Saturday, June 7, 2014

Pitfalls of the “Culture of Honor”

1. The "Culture of Honor" teaching holds that within the context of the local church, the "annointing" is channeled via those that God has placed into authority.
Hence, the key to experiencing more blessing and more spiritual power lies within the extent to which you submit to the authority of the leadership.
So to, if one questions or challenges the actions of one in authority, they risk losing the "blessing”. Pastors then, are elevated to an intermediary role in the believer’s relationship with Christ.

2. It promotes a biased ecclesiology:
Churches that espouse “Culture of Honor” tend to adhere to a strict episcolism wherein authority is channeled towards a singular authority figure or Bishop (“Apostle” in New Apostolic Reformation vernacular).

e.g, Senior Pastor>Elders>Deacons>Congregant.

Rarely do you see “culture of Honor” being taught or applied in either a presbyterian (plurality of elders accountable to a General Assembly) or Congregational (decisions made and leaders appointed via members’ vote) leadership setting.

3. It encourages licentiousness

If believers are to give honor irrespective of behaviours, lifestyle or fruit, there can obviously be no valid basis for admonition (Colossians 3:16) or church discipline (Matthew 18:15-20). Furthermore, if a pastoral leader were to say or do anything that would otherwise disqualify them from the pastoral office, the congregant who affirms the "Culture of Honor" is encouraged to simply look the other way rather than call such leaders to account.

At the practical level, this is a very sure means of control in an environment that downplays critical thinking about things like doctrine and theology; such a teaching effectively silences internal opposition under threat of potential reprobation id you don't comply.

No comments:

Post a Comment