Rev. Darrel Lee | March 1, 2024
Welcome
Welcome again, everyone. We’re happy to have you here, and also happy to welcome those who are joining us by way of the webcast. God bless you for doing so. We’ve had great meetings so far, and hopefully the best is yet to come.
Introduction
This morning we’ll try to address the relationship between forgiveness and consequences. I realize we cover some of the same material from year to year. Brother Tom Pricskett told me moments ago that Brother Loyce Carver used to cover the same material repeatedly, and I suspect that’s because he was dealing with the same issues repeatedly. That’s certainly the case here. So, in looking at the relationship between forgiveness and consequences, specifically, we want to be unified in our understanding as to why one who is guilty of sexual misconduct while serving as an Apostolic Faith minister or in a leadership role, cannot resume in that role, even after obtaining forgiveness. The same principle applies to other issues that suggest moral failure, such as gross insubordination, undermining leadership, sowing discord; those types of issues are distinct. Though forgiveness can be obtained, consequences still follow.
The consequences of sin outlive obtaining forgiveness for those sins. We know that’s the case because we still suffer the result of the Fall of Adam in the Garden. Had the consequences been mitigated permanently, we would never catch a cold, or ultimately, die. Typically, the consequences of less-than-stellar behavior that is short of sin also outlives the moment it occurred. On the positive side, however, any good that we do also outlives the moment we do it. Jesus’ Death on Calvary proves that; the result extends to us today. So, consequences carry on. We’ll develop that thought a bit as we go along here.
Today we’re going to take a “glossary” approach. There will be some overlap, given that the meanings of these words are interconnected. Our glossary includes the following: Carnality, Humanity, Confidentiality, Transparency, Repentance, Allocution, Absolution, Consequence, Manipulation, Reconciliation, and Restitution. Along with each word in today’s glossary, I also offer a two-word description as to how we’re going to apply it this morning. As we go along, I suspect that questions will emerge. You will have the opportunity to ask short questions, by either dropping them off at the back table or emailing them to info@apostolicfaith.org. After the third presentation today, I will try to give short responses to those short questions. It forces us to be concise, and that’s what we want to be. So, feel free to submit your questions. Your identity need not be disclosed, nor will I disclose it.
Carnality: Eradicate it.
“Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” – Romans 6:6
We start with carnality. Paul describes the carnal condition as “the body of sin” in Romans 6:6. In other places throughout Romans 6, we see sin (singular) used. We’ve always been taught—because it’s what we understand to be Biblical—that oftentimes sins (plural) refers to committed sins, whereas sin (singular) refers to the underlying sin condition. The word sin usually could also be translated “the sin,” and we see that in Romans 6:6: “our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin”—speaking of the condition—“might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” It could have been translated the sin or the sin condition. Actually, it goes on to say in verse 7, “For he that is dead is freed from sin”—or, is freed from the sin condition. The product of the human condition called “carnality” is what emerges: unholy thoughts, unholy words, and unholy actions. We’ll speak to that further when we cover humanity. For now, we’re talking about what springs from carnality, which include thoughts of vengeance, words of malice, acts of defiance. With sanctification, the sin condition (or the sin nature, or carnality) is destroyed, eradicated from our human nature. There is a distinction, however, between the carnal nature and the human nature.
Humanity: Develop it.
“But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever.” – 2 Peter 3:18
We grow in grace. Our humanity, or “self,” is not destroyed or eradicated. That’s the human condition—that’s humanity. It lives on. That’s the part we bring into subjection.
Paul said, “I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection” (1 Corinthians 9:27). Elsewhere, though this could be taken a bit out of context, he said, “I die daily” (1 Corinthians 15:31). That is referring to the human condition, or humanity. With respect to improving our humanity, we’re talking about self-mastery, self-discipline, self-control. It is like an athlete in training; they must demonstrate restraint and discipline in every way if they’re going to be successful. And so it is with bringing our selves or our bodies into subjection—we must be disciplined. That is not instantaneous; it is a lifelong pursuit. Sanctification is instantaneous, but to grow in grace is something we do between salvation and glorification.
In teaching Christian perfection, Wesley taught that we are so perfect as to not commit sin, in accordance with 1 John 3 and, really, the spirit of the whole Bible. We are distinguished from so many others in that we believe there’s a victory over a life of sin. We don’t live above sin; we live without sin. To live “above” sin suggests some lofty estate where we’re unaffected by the sin around us. We live in a sinful world, but we live without sin.
We will always have the traits of humanity—the limitations that are products of being part of the fallen human race. An example of humanity distinguished from carnality is thinking harshly or critically, but not with vengeance the way the carnal mind does. Another example is speaking thoughtlessly or carelessly, but not with malice, as is the case with carnality. Or acting rashly, but not out of defiance. That’s the difference with humanity. We’re not so perfect in sanctification as to have been restored to the pre-Fall Adamic condition. The pre-Fall Adamic condition was holiness with the opportunity to choose sin, which Adam and Eve did. After blood was shed to provide a covering for their naked bodies and for their committed sins, they were still left with that fallen human nature, which we still live with.
When we see humanity in others, it’s a good reminder that we are also a part of the deeply flawed human race. It’s also a reminder that when we see humanity in others, they see humanity in us. So our conclusion is that it’s better to focus on our own limitations rather than to be focused on the limitations of others. We hope that others will do the same. But if they don’t, we’re not accountable for that. We mind our own doorstep and not theirs.
As to the other aspect of humanity, Paul said, “Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after . . .” (Philippians 3:12). We have not arrived. The evidence of Christian perfection is that when we see flaws in our humanity, we take corrective action. That’s growth. That’s responsibility, as well.
At times, the distinction between humanity and carnality is not clear. For example, less-than-stellar talk or even conduct can be rooted in either humanity or carnality. These are things that have repeatedly come up over the years, so I’ll cite from my own observations and experience. For example, being weirdly familiar with a woman who is not your wife can be grooming, which is a product of carnality, or it can be blatantly foolish, which might be humanity. I’ve shared this before, but when we cover this, I’m often reminded of an elderly man who took a burden around the altars for the pretty young ladies. Multiple times I had to tell him, “You need to move over there” (pointing to the men’s altar area). Finally, I had to be a little bit more direct and say, “You need to take a burden for the young men instead of the young ladies.” Every now and then, I see inappropriate attention being given. Is that carnality or humanity? I think it’s humanity, so I extend grace and call it foolish, which doesn’t sound very graceful, but pay attention, please.
Other times, the distinction is crystal clear—clearly moral failure. We must not excuse deeply flawed human behavior by calling it humanity. It needs to be addressed, and I have a responsibility to address it that others do not have. We may let something pass for a time, but eventually we have to say something.
Whether our actions are the product of humanity or carnality, consequences follow. In both cases, at times the consequences are more profound than others, depending upon the severity of either the sin or the carelessness. The extent to which consequences can be at least partially mitigated is dependent upon our willingness to make amends. That is true whether it be humanity or carnality; it needs to be addressed. Even after making amends, we must humbly live with the consequences that we brought upon ourselves. The consequences are not the fault of the person who pointed out the problem, but our own fault. Our behavior needs to be corrected. To the extent that we are willing to correct it, that’s good news—we can move forward. To the extent we resist, that’s evidence of a deeper underlying problem.
Confidentiality: Conceal it.
“A talebearer revealeth secrets: but he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth the matter.” – Proverbs 11:13
Next, we will speak of confidentiality, and then follow that with transparency, knowing that there’s a certain tension that exists between the two.
A talebearer reveals what should be hidden; one of a faithful spirit conceals what should be hidden. A breach of confidentiality is when private information is disclosed to a third party without consent. For example, indiscriminately forwarding private or personal emails may constitute a breach of confidentiality. Though, as far as that goes, we shouldn’t write anything that we worry might be forwarded. I like to do things in writing, and sometimes I think, What if this is forwarded? Oh well, it is what it is. Even though they don’t have permission to forward it, that could happen, and this is the way I’m going to respond.
How serious is a breach of confidentiality? Well, sometimes we read news reports that are given on the condition of anonymity, stating something like, “It is reported that thus and so happened.” This usually happens in the political realm. The reporter cannot disclose the source because that source would dry up, and suddenly there would be nothing to report. So the reporter must keep sources confidential, or they will be lost. The irony is that the source has usually breached confidentiality in giving information that should have been held private. Though, sometimes political figures are actually wanting that information to get out, to float it as a trial balloon. Confidentiality in journalism is one thing.
Trade secrets are confidential and protected. I can’t recall how I stumbled upon this, but I saw an article on Allrecipes.com about “What makes Kentucky Fried Chicken finger-lickin’ good?” I have seen this from multiple sources now, so I think it’s widely known, but they use a secret recipe, and it’s guarded. Of course, the same could be said of the Coca-Cola formula, or the Pepsi formula, or the Nike formula, or any business that has trade secrets that are kept guarded. In the case of KFC, at their headquarters in Lexington, Kentucky, sometimes they have armed guards protecting that recipe.
What made the Allrecipes.com article so interesting was that it reported that years ago, somebody saw a Colonel Sanders private family scrapbook that had the ingredients listed, and that person wrote it down. So now, Allrecipes.com can tell you the eleven spices that are in KFC’s finger-lickin’ good sauce (though it’s debatable how good it actually is). That recipe is so closely guarded that three of the spices are mixed in one geographic location, three or four in another, and three or four in another so that nobody has the entire formula. The three batches are all sent to the headquarters in Lexington where they are combined, and then they make the chicken. Well, I don’t know if it’s accurate or not, but on Allrecipes.com they have the eleven ingredients and the measurements. So that trade secret isn’t so secret anymore. But in case it’s confidential, don’t tell a soul about this.
That’s only chicken. In the ministry, it’s our credibility. Once we betray confidence, our credibility takes a deserved hit, so we want to keep confidence.
Is a breach of confidence the product of humanity or carnality? It depends upon the motivation. If it is a product of carelessness or thoughtlessness, it could be attributed to humanity. But if the intent is malicious, then that’s carnality.
While we do not need the consent of a backslidden minister to disclose his failure (because I don’t think Paul obtained consent of those who failed that he named throughout his writings), seldom do we share the extent or details of that failure. We’re not vindictive; that would be carnality. We don’t share anything more than we have to share, and what we do share is typically to protect the body of believers. Nor do we disclose that such failures are often preceded by a pattern of questionable or inappropriate behavior over a longer period of time that led up to what we eventually became aware of. There’s always more than meets the eye, you can be sure of that.
Transparency: Reveal it.
“Providing for honest things, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men.” – 2 Corinthians 8:21
Transparency is the opposite—it’s the quality of openness. “Honesty” is the way it’s worded in 2 Corinthians 8:21 and elsewhere. Honesty not only before God, but also in the sight of men. There’s nothing hidden. A good example of transparency is the way the new headquarters office was constructed with windows—uncovered windows in every office—so you can walk by any office at any time and see at least who is in there, and what they’re doing, whether they’re busy on their computer, or writing down something, or have fallen asleep at their desk (which I’ve not seen yet). That’s transparency.
Transparency cites sources, though I know I just made an excuse for not citing a source. We have seen what happens when a prestigious—or I should say, formerly prestigious—university president (and more than one recently), is disclosed to be a serial plagiarist. The irony is that the persons typically are not fired but just removed from their leadership positions while still being retained as a professor in the same university. This only proves that they don’t hold themselves to the same standard they zealously exact of their students.
What does that make you think of these universities? Well, I’m not concerned about the universities. I’m concerned about the Apostolic Faith Church. And more than serial plagiarists, I’m concerned about moral failure or immoral conduct, and even less-than-stellar conduct that is a part of humanity. What people would think of the Apostolic Faith is more severe than what we think of these universities who retain their serial plagiarists and staff members with other issues.
We have high expectations of these institutions, and they would have high expectations of us, and we welcome that. By the grace of God, we’re challenged to live up to those high expectations. Keep in mind, if someone is untruthful in any one statement, it brings into question all their previous statements. And especially if they’ve been proven to be untruthful in many statements, you should not believe anything they say about anything at all. That’s what impugns or impeaches a witness in a trial. The prosecuting attorney will say, “You can discard anything this witness says about anything because they’ve been proven to be a liar.” Well, I won’t use the term liar, but I will use the term untruthful.
Sermon illustrations, by all means, should be cited. If you buy a book that has fifty-two non-Biblical illustrations, cite it. People can tell if you’re using a story that you got from somewhere else. And in fact, we cite Biblical illustrations as well, by reading from the Word of God and giving the citation as to where we found it.
Transparency in ministerial circles increases accountability. Be accountable to your pastor; pastors, be accountable to your district superintendents; and so on. Technically, I’m Brother Dave’s boss, but a couple of weeks ago when I took Debbie up to see her mother east of the Seattle area, I told him a week ahead that I was going to be gone from the office for two days. I’m not really accountable to him for office time, but for church time I am. And actually, I wasn’t going to miss a church meeting, but I wanted him to know I’d be away. By the same token, he’s accountable to me when, even though I don’t ask it of him, he lets me know when he’s going to be away for several hours.
In addition, be truthful. Don’t be disingenuous and hope to excuse what you’re feeling guilty about by not disclosing it. Maybe your pastor will find out the real story later on, and your credibility will take a hit. But we’re before God, anyway; we want to be open before Him and before one another.
We see the tension between transparency and confidentiality when it comes to church finances. On one hand, we want people to be aware of things that are deemed important. On the other hand, we do our congregants no favors when we make finances the focal point of the church operation in a manner that distracts from personal growth and evangelism. That’s the tension.
We also do no favors when we air our personal grievances to others. If you have a grievance, address it directly with the one who grieves you, rather than the one who grieves you being totally unaware of the grief that exists. If you do tell others, by the time you’re finally directed to approach it Biblically, fifty other people are aware of it, and then you’d best go back to those fifty and fix it with them. Well, we are going to cover more on that later.
Repentance: Own it.
“For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.” – 2 Corinthians 7:10
There is a distinction between godly sorrow and the sorrow of the world. The sorrow of the world is self-centered: we are sorry that our misdeeds were exposed; we regret the awkwardness and shame that we have brought upon ourselves. Godly sorrow is God centered: we recognize the gravity of the sin and have deep remorse for having offended God, as well as others. That’s the distinction. It’s deep remorse that takes responsibility—not only accepts responsibility, but takes responsibility: “I did it. This is what I did. This is the harm I caused. I’m so sorry.”
Allocution: Declare it.
“He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.” – Proverbs 28:13
Repentance makes an allocution. Confession is a form of allocution. In Proverbs 28:13, confessing stands in contrast to covering. In a criminal case, before a convicted defendant is sentenced, he or she typically stands before the judge and has the opportunity to issue a statement of allocution. When the defendant excuses or justifies his crimes, he should not expect sentencing to go well. On the other hand, if the defendant expresses remorse and takes responsibility for his crimes, then the possibility of leniency exists.
Some of you may have read of the court case in California where a defendant stood before a judge having been convicted of battery, and he told the judge that he had been reformed. I can’t remember the exact wording, but basically he said he was in a better place and beyond his violent past. I did not read that he mentioned the crime he committed. The judge was not impressed and denied his request for parole, and then I believe he leaped across the bench, grabbed her by the throat and hair—did her damage—and had to be restrained by three or four others. So much for being beyond his violent past. Anyway, he was sentenced to four years for the original battery charge, and now has been indicted for attempted murder. That’s a good example of a bad statement or declaration of allocution.
An effective allocution offers no excuses, no explaining, no justification, no shifting blame.
Absolution: Forgive it.
“For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.” – Hebrews 8:12
A sincere statement of allocution, as part of repentance, lays a firm foundation for absolution, which we more commonly call forgiveness.
I like Hebrews 8:12, and that phrase “and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.” You already know that to be absolved is to be acquitted, or to be justified. That is to stand before God just as though that crime had never been committed. If you study the Hebrews context, you may see that Hebrews 8:12 is not a case of God having amnesia. According to Hebrews 10:3, in those Levitical sacrifices there was “a remembrance again made of sins made every year . . .” You know that the purpose of the Law was to disclose the carnal condition and draw attention to the acts of sin that had occurred, and those sacrifices were made repetitively. Under the new dispensation, there is no need for repetitive reminders for our past sins.
Absolution is not having amnesia. Even with humans, the beauty of forgiveness is not that we have forgotten. It’s that we remember, but have forgiven and hold no animus toward the offender. One cannot harbor a grudge and at the same time live a victorious Christian life. We forgive even when we’re not asked to forgive. When forgiveness is asked, oftentimes it’s not in the form of a perfect statement of allocution—but we accept it. Jesus forgave us, and we certainly didn’t make allocution for everything we ever did. He forgave us, so we thank God that we extend forgiveness as well.
Consequence: Accept it.
“Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife. Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour . . .” – 2 Samuel 12:10
Forgiveness does not mitigate consequences. In forgiveness teachings, it is often implied—at times even intended—that after a while, an offender is free from suffering the consequences of his bad decisions. This is the exact issue that comes to my attention repeatedly, which is why I want to address it again today.
We see in 2 Samuel 12:10-11 that as a consequence of David’s adultery and murder, he spent the rest of his life dealing with a divided family and a fractured kingdom. Study it. That’s what the prophet told him (paraphrasing): “The sword shall never depart from thine house. And because you’ve taken the wife of Uriah to be your wife, I’m going to take your wives (plural)”. You can see the consequences that followed, even after David prayed that beautiful prayer that we have in the 51st Psalm. The Blood was applied, God did not come back to him and say, “Ah—never mind what that prophet said. You have a clean slate.” No. If you plant an apple tree, you can expect to harvest apples. But if you neglect a garden, you can expect weeds. “Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap” (Galatians 6:7). It’s a law of nature. It’s the law of sinning and suffering the consequences of that sin. It’s the law of our humanity not being properly subjected, and we live with the consequences even after we have corrected that behavior.
To the extent we accept consequences of our past sins (or with respect to our humanity, our shortcomings), we demonstrate that we take responsibility for them. It’s acknowledging, “We sinned; we backslid.” (Or for shortcomings, “We messed up; we blew it.”) To the extent we accept that consequences will follow is an indicator that we have taken responsibility for what happened. To the extent we resist consequences—saying, “Wait a minute. You can’t do that. No, wait!”—we demonstrate that we have not taken responsibility for what led to where we are today.
Manipulation: Discern it.
“That all of you have conspired against me, and there is none that sheweth me that my son hath made a league with the son of Jesse, and there is none of you that is sorry for me, or sheweth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me, to lie in wait, as at this day?” – 1 Samuel 22:8
We see manipulation all the time in the public sector. A form of manipulation is when a villain attempts, and often succeeds, in re-characterizing himself or herself as the victim. King Saul employed that tactic in an unsuccessful pursuit to kill David. (We’re not going chronologically; we’re going back to before David was king). Saul said, “There is none of you that is sorry for me.” As if to say, “Aren’t any of you saying, ‘Poor Saul’?” Well, he did wrong. Just man up to it. Don’t try to get sympathy, or suddenly say you’re the victim—you’re the villain.
For those who fail and are due correction, we would do well to let them know, “Wait a minute. You’re the one who messed up. You’re the one who threw the pebble into the pond; you are responsible for the ripples that go out, not the one who has the responsibility to suggest that your behavior needs to be corrected.” So beware lest your sympathy or your understanding facilitates bad behavior.
Some public figures hire a publicist to issue their apology, in order to manipulate the product and turn themselves from the villain into the victim. I am not quoting anyone in particular, but you could probably quote someone. For example, “I’m sorry that some were offended” is a line that is used. What do you mean “some were offended”? Who was offended? And anyway, it’s not their problem that they were offended; you did it. Some will say, “Mistakes were made.” What mistakes? And against whom? And my favorite one: “This is not who I am. I will now take some time to step away and improve as a person.” Just confess what you did and make it right.
I might have to show self-restraint; my humanity is getting the best of me! I’ve been upset by some of what I’ve had to deal with. And I’ve addressed it publicly, to the point where I declared one time, “I’m not going to sit on the same platform with that man. He’s a serial adulterer. He goes, or I go.” I have multiple names in mind. I can’t imagine such a thing being countenanced in an Apostolic Faith Church. I can’t imagine some turning away and allowing victims to sit in the audience and listen to that perpetrator. We will not have it! And we will not be moved by “crocodile tears.” It’s been said that crocodiles shed tears while they eat their prey, and I will add that they do it with a smile. It’s contrived. I’m not impressed.
Some people are used. We’ve all been played at times. At times we are willingly naïve; we hope against hope that what we sense is not the case. Oftentimes that is useful, but other times it works against us. One thing is for sure: we’re not going to be complicit in having more concern for the villain than we have for the victim.
Lenin and Stalin used minions to accomplish their purpose, and they referred to them as “useful _____” (adding a term that might be inappropriate to say, but you know what it is). Well, you may be “useful” for a time, but once you declare the truth, you will find that you will be discarded like a dirty shirt. So don’t be one of those “useful” ones. You’re doing no favors to the one to whom you’re extending sympathy and understanding.
Reconciliation: Resolve it.
“. . . be ye reconciled to God.” – 2 Corinthians 5:20
We’re familiar with reconciliation from our bank accounts. We bring our books into harmony with the bank, rather than expecting the bank to bring its books into harmony with what we show. It’s not too often that a bank makes mistakes. It has happened, but if you find a million dollars was deposited into your account, you’d better not spend it because eventually that’s going to be reconciled, and they’re going to want it back.
The Prodigal Son was reconciled to his father, not his father to him. His father didn’t need to make adjustments; the son did. Again, when it comes to being reconciled to God rather than being estranged from God, being absolved of guilt does not relieve one of making amends. We’re better off after we’re reconciled in one sense, in that we return to fellowship with God. But it’s not like we can undo what was done that brought us into a state of estrangement. The damage was done. It would have been better yet if damage had not been done.
In the Old Testament, in Leviticus 5 and 6, you know well that when they would bring a sacrifice for forgiveness, it was accepted, contingent upon having made restitution first. In the Gospel dispensation, grace is extended and credit is extended when we pray and repent, and at times restitution comes after we are saved. But I’ve seen cases where I could tell restitution was demanded by God of an individual seeking salvation. I wasn’t part of their conversation, but I could just sense that one came up against a wall and wasn’t ready to make it right, and it didn’t last. Restitution should be spontaneous, like we see with Zacchaeus in the New Testament.
Restitution: Restore it.
“And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void to offence toward God, and toward men.” – Acts 24:16
In light of restitution, we often see that in our relationship with God, the path forward is to go backward. That’s what Zacchaeus did: he didn’t just move on; he began making things right. You must retrace the steps that brought you to this point.
I learned about restitution as a boy before I knew the word restitution. It happened when my brother Gary and I went to Ridgeway Market and came home with a few packs of baseball cards. In the 1950s and ‘60s, baseball was the national pastime and a lot of kids collected baseball cards. I had what were called baseball “idols.” I won’t tell you any names, but I learned later that one guy was a drunkard, not a good character. Anyway, I made the “mistake” of telling my brother Dayle what I had done (Gary was the oldest brother, I was second, and Dayle was third), and Dayle told Mom. He was more noble than Gary or me. Well, there was no debate or discussion—Mom sent us right back up to that store and made us pay for those baseball cards, and we didn’t have much money (I guess that’s why we stole them). You know, I could have blamed Gary and said, “Well Mom, I’m just a kid. I was just following my older brother.” She was not impressed with any excuse. No, we had to make it right. And God’s way of extending favor to us is also by demanding restitution.
Similarly, it won’t work for someone to leave screaming out the front door, and later think they can return quietly through the back door as if nothing untoward ever happened. I’m familiar with some homes where that’s the way children grew up—where Dad would throw a tantrum and go out the front door, and the next day they would see him and carry on just as if nothing ever happened. That doesn’t work. You can’t leave a mess in the one branch church and then relocate to a city where there’s another branch church and expect to resume as if nothing ever happened.
We repair the damage that happens as a result of defrauding, stealing, or slander. Make amends for past deeds. If you said something untrue about somebody, you want to go back to those to whom you spoke and correct the record. Your repair must be as public as the damage you caused. And the burden of earning back trust falls much more heavily on the one who betrayed it than on the one who was betrayed.
Acts 24:16 says, “And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men.” The phrase “void of offence” means that we neither offend nor are easily offended. The “exercise” is an athletic reference that speaks to moral discipline, which is what we want.
Concluding Thoughts
Saved or unsaved, our testimony is the sum total of our life choices. Whether the choices are the product of humanity or carnality, we are capable of making poor ones. However, we don’t have control over the outcome of those poor choices. I’ll illustrate this. I wasn’t sure if I would do this, but I guess I will. [Holding up a balloon.] If I blow up this balloon and let it go, can I control the path it will take? Can I control where it will end up? [Blowing up the balloon.] I have tested this. Who can tell me which way it’s going to go? Can you control the path it takes? Can you control or even tell me where it will end up? Let’s say, in case I have COVID, I’d like it to end up out there. [Pointing away from any people, then releasing the balloon to fly away.] I’ve done this with this balloon probably twenty times, and only one time did it end up even close to where I targeted. The point being, if I did have COVID, the consequence of me deciding to let loose that balloon would have outlived the moment I decided to let it go. We see that Adam and Eve’s disobedience outlived the one moment in the Garden. And on the positive side, as I mentioned earlier, so it was with Jesus on the Cross. But when we make a bad choice, we have no control over the path it will take or the consequences that will be imposed upon us as a result. Otherwise, once we understood the consequences, we would not have made the bad choice.
In the case of moral failure (speaking of carnality), does forgiveness mean you’re just in a “time out” before we turn you in to the ministry? I think I made it clear with some passion a bit ago, but I’ll make it clear again: No. No! There is no way. It’s not about forgiveness. People say, “Wait a minute, you have to forgive the poor guy!” We do forgive, but remember that he is the villain! The victim is sitting in the congregation! The impact on the victim outlasts the event. Are we going to subject that victim to the villain? I’m not. People give the excuse, “It was consensual.” That is irrelevant. Even if consensual, will this one be restored back to the pulpit while the other is still suffering the consequences of a consensual arrangement? No way. It’s not going to happen.
It’s not about forgiveness; it’s about consequences. It’s about what you have brought upon yourself. It’s about the law of reaping what you sowed. It’s about the integrity of the Apostolic Faith ministry. It’s about our credibility! It’s about the impact on our global ministry. The impact on our global ministry will outlive the failure. Not just sexual misconduct—this is for acts of gross insubordination and sowing discord as well. However, we will not disclose details, circumstances, and patterns of behavior that preceded what people become aware of. We’re not going to do that; we will hold our tongue.
With respect to humanity (rather than carnality), we die daily, and that behavior must be corrected as well. We must live with the consequences of less-than-stellar behavior that is only a product of carelessness, thoughtlessness, or even recklessness, but falls short of sin or maliciousness. Who hasn’t said something that they regretted? I’ve told you before about the time when Debbie and I were in Eureka, California, and we went to visit a sister who was elderly and had physical problems. She had just had her leg amputated, and I was very sympathetic and very understanding. I told her, “Let them wait on you hand and foot.” The moment it came out I thought, Oh! She lost a foot! Then I thought, I hope she didn’t hear that. She heard it. That’s a product of humanity—thoughtlessness and carelessness. I was guilty; I did it and I confessed it. I hoped she wouldn’t notice, but she did.
Our humanity is the part where God may dispatch us out to “Arabia.” If we find ourselves in “Arabia,” it’s because God has sent us there. We will not blame God, because we needed it. God knew we needed time in “Arabia.” It’s like Thanksgiving gravy; to enhance the flavor, you put it through a reduction process. As John the Baptist said, “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30). So it is with us; we go through that reduction process. When we suffer as a result of our humanity, at least let it accomplish something to where we’re more subdued and more dependent upon God than ever before.
The ministry is not for the faint of heart. Christianity is not for the faint of heart! Sister Josephine McElveen recently quoted me for saying something that I had heard Brother Carver say: “You cannot discourage someone who refuses to be discouraged.” Although I may have added, “You cannot encourage someone who is determined to be discouraged.” Either way, most of what we say is the product of what we have been taught.
Reading from 2 Timothy 4, this message applies to us all. It was Paul’s final charge just before he declared that his departure was at hand. I’m not aware that our departure is at hand, but between now and then, we certainly want to fight the good fight and keep the faith. Here’s the part of what he said that we often read but don’t so often quote: “I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word . . .” (2 Timothy 4:1-2). That’s the solution. Our preachers have done a good job, and always do. Preach the Word. The social issues that the world grapples with will not be solved politically. America and every country needs spiritual revival—needs to turn their back on sin and turn toward God. The Word of God is the balm that will add a salve to every problem. So that’s what we preach. “. . . be instant in season, out of season”—whether it’s convenient or not—“reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Timothy 4:2). It goes on to say that the time will come when that sound doctrine will not be received, but we’re just responsible for the first part. Continue to declare God’s Word, and God will help us to see converts won. Some of the prophets of old saw few converts. Thank God we see some. But like we heard last night, our loyalty is to God and to the Apostolic Faith where God has called us to serve. We want to uphold a pure, sound doctrine of holiness, and as we do that, God will certainly reward us.
We’re going to have a break now and resume at fifteen past the hour. As announced last night, we expect to dismiss around 12:30 and head for the Fellowship Lodge on the campground.
Rev. Darrel Lee | July 4, 2024
Welcome and prayer
Thank you everyone. Brother Mark Mfandarahwa, will you come up and lead us in prayer, please? Let’s stand.
Agenda
A handful of people requested this meeting to address matters that pertain to those who immigrate from any foreign country to North America. That is what we will talk about today.
Global unity
“For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many” (1 Corinthians 12:12-14)
The strength of our work has always been unity. With the advent of the electronic age and technology over the last twenty to thirty years in particular, we’ve become more of a united global work. This is simply because individuals and groups can now exchange messages and view services online through YouTube, etc. That mechanism can serve to unite us, or the devil can use it to divide us, but we certainly want to be united.
The Apostle Paul spoke of unity in 1 Corinthians 12:12-14, and I will read that. He said, “For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many.”
I have heard a lot over the years about Mother Kelly inspiring the Apostolic Faith work in Washington D.C and beyond. I wonder how she did it, how she kept in unity with Portland. I don’t know if she ever came to Portland. She didn’t have YouTube. She wasn’t able to view how things are done here. We hardly went there. That is also what is amazing about the work in Africa, especially in Nigeria and Ghana where it began. Seventy years ago, missionary George Hughes made a couple of trips there and the work grew. We can observe this through the letters of Sister Ruth Ashwell. It is amazing how this global work has grown in unity, because we all read the same Bible.
There is one Gospel. Nevertheless, the application can vary slightly, and we understand that—we are not going to be the only ones in Heaven. It would be a lonely place if there were only Apostolic Faith people there. We don’t impose what we stand for on others. Not by any means. We thank God that Christ is preached here and in Apostolic Faith churches elsewhere. We are unapologetic for the manner in which we apply the Bible doctrine way of holiness.
We strive for a global Biblical approach rather than a cultural approach, because Bible culture transcends geographic and linguistic cultures. We understand that there may be minor contextual differences along the way. We don’t ignore these differences, and if they disrupt our unity, we are not content to accept them. I think that was why a couple of the brothers wanted me to address this matter.
Respecting God’s Authority and Order
We can’t use our cultural differences or private interpretations of Scripture as a cover for disrespecting authority and/or dishonoring God’s order.
As an example, a year ago, I dealt with a situation that involved a couple using private interpretation or understanding of 1 Corinthians 11.
Before going further, let me mention, and I’m sure that I have said this before, that we typically don’t include the spouses of ministers when we take up some subjects. We don’t want our spouses to be burdened with some of the things that we deal with as pastors and ministers. Even my daughter, who serves as my assistant, isn’t privy to delicate matters. I don’t burden her with those things. Not that there is a heavy burden as far as that goes, but there is no need for our families to share in it.
Anyway, concerning this issue related to women wearing hats or scarves, we don’t object to either provided attention is not drawn to oneself rather than Christ, and it is not demanded that all women do so. The irony is that 1 Corinthians 11 is about respecting authority with head covering merely used as an illustration. Paul concluded by saying, “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering” (verse 15). Women have a natural head covering, even if some wish they had more: It is called hair.
The Word of God teaches respect for authority, and that is what 1 Corinthians 11 is all about. There are two failures that we have a zero tolerance for when it comes to the ministry—sexual misconduct and gross insubordination. Insubordination might not disqualify a person for ministry, if the guilty minister quickly repairs damage, but gross insubordination will. Once a person refuses to subject themselves to authority, assuming that authority is his or her superiors, they are done. I am not speaking of my own authority. We don’t independently declare that a person is grossly insubordinate. We rely on leadership to hold each of us accountable, the same way I am accountable to the Board and other veterans.
Recommendation letters for immigrating ministers
Branch church pastors, it is important that you receive a letter of recommendation for any minister immigrating to your church before allowing them to preach. The letter must state that this person is a member of an Apostolic Faith branch church in good standing. For Nigeria, the WECA District Superintendent’s appointee notifies Portland when a minister or worker is moving to North America. When we are satisfied that this is a member in good standing, we forward the letter to the branch church. We get these letters regularly, and before we forward them, we ask some questions and request that a Minister Questionnaire or Worker Application be submitted. One question that we have been asking more recently is, “Is this person married, and if so, is the whole family coming?” We can’t have ministers or group leaders preaching who are living apart from their spouses. This has happened in the past, and where this situation already exists, we will be very cautious, especially where it has been successful. However, it is difficult to set an example as husband and wife—“and they twain shall be one flesh”—when one spouse is three thousand miles away from the other. In general, this is not what we want to happen, and we will continue to work on this.
Questions from Immigrating Ministers
Here are some questions that have come to me in letters from ministers immigrating to North America.
Question one: Is a traditional wedding for church members the same as for the world or do we follow a wedding reception guide given in our Ministers’ Manual? Which elements, such as dancing, should we allow or disregard?
I believe I covered this with clarity a year ago in March. I’m not sure of the date, but it was recently, so I will be brief and give just one example.
Not long ago, I received a phone call regarding a video that was circulating online of a wedding reception. The concern was that the reception emulated the world. I knew the pastor well, a very good man, and I was aware that a wedding had taken place.
I wrote to the pastor and named the person who had called me, because we don’t operate behind each other’s backs. We are one body of believers. I wrote . . .
(the name of the pastor) called me from abroad to express concern over a recent wedding reception. It sounds like it emulated the world, which is in strict contradiction to what we ask for when we conduct a marriage ceremony in the Apostolic Faith. That the reception took place away from the church does not alleviate the fact that this couple knew better, because they had been taught otherwise. They would do themselves a favor, and would also do you a favor, if they took down their online post of the reception. This sets an example for others to follow. Frankly, I don’t understand how couples can think this is acceptable. They need to be made to understand they have embarrassed the Apostolic Faith worldwide work. Of course, I was not there, nor have I seen the video, nor do I want to see it. I do, however, want them to be made to understand that they have embarrassed all of us.
I received a reply from the pastor. He had already called the couple into his office and explained to them that the conduct at the wedding reception was not in accordance with acceptable guidelines. I told you he was a good man. He expressed his disappointment to them and spoke to them at length about the negative impact this could have. He also asked them to take down the video, which I assume they did based on their overall response.
Having done all this, the pastor had a question for me. He asked, “What do we do to move forward?” I told him it was contingent on the couples’ response. For example, if they humbly said, “We’re Sorry. We messed up,” (which they did), I had no objection to their returning to their volunteer positions after a time—perhaps in September. On the other hand, if they were resistant or defended their actions, that would be a different matter. I left it at that saying, “You know best.” I won’t follow up now, but will leave it with the pastor, and I think it is going to come out well.
When I last spoke on this topic, perhaps last March in this very room, I stood before you exasperated. I don’t understand how people can think this is acceptable holy behavior. I also don’t understand when someone posts a worldly video or photo, and it is “liked” by purportedly holy people—ministers or their spouses. Why would we “like” something that is ungodly, worldly, and against all that we stand for?
I can’t be on social media; I wouldn’t be able to handle it. I know this, because people come to me dismayed by what they see there. They shouldn’t be telling me; they should be telling the person doing the posting. I don’t want to be discouraged, I want to be encouraged, so I stay away from all of that.
Question two: Should women’s hair length be regulated? Should the color remain natural?
I am not going to go around telling women they must grow their hair out to a certain length. Some women can’t grow their hair long. I am married to one, and it grieves her. Others, especially those elderly, can’t physically take care of longer hair. I don’t know about all of that, and I don’t want to. I do know that we cannot legislate righteousness; it comes from within. Perhaps the key is modesty. Hairstyles that draw undue attention, on men or women, detract from glorifying God.
Question three: Where does one who has immigrated send their tithes and offerings?
We tithe where we worship. Offerings can be more subjective. In America, one cannot give a designated offering—one with strings attached. A person can request that their offering be used for a certain purpose, and we will try our best to comply. However, it is not guaranteed.
There have been a few times, not many, where we have returned an offering. In one case, the money was designated for one whom we knew repeatedly solicited funds for personal use. We returned the money and told the donor that we can’t give a tax-deductible receipt for funds going to that individual. We don’t funnel money to individuals who go through life with their hand out. We hoped the donor would realize how the money was going to an individual who was undeserving.
Be aware that we don’t solicit funds. If someone is doing that, say on social media, and claiming to be part of the Apostolic Faith Church, they are actually not. For example, many years ago, someone claiming to be a member in good standing at one of our branch churches, solicited funds from several pastors. One pastor sent him the money, twice. Then another pastor, unaware that the first pastor had been preyed upon, called the Portland headquarters and asked if we knew who this person was. We didn’t. He was just someone who saw our list of pastors on our website and took advantage of that. Once we learned of the situation, we notified our pastors, and it didn’t go any further.
Though we don’t solicit funds, we are not afraid to make people aware of projects that are going on around the world. Recently, we made known the Faith City project. We try to stop short of soliciting funds. The exception would be if the request comes from the Portland headquarters office. Here, we can keep track of where the funds are going and avoid someone taking advantage of the good nature of the saints.
Question four: How do we treat Gospel workers who dress worldly during the week and dress like saints on Sunday?
This question was really about women wearing pants, aside from sports and their job requirements, such as uniforms. This issue is one that has been brought up repeatedly. The Scriptural reference that is often cited is Deuteronomy 22:5: “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.”
I heard Brother Carver say, about forty years ago, to the ministers in the United States, “We cannot use this Scripture to say that our women can never wear pants.” This verse doesn’t say anything about pants. It is about blurring the distinction between the sexes. In this age of gender confusion, we can better understand what conditions existed in Biblical times, for example, in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. A woman isn’t to characterize herself as a man, nor is a man to characterize himself as a woman.
If Moses lived today, he would be dismayed that the U.S., heavily influenced at its founding on Biblical principles, would allow men to compete as women in women’s sports. It is insanity, but that is America today. Welcome to Sodom and Gomorrah. I’m glad we could leave Sodom and come to this holy campground for a while. Speaking of the campground, the City of Portland calls at least annually, asking to use our cabins to house people who otherwise would be in high or low temperatures, depending upon the season. But there is no way we are going to allow these holy grounds to be used by this corrupt city.
The important point concerning appropriate attire is that the Bible teaches femininity for women and masculinity for men, and that is what we preach and teach. This doesn’t mean that we go into people’s homes and regulate what they do. Let me give you an example from my own past. When I was first married, I was told, unsolicited, what appropriate birth control is. I listened, walked away, and thought, That is absolutely none of your business. You do not belong in my bedroom. We don’t belong in people’s homes. We are not going to tell people what to wear to work. Instead, we do our best to inspire them to dress modestly at all times, and we trust the Holy Spirit to do the rest.
Brother Dave and I went to an event where one of the minister’s wives was dressed inappropriately. I asked Brother Dave, “What are we doing wrong?” I don’t know what the answer is, but I do know that if we legislate holiness, it won’t come from people’s hearts, and then it won’t last. So, we endeavor to inspire. One way that we do this is to hold up a mirror to ourselves and ask, “How can I better inspire holiness, including modesty?”
In addition to femininity and masculinity, the Bible teaches modesty for both males and females. Modesty is subjective, so we intentionally use some ambiguity in our approach.
Here is an example of our approach to modest and appropriate dress. Before the youth meeting on Sunday, I sent a message to Brother Erik Calhoun to speak to the musicians. The message was as follows.
Please take the opportunity this evening to see that the youth musicians are reminded that we appreciate their interest in the work of the Lord. We know they want to represent the World Headquarters well. We will appreciate that our young men are well-groomed, which includes neat hairstyles rather than the popular male shaggy looks. This also means they should not have braided or twisted dreadlocks or rolls that are not combed.
I was happy to include something that we ask of the young men, because talks of modesty are usually focused on the women. We are not the Taliban. Let’s keep that in mind.
By the way, I had noticed just one young man with shaggy hair. There may have been others that you noticed. Let me share something I have said in the past to some coming from abroad: “Please don’t judge our entire Portland work by one or two less-than-stellar examples, and I won’t judge your entire work by the less-than-stellar examples that I see where you are.”
Continuing with the message . . .
We appreciate the modesty of our young ladies where they watch their hemlines and don’t wear capped sleeves.
I wish I had elaborated a little on this. Capped sleeves are the ones that go just past the shoulder. Previously, I have stated, “Don’t wear extremely short sleeves.” This is where ambiguity comes in. What is short? If we gave a precise length, there would be appeals. We don’t want to become unnecessarily encumbered. When the young ladies’ group sang, there were two who I wish had worn longer sleeves. However, these young people are not doing drugs. Most of them are under twenty-one, and they are ahead of where I was at their age.
A year or two ago, we did have a challenge. Of the whole orchestra and choir, there was one young woman who wore sleeves that were way too short. Lo and behold, she was featured as a soloist. When I saw this, I about died, thinking, God help us! Of the one or two hundred musicians on the platform, this will be the one who people notice online. We dealt with the situation by removing the first half of that service from our website and showed only the sermon. I didn’t have the heart to tell the young lady.
Continuing again . . .
If in doubt, we request that one not participate until that doubt is removed. We know that nobody wants to draw attention to themselves.
Thanks very much. I’m sure every single one of these musicians wants to honor this global work with their carefulness.
We put the burden on them. We tried to appeal to their desire to draw closer to God. These are smart kids. Hopefully, they will think about what we have said. Most of them do.
With respect to modesty, there is one other thing to mention—a woman can be completely covered and still be immodest, in skintight apparel. We do our best to instruct, but modesty must come from the heart.
Question five: A typical complaint we receive from people who view our live webcast is that our orchestra has a percussion section. They might write something like, “I watched your service online and it didn’t seem like an Apostolic Faith service. Why does the Portland headquarters use drums?
In Portland, we have a symphony orchestra. All the instruments are needed to comprise the selections we play. This is not the case for congregational singing, so we eliminate some of the percussion for that. Our voices are instruments too, and we want to hear them. During congregational singing, that is the instrument that inspires.
Not every church has a symphony orchestra, so a percussion section is not needed. I’ve been very specific with West Coast and Midwest pastors in the U.S. that if a certain instrument of music (a trap set) does not exist in their church, they are not to add it.
If you do have a strong percussion section in your church, please temper it. Don’t put a twelve-year-old on the drums. It will give people a headache in church. They won’t be able to hear or think. The bottom line is that worship should glorify God in a respectful manner, whether or not drums are used.
Thankful for immigrants
We thank God for Apostolic Faith ministers and workers who immigrate to North America. We want to assimilate them into our work if they’re spiritually qualified and come recommended. We have particularly benefited throughout Canada and the U.S. by families moving here from Africa.
I was told that if these camp meetings were being held in some of the African countries, hundreds and thousands would be getting saved. Those coming to Portland from other countries could get discouraged, thinking, Where are all the converts? However, we are not done yet. We are still praying, so let’s be encouraged by that.
Dismissal
I promised we would end at 4:30, and I’m going to keep my promise. I originally planned to take some questions, but time has run out. Let’s stand. Sister Antonia, will you come up and dismiss us in prayer?
%402x.svg){kind=icon}
%402x.svg){kind=icon}
%402x.svg){kind=icon}
