Your church is only as great as the people who believe in the One who gives us the choice to be saved by His grace through believing in Jesus Christ and His sacrifice for our pitiful lives. Beyond that, it is not our call to judge because we’ve been warned about judging. We were called to judge ourselves and rightly divide the word of truth.

Arguments come when the ‘pious’ declare a fault. 99% of their arguments come from a lack of understanding. Proverbs 4:7 will protect us all if we’ll walk in that wisdom.

The Holy Bible is God’s instructions for us to live OUR lives, personally, for him. If we’d stop trying to get everyone to do things OUR way and start doing them God’s way, this wouldn’t even be a topic on this site.

That is where the beauty of the grace and forgiveness of God is so wonderful.

Let’s also not forget the parts of the Bible that instruct us on being holy, being honest, or being forgiving. If the church, the pastor, and whoever else, is conducting itself according to Scripture-based principles then I believe God has equipped it properly to withstand criticisms.

Some critics are unbelievers who use every small negative to make an attack on God. We hope and pray that Jesus reaches them, as we are reminded to “turn the other cheek” and keep believing, praying, forgiving and doing God’s work.

Can we question whether or not it’s something a church should even consider? Absolutely! Frankly, I’d be very uncomfortable if my pastor leased (or bought) a private plane.

Also, I was using slanderous in the dictionary sense (ie purposefully attempting to defame Ed), not the legal. My apologizes if that was unclear.

I only bring the leasing/buying thing up because the report uses it along with the 2200 square footage discrepency as a way to cast Ed in a less than favorable light. In my mind, it calls the rest of the report into question.

Anyway…

I agree with you. It really does seem to be something that should have been handled in a business type meeting, and frankly, it could have been circumvented if they published their financials in an easy to find place.

How are they different? I think you’re stuck that the report seemed to indicate, I think, that Fellowship Church paid $8,000,000 outright for the plane. But if someone drives a Mercedes, leasing, making payments to own or an outright purchase, at the end of the day it’s expensive car to own or lease.

As for slander. The question the report raised about Ed’s character is was he hiding his lifestyle from his people. The reporter interviewed several people, one on camera. Ed’s character doesn’t hinge on a 2200 square foot difference but on a carefull scrutiny on ALL of the facts. Now the report didn’t do that in my opinion, but it didn’t rise to the level of slander in the legal definition of the word. Ed was asked for an interview and he declined. The intention was not to slander him

“Do you think it’s appropriate to address the questions in a church service? Or should it be done through other means?”

IMHO, it should be done through other means, it’s church business, so it should be handled as business. Actually by handling it the way they did they, addressing issues in a church-wide setting, not scheduled for businees, they seem to be confirming the major point of the report, that the people of the church are unaware of things. It all could have been handled by stating, “Here is a copy of our annual business reports for the past 10 years”, “if you have any questions let me know”

However, I can’t say about his salary package, as you mentioned, he hasn’t released it.

Anyway, back to the question at hand: I agree with you, honesty is the best policy. Do you think it’s appropriate to address the questions in a church service? Or should it be done through other means?

But to answer your question the best way to respond to critics is to tell the truth, that never fails.