I posted yesterday about the process of restoring those who have sinned. One of the tricky issues that it raises is whether they can be restored to public ministry and if so, how soon? Dan commented that “the church seems to vacillate between talking about ‘disqualified for eternity’ and judging harshly to the other extreme of rushing the individual who has fallen back into active ministry just because they display dramatic gifts!” Cliff pointed to the biblical stories of David and Peter, who apparently were quickly “restored” following sin.

In the case of David, he never lost his job as king, despite his despicable act of deceit and murder. He therefore didn’t need to be restored to his job, though he did need a different kind of restoring and renewal:

10 Create in me a clean heart, O God,
and renew a right spirit within me.
11 Cast me not away from your presence,
and take not your Holy Spirit from me.
12 Restore to me the joy of your salvation,
and uphold me with a willing spirit.

(Ps 51:10-12 ESV)

Peter’s “restoration” is also not quite so clear-cut. He was not at that time a leader of anything, simply a disciple. Jesus’ gracious words in John 21:15-17 indicated not a ministry he would resume, but a new one he would take up, after the day of Pentecost.

I do however agree with Cliff that examples such as those of Peter and David, show the grace of God in being willing to use those who have failed spectacularly. We could add Moses and Jonah amongst others to that list.

So what can be said about how soon a person can resume leadership ministry? I think some useful direction may be found in the qualifications for elders and deacons found in 1 Tim 3. Notice the following verses:

1 Tim 3:6 “He must not be a recent convert”

1 Tim 3:10 “And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless.”

1 Tim 5:22  “Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands,”

These verses (amongst others) indicate that Paul did not want Timothy to rush people into positions of leadership. Yes, they may have charisma, but character is vitally important. A leader is someone whose example is followed, thus to elevate someone who is not living in accordance with the gospel can be very damaging to the church.

The concern in 1 Timothy seems to be that an elder or deacon should prove themselves to be of good character over a period of time. Then when they are appointed, they are in a place of having earned the trust of the congregation. Prospective elders and deacons would thus be tested, perhaps for a period of several months or even a year.

It would make sense that no less a standard should be applied to someone who has fallen into sin. A serious breach of trust has taken place. That cannot be “healed lightly” or quickly. Over time though, they may again prove themselves faithful, humble, obedient and repentant. The local church, who know them and can see their lives, will be in a position to judge whether they now trust that person again. In the specific case of Todd Bentley, it will not be overnight that he can prove he is now ready to be a “one-woman man” (see 1 Tim 3:2). (And it will not be the YouTube viewers who are in a position to make that judgment call anyway).

Finally, Rom 11:29 should be a source of encouragement to us all. God does not bestow salvation one day and then take it away the next. And maybe against our ‘better’ judgment, neither does he seem to withdraw other gifts from those who least appear to deserve them. Perhaps that is why we call them charismata – gifts of grace.

Rom 11:29  For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

.-----

Footnote: none of this should be read as an endorsement of the “restoration of Todd Bentley” process being carried out by Rick Joyner. I still have grave concerns as to his suitability as a spokesperson for the gospel. I do sincerely hope though that he is restored to right relationship with God and with the fellow believers in his local church.