congregation. Congregations should work with their appointed leaders to make leading a rewarding experience. Both leaders and congregations need to work together to make expectations of leaders “doable.”


Recognition # 3: Elders and congregations need to realize the complexity of leading a congregation.

Among the most common complaints regarding appointed congregational leaders is “slowness” in making decisions. Decision making by congregational leaders rarely can be a rapid process for a number of reasons:

  1. The “matter to be decided” is not the only “matter to be considered.” Rarely is there only one Christian principle to be considered.

  2. A decision made and announced is not easily undone or reversed regardless of the poor overall impact the decision creates. Decide wisely the first time.

  3. The decision to be made must be the result of a consensus among a group of people who commonly have different priorities and different concerns. Elders are not all alike.

  4. Every decision involves both doctrinal and relationship concerns. Neither can be ignored.

  5. A congregation is totally founded on volunteering! From membership, to attendance, to involvement, to financial support, people make choices, and their choices can be reversed at any time!

  6. Spiritual needs of those in a congregation are growing quickly! A congregation must be a community, not merely an organization whose objectives are separated from the needs of people.

  7. Change is produced by teaching, not by mandate decisions and control. Teaching involves much more than announcing. Time is involved in teaching.

  8. The concept of what it means to be Christian (by God’s definition) must include a primary emphasis on personal godliness in attitude and behavior. More is always involved than “taking a stand.”
None of these factors encourage a rapid response in decision making!

It is not unusual for those Christians who want a “quick decision” or the “quick disposal” of a matter to be focused primarily on the matter to be decided or the implementation of the decision. Rarely does a good leader have the luxury to be focused only on one matter. Deciding what is best does not always hold the promise of deciding what is popular.

The entire congregation needs a realistic understanding of the complexity of decision making. That will make a huge contribution to a congregation having reasonable expectations of leaders.


Recognition # 4: Elders need to consider an important reality in making decisions.

These thoughts likely should be a part of the # 3 recognition. They are is presented as # 4 because of their importance. The insights are the result of years of personal observation in all types of group decisions, definitely including the decisions of appointed congregational leaders.

Most decisions involve these stages for each person directly involved in making the decision:

  1. Reaction
  2. Reflection
  3. Evaluation
Reaction is basically an emotional response. It deals almost exclusively with a person’s feelings. Frequently it is a negative response because (a) it involves change in a practice or procedure and (b) it involves information that is “new” to the person receiving the information.

In both situations, the individuals tend to have negative responses. It may be a kind response, “That is not reasonable,” or a harsh response, “That is stupid!”

Most people are not aware they are reacting when they react or are being emotional when emotions are in control. Want a personal example? How often have you wondered later, “Did I say (or do) that? That is not like me!” as you suffered in bewildered, embarrassed silence as you considered a recent event? Have you ever tried to defend something that internally embarrasses you rather than acknowledge you were being emotional?

Reflection is the process that occurs when the person begins integrating his emotions with his logic. “That is stupid! Is it really?” “I know better than that! Do I?” “I do not like that! Is there more involved than whether I like it or not?”

Evaluation occurs when a person honestly backs off to obtain a clearer view, takes all new knowledge into account, and perhaps seeks additional information that is “new” to him. He genuinely seeks an understanding of what is true and not true, of what is factual and what is pretense.

The stage of reaction is a horrible time for decision making, and the stage of reflection is not much better. Wise decisions almost always occur in the evaluation stage when an honest person yields to honesty. It is in this stage that the person realizes more is involved than a “gut reaction” or personal feelings. This is the stage in which the individual encourages personal honesty regardless of personal feelings.

Different people spend varying amounts of time in each stage. Some people spend a lot of time in the reaction stage but navigate quickly through the reflection stage. When a group must make a decision, it is best if all those involved in the decision go through the same stages at approximately the same time. One does not need to be in the reaction stage while another is in the evaluation stage.

As a preacher, when I presented a decision matter to a group of elders, I preferred all decision makers to be present at a first revealing. Never did I want, push for, or expect there to be an immediate decision. I wanted everyone involved in making the decision to be in the evaluation stage (if possible) when the decision was made. Why? It is through all decision makers being in the evaluation stage that they will produce the wisest decision possible. God’s purposes are best served when people make the wisest decisions possible (see James 3:13-18).

Perhaps the best conclusion to these thoughts is found in the words of Paul as he approached death and sought to encourage Timothy:

The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will. (2 Timothy 2:24-26)

IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE A SHEPHERD, WALK IN THE PASTURE, Chapter Thirteen
Copyright © 2008, David Chadwell
Chapter Twelve Chapter Fourteen
table of contents

 Link to a summary of other books by David Chadwell

 Link to  West-Ark Church of Christ Home Page