Credentials for the Credentialing Council
Luke Miller
Introduction
Sometimes, the way you do something matters more than you’d think. There are a host of ways to learn this lesson, but my wife and I learned it recently in our feeble attempts to set up a pergola.
It all started when we got the free government check in 2020. You remember that, right? One of the few bright spots in an era we all would prefer to forget. Some people used that check on stuff that made sense, like a new washing machine, paying down debt, or groceries for hungry mouths. My wife and I stood in our kitchen in glaring need of a flooring update, opened our envelope from Uncle Sam, and said, “What we need around here is a pergola.”
I was pretty proud of how it turned out. It looked nice from the road, added a lot to our back patio, and didn’t fall over, even though I never actually anchored it to the concrete (like the directions instructed). Fast forward a few years, and we are moving out of town to the country. We decided to bring our pergola with us (after all, we were allowed to, because it wasn’t affixed to any structures). First, we tried setting it up deep in the backyard on four blocks of concrete that I eyeballed as “level.” This went about as you’d expect, nearly ending the pergola and our marriage, so we decided we’d better move it onto the (truly) level concrete driveway. But once again, I didn’t actually anchor it to the concrete.
You know the rest of the story. It looked great for a while. We added patio lights to it, enjoyed a few campfires under it, and even received compliments on it from our friends. And then, one day, the big wind storm hit. I looked outside the next morning, and there was our precious pergola, toppled over, broken, and splintered beyond repair, a testament to the fact that the way I did it, did in fact matter.
In 1971, apologist-evangelist Francis Schaeffer preached a sermon to a group of youth workers with a title that should be a ministry mantra for all of us: “The Lord’s Work in the Lord’s Way.”
Because the world is hard, confronting it without God’s power is an overwhelming prospect. But tongues of fire are not to be had simply for the asking. The New Testament teaches that certain conditions must exist. In short, they come down to this: we must do the Lord’s work in the Lord’s way…The Lord’s work in the Lord’s way is the Lord’s work in the power of the Holy Spirit and not in the power of the flesh…If we put activity, even good activity, at the center rather than trusting God, then there may be power of the world, but we will lack the power of the Holy Spirit…Tongues of fire are not for us if we are so busy doing the clever thing that we never wait quietly to find out whether the ark of the Lord has gone ahead or stayed [1].
In this article, I’m going to attempt to answer a question that has to do with the way in which a key governing body of The Christian and Missionary Alliance functions: Should women be allowed to serve on the district Credentialing Council (CC)? Let me be clear on two things from the start.
First, the way in which the CC functions in regard to this particular question does not matter as much as many other clear biblical issues [2], especially since our denomination’s particular practice of ordination/consecration is not mandated by Scripture (although it is based on biblical precedent [3]). Therefore, those who differ on this issue should still be able to maintain great missional unity. Second, the way in which the CC functions in regard to this particular question does still matter a great deal, and we ought to seek to do it in the Lord’s way, informed by the Lord’s Word, as much as possible. Therefore, it deserves the careful attention of every Alliance worker.
My goal in this article is to assist anyone willing to read it in thinking through how to accomplish this aspect of the Lord’s work, as much as possible, in the Lord’s way, even if they do not ultimately agree with my own position. Because this question does not have a simple answer, this 1:9 article is longer than most, and I encourage you to hang with it to the end. We will consider the question in light of five perspectives: The Precedent, Polity, Pauline, Practical, and Personal.
The Precedent Perspective
Historically and recently, the CC has often been presented in certain Alliance leadership circles as the district-level elder board. To be fair, this is not in writing in the CMA Manual. Nevertheless, this narrative has been very present, and it has shaped the way Alliance workers view this authority structure. Right or wrong, this framework still looms large in the collective licensed-worker consciousness, and it needs to be kept in mind when considering this issue.
The Polity Perspective
With that precedent in mind, we should then ask if there is a reason that the “CC as District Elder Board” narrative gained momentum in the first place. A brief look at some of the 70 times it is specifically mentioned in the CMA Manual says, “Yes”:
[Those granted a Provisional Official Worker License] must continue to work toward fulfillment of the requirements for consecration/ordination as outlined in the Manual of the C&MA under the supervision of the district superintendent and the district Credentialing Council [4].
The Credentialing Council shall examine and recommend approval for the licensing of official workers…The Credentialing Council shall examine and consecrate and ordain qualified candidates for the Christian ministry [5].
Persons seeking ministry in the C&MA who have been previously licensed and/or consecrated and ordained by another recognized Christian denomination or by an independent or non-denominational church body…may apply to serve with the C&MA as follows…Secure approval of the Credentialing Councilthrough an assessment interview to determine suitability for their intended ministry role and their understanding and agreement with the doctrinal distinctives, history, and polity of the C&MA [6].
Following a preliminary interview with the district’s superintendent, and upon his recommendation, applicants for licensed ministry who have been divorced and remarried, or whose spouse has been divorced, may appeal to the district Credentialing Council for a review of conditions, to determine if they meet the guidelines adopted by the Board of Directors of the C&MA. If approved, the candidate may continue the licensing process through the district Credentialing Council [7].
Exceptions to these requirements [for licensing] may be made only upon approval of the district superintendent and the district Credentialing Council [8].
Applicants who are approved bythe CDO [Candidate Development Office] or Credentialing Council are eligible for placement in ministry with the C&MA. An appropriate official worker license will be issued only upon appointment to a place of ministry by the district superintendent [9].
All official worker licenses are subject to transfer, suspension, removal, and/or revocation. Neither the district superintendent nor the Credentialing Council are obligated to renew an official worker license (IV, E) if they believe that it is in the best interests of the ministry not to do so [10].
A candidate’s consecration and ordination shall be recommended by the local church elders to the district superintendent, who shall request the candidate’s ordination to the Credentialing Council. In certain instances, the district superintendent may recommend consecration and ordination [to the aforementioned CC] without local church recommendation [11].
The ecclesiastical authority will have the authority to suspend the public ministry of any licensed/certified/international worker who is the subject of a charge or disciplinary proceeding. For a district worker, this action will be reported immediately to the Credentialing Council and to the District Executive Committee [12].
When circumstances arise that would normally warrant the initiation or completion of the disciplinary process, but the C&MA no longer has direct authority over the individual, it is within the purview of the Credentialing Council of the consecrating and ordaining district to withdraw the individual’s consecration and ordination. The recommendation to withdraw consecration and ordination shall be presented to the Credentialing Council by the district superintendent…[13]
From these quotes alone, there are at least two significant polity-related considerations that should be noted.
First, under current Alliance polity, the CC fulfills a role very similar to that of an Alliance church elder board.Based on these descriptions alone, we see that the CC (in partnership with the District Superintendent [DS] and often the DEXCOM) holds a key portion of the responsibility to (1) examine consecration/ordination candidates (regarding their doctrine, ministry, and life, including something as specific and personal as marriage and divorce history), (2) oversee the educating and mentoring of consecration/ordination candidates (including helping set their training curriculum, as stated elsewhere in the Manual), (3) deny consecration/ordination candidates public ministry placement in an Alliance church or ministry, (4) approve consecration/ordination candidates for public ministry in an Alliance church or ministry, (5) consecrate and ordain candidates for Alliance ministry and (6) discipline Alliance workers (including suspension and revoking of consecration/ordination).
This sounds a lot like what elders in my local Alliance church are entrusted with, and I’m guessing yours too. Most Alliance church elder boards carry significant responsibility to (1) examine ministry leader candidates, (2) oversee the educating and mentoring of ministry leader candidates, (3) deny leadership candidates ministry roles, (4) approve leadership candidates for ministry roles, (5) officially install candidates in ministry positions, and (6) discipline ministry leaders in their roles.
Second, and closely related, under current Alliance polity, the CC carries a significant amount of elder-like authority over Alliance local churches.In fact, if the situation requires it, each of the six things listed above can be done with or without the approval of a local church’s members, deacons, or elders.If a team of local Alliance church elders recommends that an unlicensed person come on staff as a pastor, and the CC says “no” to that person receiving a Provisional License, that person cannot come on staff as a pastor so long as the church remains an Alliance church. If a DS believes someone should be consecrated/ordained and, for whatever reason, this person does not have the recommendation of local Alliance church elders, “the superintendent may recommend consecration and ordination [to the aforementioned CC] without local church recommendation” [14].
This is not at all to present the CC’s authority as sinister. Our CC’s have a healthy track record of seeking to work with local churches and not domineering over them, and the Manual clearly expects that cooperation with local churches is the normal and desired route. The authority the CC possesses is a good and protective authority that they possess for a reason, and believers willingly submit to this kind of authority when they join the Alliance. The point here is simply this: The CC does indeed have the ability to wield authorityover local churches if needed, and that kind of authority over local church members, deacons, and elders certainly seems to be elder-like authority.
The Pauline Perspective
“I see what you’re saying about the similarities between the CC and a local church elder board. But why should we be concerned about a woman possessing elder-like authority in the first place?” I’m glad you asked (and that you’re still reading this). For that, we turn to the often-debated 1 Timothy 2:12. Regardless of where you currently fall in that debate, I hope you can at least agree with me that (1) as Tim Keller points out, Paul is prohibiting women from doing something [15], and (2) that something has to do with teaching and exercising authority over men.
That being said, here is where I personally would go from there. Based on the facts that New Testament elders are (1) invested with unique local church leadership authority, and that (2) a key way that specific elder authority is exercised is through their church-sanctioned teaching, this verse would seem to be prohibiting women from fulfilling two elder-specific functions (or, as is also respectably argued for, two elder-specific functions that are in essence one function) in the corporate gathering: (1) teaching in an elder-like way, and (2) exercising authority in an elder-like way.
Notice, while Paul will get to the office of an elder in just a few verses (3:1-7), his focus at this point is not on the office of elder, but on the function of an elder (teaching and exercising authority). This is not because Paul separated office from function, but precisely because he didn’t: I think he wanted to prevent someone from functioning in an elder-like way who did not meet the qualifications for the office of elder, in this case the gender qualification. We can easily see the wisdom in this: A person being allowed to fulfill elder-specific functions without actually holding the office of elder will either (1) face personal frustration (they can do the work, but lack the authority of the office to make their work most effective), or (2) be the source of church-damaging activity (they are doing the work with significant impact, but as one biblically unqualified).
We do well to remember the pitfalls of separating office from function in the current CC debate. We also do well to remember this additional quote from the CMA Manual regarding Official Workers: “Women may engage in any kind of ministry except that which involves elder authority” [16]. If there is one New Testament phrase that seems to sum up the role of a CC member, it is this: “Teach and exercise authority.” And not just “exercise authority over men”, but exercise authority over many local churches, local deacon boards, and local elder boards. While we (including myself) may not call CC members NT elders, the role seems to be very comparable. Therefore, it seems unfitting that it should be fulfilled by someone that the Apostle Paul (and current Alliance Polity) would not allow to serve as a NT elder in a local church.
The Practical Perspective
That all being said, I would also like us to consider two practical implications that result from women serving on a district CC.
First, under current Alliance polity, women who serve on the CC would be allowed to serve in an elder-like role on an Alliance district level, but not as elders in their local Alliance church. For example, a woman could serve as a CC member in a meeting determining whether a certain Mr. Smith gets to be a pastor in an Alliance district, only to drive back home that night and be excluded from serving as an elder in a meeting determining whether a certain Mr. Smith gets to be a pastor in her own Alliance church. And yes, it is conceivable that this is the same Mr. Smith being considered in both meetings! Thus, she would be given elder-like authority to help determine Mr Smith’s fitness for ministry on a district level, but be denied elder authority to help determine his fitness on a local church level. This hardly seems fair or consistent.
Second, if women are allowed to serve on the CC, many current/potential Alliance workers and churches will be forced into significant conscience issues. Those who are convinced that the CC fulfills an elder-like role in the Alliance could be prevented by conscience from serving on or submitting to what they believe to be an elder-like board that includes non-elder-qualified members. To sin against conscience is a serious matter before the Lord (Rom 14:23). Whether or not we ultimately agree with those who reflect this particular conviction, we ought to be very cautious lest we force them into a position of a conflicted conscience. Especially in a matter of conscience where the Alliance would be moving away from them, not them from the Alliance. Moreover, we ought to be realistic about the potential ramifications of losing current and future CC members, future Alliance worker candidates, and even entire Alliance churches.
The Personal Perspective
This brings us, finally, to the personal perspective, which I will tee up with this question: In being prevented from serving on a district CC, are women (1) being denied kingdom influence and fruitfulness and (2) particularly being denied the opportunity to provide female-specific wisdom and insight regarding current and potential Alliance workers? I want to be fair to those who, at first glance, would answer “yes” to both questions, in saying that I can understand why they would do so. To them, this is probably yet another area where capable, godly, gifted women are being told “no” to a leadership position that carries much kingdom influence.
For those who do currently hold this perspective, I would appreciate the opportunity to present a reframing of the issue through the personal example of one of the most gifted leaders I know: My wife. In many ways, my wife is more of a natural leader, discipler, and discerner than I am, gifts she has clearly shown over the past several years in building up a women’s ministry and creating a women’s leadership team in our local church (all on volunteer time).
One thing I can never imagine saying to her in her current ministry role is this: “Because you have the gifts to be a great CC member, but are not allowed to serve on the CC, you are missing out on greater kingdom influence and fruitfulness in the Alliance, particularly when it comes to the ministry futures of current and potential Alliance workers.” Why not? Because to say this would be to belittle her current ministry, and to greatly underestimate the ministry impact she is already capable of having in the Alliance in and through her local church.
Think for a moment about all the ways a female church leader can impact a current or potential Alliance worker, particularly in the normal cradle-to-grave setting of the local church. They can teach them about Jesus when they are children. They can mentor them formally (e.g., 1-on-1 discipleship) or informally (e.g., being an example to and having impromptu conversations with them) when they are teenagers. They can point them out as a potential leadership candidate to other leaders as they grow into young adults, and they can give them opportunities to serve, make mistakes, and learn in the area they oversee. They can encourage them to go for it when they hear they want to pursue Alliance credentialing, or slow them down with an honest conversation when they see they are not ready. They can be there to affirm and celebrate with them at their consecration/ordination service, and they can provide helpful feedback to them as they begin their role as an Alliance worker. They can serve alongside them in that continued role as a wise church deacon. They can weigh in on critical decisions that will impact their ministry as a DEXCOM member. Much more could be said, but in short, they can help provide an Alliance worker with a lifetime of godly encouragement, accountability, and genuine partnership in the gospel.
What impact can a female leader have on current and potential Alliance workers when not serving on the CC? More than can be measured in this life. And perhaps part of why we are seeing such a push for this change in denominational leadership is because we, including myself, have often made too little of what these female leaders are doing in the first place. That being said, I am certainly not opposed to them having even more opportunity for impact in district matters, and maybe an alternative to capable women serving as CC members would be for them to serve on some form of advisory committee to the CC, to be brought in and consulted at each CC’s discretion.
Conclusion
“Let us not think that waiting on the Lord will mean getting less done. The truth is that by doing the Lord’s work in the Lord’s way we will accomplish more, not less…After all, who can do the most, you or the God of heaven and earth?” [17]
Regardless of whether you ultimately agree with me on this issue, I pray that, as you approach it, you will embrace Schaeffer’s perspective as your own. And if women end up serving on my district’s Credentialing Council, as they already do in some districts, I will pray that the God of heaven and earth uses them greatly in that role. But may we do our best to make this decision out of careful, sincere, biblically-shaped conviction regarding what we believe comes closest to the Lord’s way. Because the Lord’s way, after all, is how we will truly be productive in the Lord’s work.
Luke Miller - Westwood Alliance Church - Mansfield, Ohio
Notes
[1] Francis A. Schaeffer, No Little People (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2021), 73-74, 76, 82.
[2] For example, the deity of Christ, or even, in my opinion, the recently debated topic of whether a woman should be allowed to have the title of pastor. For a helpful article on this kind of “theological triage”, see “A Call for Theological Triage and Christian Maturity” by Albert Mohler: https://albertmohler.com/2005/07/12/a-call-for-theological-triage-and-christian-maturity/
[3] The Christian and Missionary Alliance, Manual of the Christian and Missionary Alliance, 2026 ed.(Reynoldsburg, OH: One Alliance Place), E4-1.
[4] The Christian and Missionary Alliance, E3-3, emphasis mine.
[5] Ibid., A4-7.
[6] Ibid., E3-7, emphasis mine.
[7] Ibid., E3-8, emphasis mine.
[8] Ibid., E3-6.
[9] Ibid., E3-7, emphasis mine.
[10] Ibid., E3-14, emphasis mine.
[11] Ibid., E4-2.
[12] Ibid., E7-8, emphasis mine.
[13] Ibid., E7-17, emphasis mine.
[14] Ibid., E4-2.
[15] The Gospel Coalition, “What Did Paul Mean by ‘I Do Not Permit a Woman to Teach’? | Don Carson and Tim Keller | TGC Q&A”, November 18, 2020, Video, https://youtu.be/zShK_3DxxKs?si=32kHd4rVXvAzmnzi.
[16] The Christian and Missionary Alliance, B1-2.
[17] Schaeffer, 84.