This question is from irm lover received on 23 August 2008 at 12:23 PM.
im really bothered on how the system works in our sect, or whatever you may want it to be called. pastors were always driven away. also we the congregation suffers all its consequences. as the pastors were moved, congregation tends to lose its pastor, new relationship were built, and us, friends were moved away from us..though we may still stay friends, still there are etiquetes stuff that we need to consider. our old pastor has their new flocks, and its very offending for our new pastor to keep on keeping in touch with the previous ones… get what i mean???
besides, as far as i know.. there pastors with lots of problems in their congregation, where the congregation themselves request for the removal of their pastors but it seems it was not granted. ion the other hand other “small” pastors tends to suffer the fact that someday, anytime they will be transfered. and may i ask what disciplinary actions were given to those rebellious pastors called to another church but still insisting their decisions that they will stay in their churches? i mean.. where’s the fairness in that????i really knew lot’s of things going on in this church.. and i really need even short yet satisfying answers as soon as possible.
Thank you for your honest and sincere query. I symphatize with you. You must be one who lost a good and well-loved pastor/deaconess because of our system of assigning church workers. — Please understand that this system of transferring church workers from one congregation to another is a century-old system and was part of our church culture. This system is called “Episcopalian.”
There are three systems existing today in Christian churches that has to do with the manner by which workers (pastors and deaconesses) are being transferred around churches. The first one is what we use. The second one is being observed by most Baptist churches. In this system, it is the church board or the congregation (or both) who has the authority to “call” or “dismiss” their worker. The third one is the founder-pastor pastoring for life. Good examples of this are JIL (Jesus Is Lord) Church by Bishop Eddie Villanueva and Day by Day Ministries by Pastor Ed Lapiz.
To correct some of the problems you raised, for some years now I provided the church board and the pastor/deaconesses evaluation sheets separately. The goal is for the church board to evaluate their workers and submit their evaluations to me. The same is true with the worker; he/she has to state in the evaluation sheet why he/she wants to stay or leave. — This mechanism is still in its infancy stage and has to undergo several changes yet. — As of today, the church as a whole still embraces the tenet: “Ang idestino sa atin ay siyang kalooban ng Diyos” (The worker assigned to us is the will of God.)
To further explain the problems that you observed, please understand the fact that all workers differ in their ability, maturity, personality, temperament, intelligence quotient, emotional quotient, physical appearance, etc. This is also true with regards to the congregations. There are city churches, rural churches, poor churches, wealthy churches. — Divine wisdom is needed to be able to find the work fitted to a particular congregation. — Again, please understand that in most cases, the percentage of fitness of a worker vis-a-vis a congregation is only 70 percent. — There are workers (pastors/deaconesses) who are well liked by the congregations, and it is true also that there are workers (pastors/deaconesses) who are not delivering well in their ministry. — In this case, the chairman of the denomination cannot dismiss them in the ministry, instead he is duty-bound to give them respective church assignments. Now, in case a “good” pastor/deaconess is replaced by a mediocre one, then the church suffers. — On the other hand, if a “good” pastor/deaconess is transferred to a congregation where the membership is suffering from the ministry of the “unfit” — then the congregation rejoices.
Meanwhile, with the second system of transferring workers where the congregation or the church board decides the fate of the worker whom they will “call” or “dismiss” — the mortality of workers are great. Among them are those genuinely called by God to the ministry, many of whom are seminary trained, and yet the system will cause them to leave the ministry and seek employment elsewhere to feed their family.
To my understanding, our present system is more friendly and caring for the workers. Inherent in the system is a built-in assurance that all workers will have a congregation to minister unto. Unless we are able to find a better and more biblical way of conducting church assignments of workers, our only recourse is to strengthen what the evaluation system I have introduced as mentioned above, which we may call the workers-congregations feedback mechanism. It is not abrogating the old system but just introducing a mechanism of correction.
However, on a deeper dimension, the ecclesiological “because of” and “inspite of” Christian growth is at play in the present problem that the IRM church is undergoing. — A greater number of believers, and their growth is escalating, is having the “because of” mentality on Christian growth. Simply stated — their Christian growth is being enhanced “because of” the ministry of the worker of their chocie. On the other hand, the concept of the believers in the past with regards to growth towards Christian maturity is the “inspite of” principle. Again, simply stated — they entrust their Christian growth on a more stable means. That “inspite of” the changes of pastors/deaconesses in their congregation, they steadily grow. They are guided by the concept that “ang itinawag ang kalooban ng Diyos sa amin” (the worker assigned is God’s will for us).
With regards to your other questions about rebellious pastors or those with unethical practices, let the aggrieved pastor or congregation lodge a complaint to me, and I will refer it to the National Screening and Discipline Committee.
Thank you for your questions. How I wish that I answered even some of these. God bless you.
Yours in behalf of the million of crying Filipinos,
BISHOP REYNALDO DOMINGO
Chairman, IRM Church
NOTE: Bishop Rey encourages open lines of communication with other IRM members or workers. You may click here for instructions on how to send a completely anonymous question or comment for him to address in this website. Thanks!
Posted by Admin 
M Minuyan Norzagaray. The forum was prepared in order to provide all IRM workers in Bulacan with a venue to discuss concerns about IRM with Bishop Rey Domingo.
After a hearty lunch, a special choir composed of Rev. Jerry dela Cruz, Pred. Zosimo Cruz, Rev. Jun Bautista, Rev. Jeffrey Fajardo, Deac. Cherry dela Cruz, Deac. Fe Bautista and Deac. Lanie Fajardo performed two hymns – “Standing on the Promises” and “How Great Thou Art.” 
he afternoon activities as he needed to settle things concerning the accident. Before he left, Rev. Rufino dela Cruz led all the workers in praying for him and his family. The event ended with fellowship and games for all workers of IRM churches in Bulacan.
