International Charismatic Leaders Meet to Discuss Ethics Crisis

Dear friends

I forward the article below on the recent Orlando Statement (January 2004),
which I think should be of great interest to all, and especially us
Charismatic Christians, as regards Church governance and how we can avoid
more scandals. Any statement endorsed by such an influential group of
leaders acknowledging a crisis in leadership integrity within their own
movement deserves wide publicity and sober discussion. For those unfamiliar
with the names in the article below, I am not aware of any other meeting
having drawn such a high level group of international Charismatic leaders.
Please find here, my comments on the issue, then an article on the subject
and finally the Orlando statement itself.

We have to note that Jesus preached more against the hypocrisy of religious
leaders than any other issue. It therefore should deserve a similar amount
of our attention. While attacking specifically the religious leaders of his
day, he encouraged his disciples to avoid the same mistakes (Matt 23:11),
which indicates he was concerned about Christian religious leaders today -
not just Jewish ones in ancient Israel. A logical reason is that it
discredits our message on all other issues. Our enemies love to publicise
the fall of Christian leaders, because it hurts our cause.

Firstly I endorse the view the statement acknowledges, that we do have a
leadership ethics crisis today. Secondly, I endorse the general thrust of
the statement, but feel it doesn't go far enough in certain areas - for
example dealing with the need for accountability to followers. Possibly
this is being evaded because it would create unwelcome accountability and
reduced power for many senior Charismatic ministry leaders - and precisely
because the Orlando statement was probably drafted only by high level
leaders all with a vested interest in protecting their power. Real follower
accountability, I feel would require painful changes in many ministries, in
which there are currently no real avenues by which their leaders can be held
accountable.

I argue that accountability to seniors and peers is insufficient as these
people often don't know what other senior leaders are up to. Because of
excessively autocratic and well defended power structures and mythological
celebrity images, it is extremely difficult for followers to hold many
senior Charismatic leaders accountable. Those who try to hold leaders
accountable, simply become the targets of organised spiritual abuse.
Leaders can then backslide undisturbed hidden behind protective layers of
employees afraid to lose their jobs; important titles; symbols of power;
abusive organisations; public relations image building etc. The Orlando
statement below emphaises personal rather than organisational/legal
accountability structures, which I view as a half-truth. They are not
enough alone, but safer to have them than not have them. The problem is
with purely relational accountability is that the backslidden leader can
simply protest a breakdown of relationship and cut relations with anyone who
challenges him. A formal accountability structure is harder to manipulate.
I feel that while these offices are valid, the Orlando statements
endorsement of the use of religious titles is contrary to Matthew 23:7-10.

I also feel the statement fails to address the problem of leadership
idolatory of 'superstars' within the Charismatic movement. This is a sin of
followers as well as leaders who tolerate it (Acts 12:23). It leads to the
unbiblical assumption of infallibility (Romans 3:23) and thus the view that
it is disrespectful to hold leaders accountable. It would have been very
helpful also for the statement to have said something about how spiritual
gifting should not be used as an assumption of integrity (Matthew 7:22-23).

I feel the statement should also have said something about the judgement of
God on leaders who fail to act against others serious sin (1 Sam 3:13),
which would hopefully create more accountability through more fear of God
and less fear of human leaders in our ministries.

Nevertheless, while I feel the statement is inadequate, I welcome the fact
that this issue is now on the central agenda of the core leadership of the
Charismatic movement I think is progress. Hopefully the statement will lead
to discussion will lead to more thought and perhaps further statements which
will bring real changes in ministries.

I would hope that the Orlando statement would embolden members of many
ministries to quit idolatory of unquestioning obedience and follow the
Matthew 18 procedure and Acts 6 procedure to hold their leaders accountable.

Does your ministry have any mechanism by which leaders can be held
accountable by their followers? For example, who decides what the leader
earns? Does he decide himself? Who is the leader obliged to consult before
making major decisions on your behalf? Who can force the leader to answer
questions if you hear rumours of scandal? Is the leader accountable to
anyone other than his paid staff or relatives? Does the leader chair every
meeting he goes to, so he can avoid discussion on topics he is afraid to
talk about? What set procedures for discipline exist in the organisation?
If none, then that makes it easy to manipulate? How could a grievience, for
example on of abuse of power or money be addressed within the organisation?
Are those who previously questioned the ethics of the organisation still
with the organisation - or were they intimidated into silence and encouraged
to
leave? Why not ask and find out? Don't wait till you discover unethical
behaviour before you argue for increased accountability.

Someone may question my standing to debate a statement by such an eminent
set of leaders in my own movement. I do so with appeal to the scriptures
(referenced above) and also with much first hand experience of the problems
described above. Charismatic ministries are not the only ones who
experience these problems, but perhaps being a young movement - have not yet
learned some of the lessons of the older denominations in restraining power
abuse.

Philip Rosenthal

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Special Report: A Call for Accountability

http://www.ministriestoday.com/specialreport.html

Charismatic leaders issued a strong call for ethics at the Ministries Today
Symposium in Orlando, Florida.

From Staff Reports (For the full text of this article, see the March/April
issue of Ministries Today.)

More than 50 charismatic leaders drew a line in the sand at an historic
meeting in Orlando, Florida, in January. Their message: "It's not about
power or titles, it's about winning the lost."

It was a virtual "who's who" of the charismatic/ Pentecostal community at
the first-ever Ministries Today Symposium, where high-profile ministers met
to discuss key issues relating to leadership and ethics January 6-7.

In light of the magazine's year-long emphasis on the fivefold ministries and
senior editorial adviser Jack W. Hayford's challenge for ethical
accountability (see "Practicing What We Preach," November/ December 2003),
Ministries Today's publisher Stephen Strang felt compelled to assemble a
group of leaders to address topics such as the use of titles, leadership
abuse, financial integrity and ministry ethics.

Hayford moderated panel discussions on three topics: leadership issues
regarding the fivefold ministries, spiritual and moral issues and questions
which challenge the credibility of the larger charismatic/Pentecostal
community's witness and the future of the movement.

Besides the positive relationships forged and productive discussion, one of
the immediate results of the symposium was a collection of affirmations
called "The Orlando Statement," compiled and agreed upon by the group at the
conclusion of the gathering.

During the first panel discussion, participants Reinhard Bonnke, Joyce
Meyer, Bill Hamon, C. Peter Wagner, Kingsley Fletcher and Rod Parsley
addressed the continuation of the fivefold ministries, the use of titles to
identify the offices of apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher.

None in the panel or audience disputed the legitimacy of the post-New
Testament ministry of all the fivefold gifts, but some expressed concern
that the power invested in titles of apostle and prophet often causes the
holder to exercise authority and not service.

While a variety of opinions were expressed regarding if and when those
ministering in the fivefold gifts should be granted titles, the overarching
consensus of the discussion was the need to return to the work of
soul-winning and shepherding that the Scriptures demand-activities from
which the use of titles sometimes distracts the church.

The second panel, including Cindy Jacobs, John Bevere, Keith Butler, Steve
Hill, Mark Rutland and Rick Joyner, concerned itself with the ethical crisis
in the charismatic/Pentecostal community. Citing issues such as marital
responsibility, "cheap concepts of restoration" and a lack of
"self-moderating standards" in issues of finances, Hayford expressed his
concern at the outset of the discussion.

"Like the book of Judges, the movement is increasingly moving toward
everyone doing what is right in their own eyes," he said. "We're watching
the dumbing down of a movement, in many ways-dumbing down in the thoughtful
pursuit of what we're really about."

Hayford suggested that ethical issues threaten the continued viability of
the movement and the willingness of many to identify with it. Although many
may embrace the theological perspectives of the movement, they are reticent
to be a part of what they see as the excess and shoddy ethics of many
high-profile charismatic leaders, he said.

The third and final panel, including Ted Haggard, R.T. Kendall, J. Lee
Grady, Francis Frangipane, Myles Munroe and Frank Reid, explored the future
of the charismatic/Pentecostal movement.

The discussion largely surrounded the issue of the continued identity of the
movement and the need for a unified response to the gay agenda, same-sex
marriage, universalism and other issues on which there have not been strong
statements made.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

http://www.ministriestoday.com/OrlandoStatement.html

The Orlando Statement
Fivefold Ministries

Statement of Objective: In light of the current misgivings concerning the
awakening and release of the fivefold ministries in the
charismatic/Pentecostal movement, we observe six distinct areas of general
agreement. The following affirmations are presented in hope of promoting
relational harmony and ministerial partnership. In light of our biblical
mandate to be unified in the task of equipping the body for the task of
world evangelism, we express the following:


1. Unity and Diversity: We affirm that the proper functioning of the body of
Christ depends on the "unlikeness" of its members. Thus a diversity of
perspectives and an ideological tension must not only be allowed but also
encouraged for the sake of fruitfulness, maturity and interdependence.

2. The Heart of Ministry: We affirm that the heart of all ministry is
servanthood, the task of all ministry is shepherding, and the goal of all
ministry is the salvation of the lost and the equipping of the saved.


3. Continuation of the Fivefold Ministries: We affirm that there is an
ongoing post-New Testament activity of the charismata of 1 Corinthians 12,
as well as the ministries of the pastor, teacher and evangelist described in
Ephesians 4. Therefore, it would naturally follow that we affirm the ongoing
post-New Testament activity of apostles and prophets.


4. Current Escalation of Apostolic and Prophetic Activity: We affirm that,
while all of the fivefold ministries have been active since their bestowal
by the ascended Christ, that the last 30 years has evidenced an increase of
apostolic and prophetic ministry, resulting in substantive growth of the
church in the developing world and a resulting influence on the charismatic
church in the United States and Europe.


5. Distinction of Offices and Giftings of the Fivefold Ministries: We affirm
that there is a distinction between the office and the gifting of each of
the fivefold ministries: "office" being endowment of position with authority
and responsibility granted by a legitimate body of one's peers, in
recognition of gifting; "gifting" being those capacities and spiritual
qualities that only God entrusts to become manifest through an individual.

6. The Use of Titles: We affirm the appropriation of titles by those who
demonstrate the character and giftings requisite those titles, but we also
affirm that the use of titles be submitted to the demands of servanthood and
not become a distraction or hindrance to the very offices that they claim to
serve, or the gifting they have been granted to minister.

Ethical Accountability

Statement of Objective: The pursuit of this statement is to affirm those
commonly-held values of biblical discipline and grace that have been
timelessly honored by the people of God in reference to ethics, morality,
marriage and ministry lifestyle. Our interaction has targeted the
formulation of statements which we acknowledge as essential to sustaining
the purity of the witness of the broad fellowship of charismatic believers.
We recognize that there is no human agency that can mandate or administrate
conformity to any set of values. Nonetheless, we present these summary
affirmations, in hope that:

1. We hope all who embrace life in the Holy Spirit would give an equal and
total embrace to the whole of the Scripture's requirements regarding ethics,
moral purity, sexual integrity, marital fidelity, financial accountability
and the spirit of Christlike ministry.

2. We hope we may present a point of reference for all charismatic Christian
believers that thereby they may be assured of the constancy of their
majority leadership to live by the character expectations of leaders as
revealed in the eternal Word of God.

3. We hope the values focused in these affirmations might become
acknowledged and honored as reflecting the common convictions and values of
the broad fellowship of charismatic tradition.

4. We hope we might recognize and affirm that, apart from the ongoing
transformation of the Holy Spirit, both structures and relationships will be
ineffective in the establishment of and the adherence to any moral or
ethical standards.
We seek neither to establish a governing group nor attempt to frame and
administer legal structures for enforcing ethical standards. We know that
ultimately such are impossible apart from hearts of submission to God's Word
and Spirit. Still, with all, we hope that we may project an informal
mechanism for identifying and marginalizing those who independently pursue a
lesser commitment to Christian discipline or who demonstrate an indifference
to a biblical lifestyle, thereby separating themselves as apart from and
unrepresentative of true charismatic Christian standards. We embrace the
following affirmations:


1. Ethical Crisis: the Problem: There is a crisis of ethical standards in
the church in general and among charismatic/Pentecostal leaders in
particular, characterized by: (1) an increasing tolerance for sexual
infidelity; (2) an escalation in instances of abandonment of marital
responsibility under the guise of commitment to ministry callings; (3) an
indulgent understanding of the concept of restoration and; (4) a lack of
self-moderation and discipline in areas of financial responsibility and
extravagance.

2. Ethical Crisis: Causes: This ethical crisis is in part due to (1) an
increase in the number of ministry leaders operating outside existing
accountability structures; (2) the failure of existing accountability
structures to enforce legal standards because of an absence of authentic
peer relationships; (3) an increasingly prevalent perspective of ministry as
a profession in which the importance of success and power outweigh the
demands of servanthood and integrity and; (4) a growing perception that the
private life of the leader has no bearing on his/her public ministry as long
as that ministry continues to gratify its followers.

3. The Ineffectiveness of Strictly Legal Accountability Structures: Proposed
structures of ethical accountability that are strictly defined by legal
limitations have not worked in the past and thus will not work unless
accompanied by the relational networks composed of both peers and superiors
who are willing to openly confront moral failure and constructively provide
avenues of restoration for the repentant. Thus, we urge assertive acceptance
of the responsibility to minister discipline with love and righteousness
with grace, so any independence from and persistence to behaviors adverse to
godly values be identified as alien to the lifestyle of charismatic
Christians and unrepresentative of the true charismatic Christian community.

© Copyright 2004 Strang Communications, All Rights Reserved