Mote and Academic ?
or
Moat and Pandemic?
The Situation
The very recent incident in Shalom Baptist Church that led to the separation of majority group and its pastor, and eventually the obvious show of political power on the side of those that caused the dismemberment of the majority members could be considered mote and academic in the light of the history and existence of Shalom.
Moreover, the author cannot in his right judgment simply treat the subject in that light, not only for the sake of study, but also to awaken our church senses in the light of our beliefs which we hold dear to us; the democratic and congregational church polity common among Baptists, specifically the Southern Baptist Churches.
The church is a pure democracy, but some would say? Demoncrazy? Or is there really such thing? The subject at hand could not be considered mote and academic in a sense that for as long as the institution of this church is concerned, what it professes to believe also possesses its very existence.
Yes, it is also true that every local congregation is autonomous. Some may have profounded 3 self's and others five. It is never to be construed however, that any departure in any major tenets viz a viz democratic and congregational governance which is basic and normative among SBC churches is permissible. Those who say they are… but on the basis of their preferred styles invite Pandora all the more open wide her box.
In view of what has transpired very recently in Shalom a moat has been established and its pandemic influences now threatens or may already have swallowed its very foundation. The worst scenario would be, if there are other churches of like scenario and who can tell?
The Interim Involvement
Shalom at first, invited SOMMABCA to mediate in the ongoing factions between Pastor Arriola’s group and Carls’ ( Pastor Dante’s). Such gestures somewhat appeals to the basic democratic way of handling church disputes among SOMMABCA churches as provided for in their by-laws in settling church internal disputes among others.
Both parties asked for a mediation.and agreed to allow SOMMABCA to help them settle the issue. (From the onset there was already a deception, owing to the fact that Carl’s’ group was outnumbered- that they are really in dire need of help)
At first it was agreed that SOMMABCA will send preachers every Sunday to help them sort out the issues and come to terms or a solution. This has worked for quite sometime about a Month or so, until Pastor Arriola and Carl both signed an undertakings to vacate the parsonage (that they both occupy). This led to the separation. First in the opinions, and Secondly in split.
Opinion and Split
In opinion:
1. To Carl’s group it was a victory because they taught they already won the victory and was able to unseat their foe.
2. To Pastor Arriola it was only an agreement to vacate the parsonage which becomes (seemingly) the root of their conflicts but not church separation.
This development brought Atty. Tagoc to request the association to install Pastor Dante, which is scheduled in their timetable to come that Sunday to preach.
Violation number 1 – Their conflict is not yet fully resolved, and to ask for a pastor direct from SOMMABCA is not the normal nor the ideal practice. Besides, the majority officers are with Pastor Arriola’s group. About one or two were left with Carl/Atty's group. This makes their organization, sick, defunct and is needing some time to heal and to get organized.
In this situation the church must first ascertain their status and come up with a common decision as a group in search of a pastor. As a result, Atty Tagoc’s request was not granted, instead Pastor Larraga was designated by SOMMABCA and upon the request of another group inside Shalom.This group is not of Dante's/Carl's nor Arriola's . Pastor Vir to serve in the interim in order to assist Shalom until such time that they are one in their decision and able to look for a pastor.
The Interim Relationship
Pastor Larraga was well received by the congregation on the 1st official Sunday he assumed his post as an interim pastor. From the onset, he laid down rules and parameters to guide the church in the process. All remaining elders and members were convened and signed the letter and instructions as circulated by the interim by the majority of them, so that they could begin the deliberations. (see letter and circular)
The following Sunday, he was welcomed by Atty Tagoc and was given a copy furnished of a letter addressed to the SOMMABCA Chairman, thanking SOMMABCA for the effort.
That same Sunday was very memorable because it was a joint Lord’s Supper celebration with some members from Grace Community and Maricris.
After the consecration song, the interim pastor announced that he does not recognize the letter as coming from the church and tore the letter instead in front of the congregation in Jesus name. So that they might understand in simple terms what it means to have a congregational decision in relation to pastoral call.
After that, he called for church’s decision to sign to call him as pastor , and he had majority of the members signatures. But this does not mean he does not make himself accountable with anybody such as SOMMABCA nor Shalom. .(see congregational letter as signed).
This they did also (Carl's group), but they are far below their numbers even when there are about 2 who double signed.(see the membership committees report on the actual membership after the split).
This incident was their Second vicious attempt to rid of any one who would stand in their way to seat Dante. In order to fortify their position they employ:
Intimidation
By calling the aid of Barangay tanods and policemen. They deployed 1 jeep from the Barangay and 2 patrol cars from the police. Atty. Tagoc and Carl conspired to control the pulpit. Until the time that they successfully installed Dante on their own even without congregational vote or decision.
SOMMABCA’S RESPONSE
Actually, there are members/people from Shalom and even from Pastor Arriola’s group who are clamoring for SOMMABCA to use their power to correct the wrong. Of course, SOMMABCA, or anyone aggrieved can resort to any legal means to address the issue.
An implication would be, in any given SB churches, for this matter, may practically replicate their strategies and live as freely as they choose. God forbid!
The writer admires SOMMABCA for their inaction (not actually inaction – SOMMABCA BOT did their best share and so do I and other SOMMABCA pastors). Inaction in pursing further actions. I for one, just rest my case here and leave the results to God, who in his infinite wisdom knows why things happen the way they happen. To use the arms of flesh means to fail.
End Statements
Who’s church is it? Who’s responsible? While there are many Southern Baptist local churches, in biblical sense, there is only one body. We all share the same blessings from the same source for the edification of the church. All Christian denominations are included and all are vital parts that make up the whole.
Moreover, within this body, ( or part ) that we are occupying – we occupy a very specific place i.e. right here in SOMMABCA or etc.
Yes, there is a need to reassess the mechanism how we deal with conflicts (of the same nature or may be different) when they arise. But we cannot simply shrugged off our shoulders and say it’s their problem, not our ’s or mine.
Yes, we are autonomous but what binds us together, should practically bind us all, otherwise, there is no bond existing.
Still I am optimistic for Shalom, in God’s time, it shall become greater even better than before. What happened in Shalom can also happen anywhere or maybe happening anywhere.
Therefore;
“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about seeking whom he may devour.” I Peter 5:8
