FYI-what happened before being called in by the elders

The following info is what happened in Jan. 2002 which led up to me being called in by the elders. I realize this happened over 2 months ago and I should have supplied this sooner, but if anyone is still interested here it is.

My name is A.L."Mac" McAlister and my wife is Barbara. We were faithful members at Richland Hills COC for approximately 11 years. The following statement gives the sequence of events that led to me being called before three elders to be chastized as being divisive. The summary of that mtg. has been provided.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS:
1/9/02-Wed. night service-I was unable to attend this service because I work out of town during most weeks so I can have weekends off to attend Sun. services. Evidently after the lesson one of our ministers introduced to the congregation a group of approximately 160 members. These people, both men and women, were asked to come forward and one of our elders prayed over them to bless them as "special servants." Apparently the elders had decided that RHCC would no longer have deacons. I say apparently because this rather significant detail wasleft out of the announcements made that night. I have discussed this situation with numerous fellow members who were in attendance at this particular Wed. night service. To the person, no one was aware our deacons were being replaced with "special servants." Even more appalling, approximately half of the current deacons had not been informed of this rather significant decision. Even some of the men that came forward that night did not realize that they were no longer deacons but were now officially "special servants." If "special servants" are replacements for the deacons then how can women qualify when a deacon is supposed to be the husband of one wife (1Tim.3:12)? How confusing!
1/11/02,Fri.-I called home from a layover in Honolulu and my wife told me that the word was out that RHCC would no longer have deacons. The apparent source of this information was from a female minister and someone who works in the church office. My immediate response was that this is nonsense and somebody's foolish gossip. I told my wife that I would call some elders that we know and advise them of the story that was going around so they could "nip this rumor in the bud."
I attempted to contact three elders-Jon Jones, James Kelso, and Bob Hamm. After numerous attempts, I was able to get Bob Hamm on the phone. I told him what I had heard and was absolutely astonished by his reply. He said that this was no rumor it was in fact true!! I almost ate the phone. How is this scripturally possible?? Deacons have been a part of the Lord's church for 2000 years! RHCC has had deacons for 45 years. How do you suddenly ignore the divinely inspired words of the Apostle Paul? This was simply unbelievable!Surely there has been a tragic mistake!
Mr. Hamm told me that the elders had been studying this matter for some time. Their study was apparently based on a paper written 8 yrs earlier by Eldre Echols. the conclusion of this study was that there were "deaconesses" in the first century church. I told Mr. Hamm that I had never seen the word "deaconess" in any scripture in any Bible that I had read. Mr. Hamm said that the term "their wives" or "women" in 1Tim 3 refers to "deaconesses." My reply was that I doubted that a man as articulate and capable as the Apostle Paul needed anyone to redefine the meaning of his divinely inspired words 2000 years after he wrote them. It is my belief that this verse is referring to the wives of deacons and/or the wives of elders. Mr. Hamm replied that this was a matter of opinion. I reminded him that my opinion was supported by 2000 yrs of Bible history as well as the teachings of RHCC for 40+ yrs. He had no reply.
My greater concern in this matter was fact that the elders were less than candid about bringing this new policy before the congregation. It would seem to me that if through their studies they had achieved some sort of major breakthrough in scripure interpretation that they would want to make certain that their flock(the congregation) heard about it loud and clear. Why not share what they had studied with their fellow Christians? Surely these church leaders would want the entire congregation to be entirely aware of their new revelation! Wouldn't they shout it from the rooftop??Any decisions they had made concerning eliminating the office of deacon would certainly be of interest to every member of RHCC, wouldn't it??
But instead the elders decided to make an announcement after a Wed. night service. And they didn't even bother to tell the congregation that we no longer had deacons!! The announcement simply introduced men and women as "special servants." Gee, I was under the impression that we were all servants. That's what Jesus was. First, the Son of God was a servant! I wonder what makes one servant more special than another?! Is the rest of the congregation non-special servants?? I don't think Jesus saw it this way.
I asked Mr. Hamm why the elders were reluctant to share their "good news" with the congregation. He said that they had announced it to the entire congregation on Wed. night.I reminded Mr. Hamm that it was impossible to get the entire congregation in the auditorium at one time. That is why we have 3 services on Sun. morn.The attendance on Wed night is approximately 1700. The attendance on Sun morn is over 3500. Why not have a Sun morn sermon about "special servants?" Shouldn't we get the word out so everyone will know? How about an announcement in the bulletin, or a mailout? Mr. Hamm said the elders decided to do it this way to avoid causing a major hassle with this matter. In other words, the elders made a purposeful decision to not be completely open and candid with the members of the congregation. At best their action is inconsiderate.To many their action appears to be openly devious and deceptive. If the elders are completly confident with their decision in the matter--why would they overtly or covertly attempt to conceal their decision from the congregation??
I asked Mr. Hamm why the elders felt compelled to make such a controversial decision. He said they had to do it to promote church growth. I reminded him that growth at RHCC was so good that we had to ge to 3 Sun services--and this growth was still while we had deacons!! He said they had to do this because other churches were doing it. (What a poor reason!) I pointed out that there were numerous churches in the DFW area that had significantly greater growth than RHCC but they had little to do with teaching the gospel.These charismatic organizations are involved in religious entertainment and are there to put on a good show.
No where in the scripture can I find that the elders are responsible for church growth. The elders are servants to the congregation and one of their first responsibilities is to make sure the "gospel" is taught exactly as it is written in the scriptures. The divinely inspired words of the authors of the New Testament should not be added to nor taken from (Rev.22:18-19).
Finally, I asked Mr. Hamm what was the selection process to determine who these "special servants" would be. In the past the congregation has nominated men to be deacons, then "tested" the nominees as the scripture outlines. Mr.Hamm said the elders had selected the "special servants." I asked who "tested" them.Mr. Hamm replied that the elders did. So, in fact, the elders decided to eliminate the office of deacon.They chose, tested, and anointed their new "special servants" with absolutely no input or consultation with the congregation. Is this scriptural??
Mr.Hamm ended the conversation by stating that the elders had made their decision, it was final and there would be no reconsidering! I suggested that perhaps the elders could have some open forum meetings with the congregation to explain what was going on. Mr.Hamm restated that their decision had been announced to everyone on Wed night. I tried to reemphasize that there was much confusion about what had occurred and the congregation neede to be informed. Mr.Hamm reminded me that they were the elders, they were all in agreement, and their decision was final i.e., there will be no open discussions with the congregation.
In summary my conversation with Mr.Hamm enlightened me to a problem even greater that the fact that RHCC would no longer have deacons.There is no doubt that the New Testament mentions deacons on several occasions.It is my belief that God instructs the church to have elders and deacons when qualified men are available to fill those positions. There is even less doubt that the elders' actions in this matter were deceitful and devious. I can't speak of their motivation; but their actions are a matter of record. The elders should go before the congregation, repent of their actions and request forgiveness of the entire congregational body at RHCC.
1/12/02,Sat. I returned home from my trip. I called a friend of mine who is in my Sunday School class and in our care group. He is a good and godly man with a keen knowledge of the scriptures. I asked if he had heard about the elders' decision to eliminate deacons at RHCC.He said he had and vehemently disagreed with it. He had talked with a couple of elders about it and was trying to set up a meeting with them. He asked if I would like to attend if such a meeting could be arranged. I said absolutely YES!
1/13/03,Sun-My wife and I attened early Sun School and the second service. No where at any time did I see nor hear any mention of the fact that RHCC would no longer have deacons. Not once was the new office of "special servant" mentioned. There was no hint nor clue to the fact that both men and women would now fill the position in the church that the Apostle Paul described in 1Tim 3. How could such an important and significant change go unheralded?? What is going on?? Why all the secrecy??
That night we attende our care group meeting as we normally do on the 2nd Sunday of each month. There were 28 people in attendance. During the request for prayers I mentioned that we should pray for our church and its leadership as go through this controversy of no longer having deacons. Other than one other couple, no one else at the meeting had any idea that the elders had in fact decided to make this change. Four other people had heard about it but dismissed it as nonsense because such a change was obviously not scriptural. When two of us assured the group that we had talked directly to different elders who assured us that the decision has been made and in fact was in effect, everyone was appalled!!How could this be? What about 1Tim 3?? What about Philippians? RHCC has always had deacons!! The C of C has always had deacons.There were deacons in the first century church!If "special servants" are replacements for deacons, how can a woman qualify. Can a woman be the husband of one wife? How confusing!!!
My friend mentioned that he was trying to set up a mtg with an elder or group of elders to get more information and guidance. He reiterated the need for prayer and study of the scripture. One of the other men led an eloquent prayer request for a special blessing on our church and its leadership in this matter.After the prayer and a timely Bible study, our leader assured the group he would attempt to keep everyone informed as to what was going on. Obviously there was much CONCERN and DISMAY with the care group.
1/14/02-Mon-My friend called and said he had a meeting set up with Jon Jones for Tues.He said Jon felt that we should go talk to Eldred Echols. He wanted to know what I thought about getting Eldred involved with this matter. I responded that I understood that Eldred was in failing health and confined to a wheelchair and I didn't really feel comfortable imposing on him. This was a decision made by the elders not Eldred Echols.Granted both Bob Hamm and Jon Jones had stated that the paper written by Eldred 8 yrs earlier was a factor in their decision to eliminate deacons. They both stated that Eldred was convinced there were "deaconesses" in the first century church.
I must state that I appreciate the fact that the elders listen to a man like Eldred Echols.At RHCC, when Eldre speaks peole listen!!! He is a man deserving of such respect!Having said that,I will also say that I have read other papers written by equally scholarly men. These men acknowledge that women were dutiful servants in the first century church.But no where do they find a scriptural basis for an office of "special servant" that replaces the office of deacon. As a matter of fact, I don't see that Eldred's writing came to this conclusion. Again, no where in my study of the Bible do I find the word deaconess in the scripture nor do I find the qualifications for a woman to serve in an office or official position of the church. It just isn't in God's plan.
I have the utmost respect for Eldred Echols. As a matter of fact, he taught the first Sunday school class we attended at RHCC. There is no doubt about his credentials. However, this decision was made by the elders and that is who I would go to to seek clarification and guidance in this matter. This was relayed to Jon Jones but Jon insisted that we involve Eldred in our discussion. He said we could meet at Eldred's house at 10:00AM Tues. Reluctantly, I agreed.

1/15/02-Tues.Jon Jones, my friend and I met at Eldred Echols home at 11:00 AM.We were invited in by his lovely wife and met with Eldred in his living room.He was in his wheet chair and appeared to be quite frail.Jon asked how he was feeling.He replied, O, about as good as can be expected." He asked why we were there.
Jon asked if we could impose on him to share some of his thoughts about "deaconesses" in the first century. Eldred reiterated what he had written 8 yrs earlier. He stated his studies had convinced him there were women in the first century church who served in special situations. He believed Phoebe to be a deaconess who was doing mission work with the Apostle Paul(I find no scriptural basis for this assumption).He allowed that the word "women" or "wives" as used in some translations could be referring to females who did special service on various occasions in the first century church. He talked briefly about widows and young ladies who had taken vows of celibacy that also served the early church and also worked with the Apostles.
Throughout this discussion, Eldred spoke with a low frail voice. At times, we had to ask him to repeat what he had said. I felt very uncomfortable imposing on this elderly gentleman. However, he did appear to be amiable to our inquiry. I particularly wanted his input on the conjunctive work "likewise" that was used twice by the Apostle Paul in 1Tim 3.
Three times, I asked Eldred if the word "likewise" as used in 1Tim 3:11 meant that the group of people the Apostle Paul was discussing before and after this word were of equal credentials. Three times Eldred emphatically and without hesitation said, "NO!" Certainly if "likewise" here meant that the subjects before and after were the same; then the word likewise in 1Tim 3:8 would have to mean the same thing. This would mean that deacon and elders are equal. This would also mean that women could serve as elders since "likewise" means they can serve as deacons. Surely if a woman can serve as an elder she can surely serve as a preacher. Is this where the elders are going? Is there any way this is scripturally possible? What's going on ? I'm confused!!
Our mtg with Eldred concluded after about an hour. I left wondering is what Eldred had said in his paper is in fact what the elders were doing. I also left feeling somewhat quilty about even being there. As I stated, this decision was made by the elders not Eldred Echols. I am still seeking clarification and understanding from the elders at RHCC.

1/16/02,Wed-Attended Wed night service. Rick delivered a lesson on the Profane fire of Nadab and Abihu(Lev.10)One of the points he made is that God expects reverence and obedience to His word. He stated, "God will not tolerate flippancy and irreverance in His presence." Doesn't this still apply today? Is the scripture not the inspired word of God?
Apparently, Rick's point was that these two young men had been disobedient and irreverent and God was quick and absolute in His disapproval. One message I got from this lesson is that God expects His word to be obeyed.
1/18/02,Fri-Mailed letter to the elders. Posted above. Never received a response.
1/20/02,Sun-My wife and I attended early Sunday school and second worship service. In Sun school class there was some discussion about deacons being replaced with "special servants," but mostly people were uninformed or unbelieving this had happened. After services Rick mad a short and unprofound announcment about a Wed night lesson on the word deacon. My wife and I and everyone I'd talked with were most anxious about what Rick would have to say about his. But still the major problem was a lack of communication. The majority of the congregation were still unaware that anything of such significance had transpired. Surely Rick's Wed night sermon would be an opportunity for everyone to pray and study together and to see what the scripture has to say in this matter. Unfortunately there had been no major announcement, mailout, bulletin exert, etc. to let the congregation know what was going on. Surely in a matter as significant as this everyone in the congregation should be involved. Why is the consideration in a matter of this magnitude not being given the utmost priority by the elders and ministers at RHCC? Is there something to hide? What's going on? Is there a concern that the congregation will be unable to understand? The elders stated they had studied this matter for over a year. Apparently, the congregation is only going to get one Wed night sermon of enlightenment. If this Wed night service is going to explain the reasons for changing 2000 yrs of church doctrine certainly every Christian would want to see how these changes are scripturally founded. Somehow, someway, someone needed to get the work out that someting major is happening in our congregation. With this in mind, my wife and I were inspired to mail out a flyer. The message of the flyer was simple---study your Bible, pray to God and come to church. Somehow the elders at RHCC decided that this message was divisive.
1/21/02,Mon-My wife, Barbara, and I spent Sun night and Mon, addressing and stamping 2000 flyers. We needed to get them in the mail by Mon to be sure everyone would receive them before Rick's Wed night sermon.Our intent was pure and simple--every member at RHCC needed to attend and hear an explanation as to how the elders had come to such a monumental decision.
1/23/02,Wed-Attended Rick's sermon on deacons/deaconesses. The tape is available through the church office. I will make only two comments. He contradicts himself about deaconesses in the first century church and he contradicts what Eldred Echols says concerning the word "likewise."
1/27/02,Sun-Bob Hamm calls about 1:00PM. He stated the elders had discussed the flyer my wife and I had sent out and determined it was divisive. Apparently this discussion occurred at the men's retreat the previous day. At no time did any one elder contact me personally to discuss their concerns about my actions. As a matter of fact, to this day, no individual elder has yet contacted me to discuss this matter. Instead they had a group mtg and apparently decided to condemn me having not heard one word from me personally to even verify what I had or had not done.Mr. Hamm's major concern was to ascertain the names of everyone involved so he could "deal with them" on an individual basis. Apparently Mr. Hamm was having some difficulty believing my wife and I were able to prepare and mail 2000 flyers in such a short time.Finally Mr.Hamm indicated he and two other elders wanted to meet with me. I said I would meet with them anywhere, anytime, but I insisted on bringing witnesses.He was reluctant. Obviously they wanted the mtg three against one. He said he would have to "check with the guys," and let me know. The mtg was finally set up for Jan. 31 at 4:))PM.
What occurred at the mtg is available in a previous posting.


Since then--
After the Wed night sermon on deacons (1/23/02), we have not attended RHCC again. My wife and I each wrote a letter to the elders asking them to remove our names from the rolls at RHCC (dated March 12,2002). We have not received any reponse to even inquire if we are attending church anywhere. My wife has yet to have any elder communicate with her during this entire ordeal. As you may recall the elders refused to allow her to attend the group mtg. with the elders. Are these men truly shepherding God's flock?