Your ad hominem accusation is premature. We can take up that discussion on the Biblical Governance page, if you want.

I agree that boards in management mode are in role conflict, and that this world accountability is essential.

In fact, many religious organizations utilize a Policy Governance model with great effect, most notably and successfully, the Unitarian Universalist movement, various synagogues, etc.
You rightly declare that “Proper diagnosis is essential for proper treatment” but your diagnosis of the problems of Boards of Directors seems misplaced.

The problem is not simply rubberstamping or even micromanaging. The real problem is that when boards are in a management role, making decisions about *how* to reach an organizational objective, they are in a role conflict. They have the authority to make decisions but there is no one whose sole responsibility is to look out for the interests of the “moral owners.” Claiming that Policy Governance is inappropriate because it is “secular” is at least an ad hominem as well as a misunderstanding of the philosophical/religious foundation. It is like arguing that computers are not appropriate for churches because they are secular.

Policy Governance recognizes that without some external entity to provide oversight, people will tend to act in their own best interests rather than in the best interests of the people they serve. As it says in Genesis 6:5, 8:15, יֵצֶר לֵב הָאָדָם רַע (The creative nature of human beings is evil from his youth). Everyone needs someone watching over them, someone who can hold them accountable, immediately, not after death.

Policy Governance creates that independent body to serve in place of the moral owners of the organization. For religious organizations who view God as being THE ultimate moral owner, the Board tries its best to understand and protect God’s interests and desires.

Barry Diamond
Governance Consultant

I haven’t gotten this book from the library yet. It sure sounds interesting. Sure hope and pray for a good result for Adam today. Our SS Class sort of bombed yesterday. Not sure why yet. Possible because FBC has started a class on Sunday afternoon for college students and they were confused about which class they were supposed to attend. PEW

The model for Governmental health care is Medicare and Medicaid, which are extensions of Social Security — which means that the whole banana is a Ponzi scheme.

The only way that a Ponzi scheme can work is for new money to come in to pay the obligations. As long as there is new money to fund the obligations, it will continue.

If health care is mandated there will be tons of new money coming in to the Ponzi scheme to keep it afloat. This kind of reform is not change, but is really just more of the same old scheme.

I have read Political Polytheism and found it compelling. It seems clear to me that fussing with politics or Constitutional issues will not effective for Christ unless and until the churches begin to get it mostly right. The church is the foundation upon which the civil government rests. Thus, the church is the more critical issue.

Good article. I enjoyed it. Have you read Gary North’s work in Political Polytheism? Or his e-book, Conspiracy in Philadelphia?

The latter is an expansion and reworking of part 3 from the former. Both attempt to show that the Constitutional Convention was a departure from Christianity and a violation of the governmental covenant before God, rather than a renewal of that covenant.

I have not read them myself, but I understand them to be quite good. They are in my “to read” stack!

The Founders thought that basic Christian values were part of the American genetic code, if you will — that they would always dominate socially. So, they created a government for such people — and it works very well for such people.

But over time, our common Christian values have been drained away — very intentionally! And we are now at the point in our history where we are discovering that our system of government does not work for a people who are not fundamentally Christian.

We need to be careful about following one’s own conscience — apart from the light of Christ — because it is a recipe for disaster. “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9). Conscience is developed by the Holy Spirit in the light of Christ through Scripture. So, within these strictures, yes, follow your conscience.

It is not that religion should be kept out of politics, but that church and state (church government and civil government) have different jurisdictions. And when they merge we get either religious totalitarianism or secular totalitarianism. Both are disastrous. The basic fault lines of history over 2,000 years shows that this has been a major problem.

The Founders were trying to solve that problem by balancing government between church and state, but also between the executive, legislative and judicial branches. They knew that sinful people would abuse power, so they rightly thought that no one person nor any branch of government should dominate the others. Checks and balances were the key.

And it worked well as long as Christians played a major role in each area of balance. Today, Christians play less and less a role, and are forbidden to name or practice their faith in the process.

Are we saying the same thing?