Accountability and Submission

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Saying "No" when asked to do something isn't being unsubmissive. When a person requests a favor, you have the option to say yes or no.



I guess I don't really get what you're talking about. I don't see what this has to do with submission. For instance, when our drama director asks me if I want to participate in the Christmas drama, I can say "Yes", or "No, I don't have time right now", and there's no lack of submission either way.

How can you be unsubmissive to something that isn't a direct instruction?

I suppose I'm looking for an example of something that would be directly commanded or instructed, falling outside of the exceptions I provided, that would lead to a lack of submission.

Are you talking about requests to fill positions or do certain jobs? Or are you talking about if the pastor gets up and says, "All church members must avoid movie theaters", and you dont' see anything wrong with them, so you disregard the instruction?

Do you see pastors asking saints to fulfill volunteer positions as pressure to submit? Is it wrong for a pastor to make requests of a saint?

Abbie,

It is more about the idea and the propagation of: before I will use you in the gifts you think you have or things you feel you want to do in the church, such as, teaching, counseling, or administrating you must prove you are willing to do whatever is asked of you. Example: hosting bake sales, scrubbing toilets, garage sales, and church cleanup.

I remember growing up in our church, coming home from Bible college one summer and on Wednesday night Bible study...our Pastor handing out forms for us to look at and check off the areas in the church you are wanting or willing to be used. I checked every box except Center of interest Sunday School teaching. I am not good with little ones, and don't do crafts and such...even then.

I got called into the office and asked to teach Center of Interest. I declined. I was told that I would not be working in the deaf ministry then and they gave the Deaf Ministry Coordinatior position to a young man who was just learning. It was done to show me who was in charge and they would use me where they wanted and not where I wanted. A control thing. I was told I was not submissive and I needed Disciplined. I did not feel I needed discipline as I had done nothing to be disciplined for. [Keep in mind this was 30 years ago]

I hope this is more detailed as to what I am discussing.

Blessings, Rhoni

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by originalsecretplace

Smart cat.... Sorry couldn't resist.

Unconditional obedience to a human being is not lawful or intelligent.

I don't think the church is based on the same model as the military hierarchy where obedience is the golden rule. But even in the military people are held accountable, charged and punished when they are given an order that is morally wrong and they carry it out anyway.

"I did it because I was ordered to" is not an excuse. We are all accountable for our actions and we will be judged for them before God. Every man will giva account of HIMSELF. Bilnd obdience is not acceptable, ever.

I think submission is more an attitude that bears the fruit of obedience where appropriate.

Fruit of obedience is obeying. Where appropriate is subjective. Pastor thinks he has the right to ask and not be refused. You think you were asked so therefore have the right to refuse. If you refuse you are not submissive and therefore not able to be used where you are most effective.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

Abbie,

It is more about the idea and the propagation of: before I will use you in the gifts you think you have or things you feel you want to do in the church, such as, teaching, counseling, or administrating you must prove you are willing to do whatever is asked of you. Example: hosting bake sales, scrubbing toilets, garage sales, and church cleanup.

Well, this comes to mind:

Luke 16:10 "He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much...."

I remember growing up in our church, coming home from Bible college one summer and on Wednesday night Bible study...our Pastor handing out forms for us to look at and check off the areas in the church you are wanting or willing to be used. I checked every box except Center of interest Sunday School teaching. I am not good with little ones, and don't do crafts and such...even then.

I got called into the office and asked to teach Center of Interest. I declined. I was told that I would not be working in the deaf ministry then and they gave the Deaf Ministry Coordinatior position to a young man who was just learning. It was done to show me who was in charge and they would use me where they wanted and not where I wanted. A control thing. I was told I was not submissive and I needed Disciplined. I did not feel I needed discipline as I had done nothing to be disciplined for. [Keep in mind this was 30 years ago]

I hope this is more detailed as to what I am discussing.

Blessings, Rhoni

I understand what you are talking about, but I don't think it has to do with submission.

In my opinion, we should serve wherever and however we can serve, and be patient for God to make room for our gifts and talents. Humility requires that we serve even in areas that aren't desirable, simply because there is a need.

I don't believe that means we can't say "No", but I do believe that if we are available, we should be available where there is a need, and not necessarily where we desire to be available.

Some pastors and church leaders do "test" people in the small things before giving them a more desirable position or task. I think that is a good thing, because if you ask a person to perform a small or menial task, and they accomplish it with excellence, then it is a very good indicator of how they will perform a greater task. It also reflects an attitude of servitude, which is a very desirable trait.

I can't think of anything my pastor could ask of me that I would refuse, unless it was physically impossible. Having a pastor you can trust not to take advantage of you or your time is a good thing...but if my pastor were to "test" me, I would hope that I would pass with flying colors.

I don't think tests are bad or wrong.

[originalsecretplace]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

Fruit of obedience is obeying. Where appropriate is subjective. Pastor thinks he has the right to ask and not be refused. You think you were asked so therefore have the right to refuse. If you refuse you are not submissive and therefore not able to be used where you are most effective.

Well... many people including pastor think they have a right to ask and not be refused. People include spouses, children, parents, bosses... Where appropriate is not as subjective as you may think. I've read some books on boundaries (now I'm an expert ) but I do believe that people KNOW when they are overstepping even if they won't admit it.

My family has been subjected to that kind of reasoning before in church and was told "I'll remember this when ...". My answer is: the church building where I spend less than 15% of my time is not where most of my ministry happens. If it is then what are we doing with the other 85% of our time?
I can do, without interference, whatever God asks me to do outside of those few short hours I spend in service.

It's frustrating to feel that you're not being used most effeciently. Not only do you feel it for yourself but you feel it for those who are suffering because of it (the deaf).

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Well, this comes to mind:

Luke 16:10 "He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much...."




I understand what you are talking about, but I don't think it has to do with submission.

In my opinion, we should serve wherever and however we can serve, and be patient for God to make room for our gifts and talents. Humility requires that we serve even in areas that aren't desirable, simply because there is a need.

I don't believe that means we can't say "No", but I do believe that if we are available, we should be available where there is a need, and not necessarily where we desire to be available.

Some pastors and church leaders do "test" people in the small things before giving them a more desirable position or task. I think that is a good thing, because if you ask a person to perform a small or menial task, and they accomplish it with excellence, then it is a very good indicator of how they will perform a greater task. It also reflects an attitude of servitude, which is a very desirable trait.

I can't think of anything my pastor could ask of me that I would refuse, unless it was physically impossible. Having a pastor you can trust not to take advantage of you or your time is a good thing...but if my pastor were to "test" me, I would hope that I would pass with flying colors.

I don't think tests are bad or wrong.

Dear Abbie,

I guess this is where I disagree. Many of our mega churches and more successful Apostolic churches are those who utilize people in their gifts and or the places they feel competent or want to serve. If you want to do something then you take ownership and pride in your work. You work with a passion.

I experienced something comparable when I was a Personnel Director for a large retail corportation. In retail they like to hire people who will work any shift, any department...whatever is asked of them. When I hired for a supercenter I hired people qualified and hired them for the shift they wanted or were able to work as it affected their family. The store was in the black...became profitable within one week of opening. The average was 6 months. They came to ask me to manage a store for them. I turned them down.

Much is to be said for utilizing people in the place they feel most competent and in the shift/time schedule that is beneficial to them. They produce more, have more passion, and the company benefits. The same goes for our churches. It is a church but also a business and if you want it to prosper and be a growing church you must be efficient in your use of people. People produce when they have a passion. When the passsion is thwarted by control issues and going through numerous channels to get a job accomplished then you lose momentum. You usually lose the people too.

Blessings, Rhoni

[Rhoni]

The humilty issue is not a humility issue but a control issue. You can always us the proverbial...they left my church because they were an unfruitful branch that needed pruning from our proverbial tree so it can grow...you know the justification for mass exodus or church trouble of any kind. Heaven forbid that it be the leadership's responsibility for dropping the proverbial ball!

Blessigns, Rhoni

[MissBrattified]

Boundaries are good. Our personal relationship with God should be top priority, and we should have time and space boundaries that protect that, especially when it comes to our daily communication with Him.

Family ought to be next on the list, and again, there should be boundaries in place that protect family time.

However...IF you have time to help out at the church, I think you should just offer your services, and then be willing to serve wherever and whenever you are asked, within the time frame you have offered.

It isn't wrong to say "No" when asked, but I think it's wrong to say, "Yeah, I'll sing a solo, but I won't sing on Wednesday nights--only Sundays." Or, "Sure, I'll teach Sunday School, but only if I get to be the main teacher or the Superintendent."

It's one thing to have boundaries; it's another to limit your support to the areas that please you. There is a girl in our church who always wants the solo part. She is constantly asking to sing for altar call, and counts the number of solos other singers get and compares that to the number she gets to sing. Ya know what? Because of her attitude, AND the fact that she NEVER shows up in the prayer room? I have no intention of giving her the spot she desires, because her attitude stinks. She thinks she's meant to be a soloist, and I say that when she learns how to be content with serving the Lord in song, and not serving her own need for attention, THEN she will be eligible. That probably makes me sound like a meanie. I try not to be.

I'd rather use someone who is willing and available and prayerful and faithful in the small things than someone with huge talent, and an equally huge ego.

I'm just saying that I understand the "tests", because ministry is important enough that it should be limited to those with a servants' heart. How can you serve in ministry to the congregation if you are only interested in serving your own desires to be seen or heard or to express yourself?

I still don't see what this has to do with submission. It's about a dynamic that exists between leadership and laity, in which those who are faithful get all the desirable positions, while those who may be more talented are passed over, many times simply because they aren't willing to serve, except where it serves them.

Now, Rhoni, because you are a sensitive soul, I will point out that my post isn't pointed at you, because I still don't know enough about what you're referencing to point it in your direction, but rather toward the topic that you've raised, as far as I understand it.

In fairness, there ARE quite a few pastors and church leaders who believe that saints don't have the right to say "No" to anything, and they are put out and taken aback and often offended when the N Word finally happens. To those people I would say: You're Wrong. Most of the people who fill church positions and clean the toilets and teach classes and sing in the choir are volunteers, and their voluntary service should never be taken for granted or taken advantage of or demanded or expected.

Well, there you go. That's my 2 cents.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Boundaries are good. Our personal relationship with God should be top priority, and we should have time and space boundaries that protect that, especially when it comes to our daily communication with Him.

Family ought to be next on the list, and again, there should be boundaries in place that protect family time.

However...IF you have time to help out at the church, I think you should just offer your services, and then be willing to serve wherever and whenever you are asked, within the time frame you have offered.

It isn't wrong to say "No" when asked, but I think it's wrong to say, "Yeah, I'll sing a solo, but I won't sing on Wednesday nights--only Sundays." Or, "Sure, I'll teach Sunday School, but only if I get to be the main teacher or the Superintendent."

It's one thing to have boundaries; it's another to limit your support to the areas that please you. There is a girl in our church who always wants the solo part. She is constantly asking to sing for altar call, and counts the number of solos other singers get and compares that to the number she gets to sing. Ya know what? Because of her attitude, AND the fact that she NEVER shows up in the prayer room? I have no intention of giving her the spot she desires, because her attitude stinks. She thinks she's meant to be a soloist, and I say that when she learns how to be content with serving the Lord in song, and not serving her own need for attention, THEN she will be eligible.

I'd rather use someone who is willing and available and prayerful and faithful in the small things than someone with huge talent, and an equally huge ego.

I'm just saying that I understand the "tests", because ministry is important enough that it should be limited to those with a servants' heart. How can you serve in ministry to the congregation if you are only interested in serving your own desires to be seen or heard or to express yourself?
I still don't see what this has to do with submission. It's about a dynamic that exists between leadership and laity, in which those who are faithful get all the desirable positions, while those who may be more talented are passed over, many times simply because they aren't willing to serve, except where it serves them.

Now, Rhoni, because you are a sensitive soul, I will point out that my post isn't pointed at you, because I still don't know enough about what you're referencing to point it in your direction, but rather toward the topic that you've raised, as far as I understand it.

In fairness, there ARE quite a few pastors and church leaders who believe that saints don't have the right to say "No" to anything, and they are put out and taken aback and often offended when the N Word finally happens. To those people I would say: You're Wrong. Most of the people who fill church positions and clean the toilets and teach classes and sing in the choir are volunteers, and their voluntary service should never be taken for granted or taken advantage of or demanded or expected.
Well, there you go. That's my 2 cents.

Dear Abbie,

Great points and I totally agree with the bolded, and in part the other. I do believe that those in what is considered 'more desirable' positions can and do serve where needed when there is a need. What I disagree with is the having to prove oneself over and over because leadership wants to prove they are in control.

You don't waste good Sunday School teachers putting them in janitorial positions nor do you elevate the janitor to postion of Sunday School teacher is he/she can't teach.

Thank-you for going easy on me I toughen up a little at a time...

Blessigns, Rhoni

P.S. What many don't understand is I often play the part of the opposing view to stimulate discussion not because it is all about me.