I have read through all of the epistles and the Gospels again and again (just recently again). What I can’t find is decision making within the body as it relates to “business” and other such decisions made by “churches”. A few times we see the disciples/church nominating leaders (Acts 1, Acts 6) assisting in some pretty big decisions (Acts 14 and Acts 15) and we see all of the epistles except for Philemon, Titus and Timothy being addressed to the specific church in the city and contrary to popular belief Titus or Timothy were not “pastors” and the letters written to them were not “pastoral epistles” regardless of how often that terminology is used.
So that leads to these questions:
1. Who should make decisions in the church?
2. Why do churches feel they need to be “elder” ruled? Where is that exactly besides Roman Catholic residue?
3. Does the way churches appoint leaders and make decisions testify to our confidence in the Holy Spirit as it relates to the “priesthood of all believers”?
4. Are laymen too dumb to contribute too ALL decision making in the church? I know leaders will say “I would never say it” but I don’t have to tell my wife I hate her guts all I need to do is knock her over the head for 10 years.
5. What would the church look like if we were to go to a pure consensus?
6. Is this illogical? And if so is this because maybe our churches are too big or the leaders aren’t really doing there roll in the maturation process (Ephesians 4)?
Thanks for your interaction?
Lionel,
You point out that the NT letters were written to the churches. It continues to amaze me that when the churches in Galatia are in a life-or-death struggle with heresy, Paul neither blames the elders (who had been appointed earlier), nor calls on them to straighten things out. The stakes culd not be higher, but Paul puts this on the “brothers”.
Lionel-
Pretty important questions.
I myself have tried to drop the terms “clergy” and “layman” from my vocabulary as I do not want to continue to encourage that false doctrine.
Although the terms are in God’s Word, the way they are used today is not an accurate portrayal of what the terms mean in scripture.
John Zens does an excellent job of clarifying what these synonymous terms mean:
Unbiblical Clergy/ Laity distinctions
“The New Testament teaches leadership among the people of God, but not in a way that leads to the “clergy/laity” conclusion. The root words from which we derive the English words “clergy” and “laity” are found in the New Testament, but our usage of “clergy/laity” is far removed from the New Testament concepts.”
“The English word “clergy” is related to the Greek word “cleros”. It means “a lot or inheritance”. For example, in 1 Peter 5:3 the elders are exhorted not to lord it over “the lots” (Greek: ton cleron), which refers to the entire flock of God’s people. Nowhere in the New Testament is any form of “cleros” used to designate a separate class of “ordained” leaders. Instead, it refers to the “inheritance” (Greek: clerou) laid up for all the saints (Col. 1:12; Acts 26:18). The saints as a collective whole are conceived of in the New Testament as God’s “inheritance”. We have utterly perverted and turned upside-down the New Testament teaching by using the term “clergy: to refer to a special elite group of church leaders.”
“This English word is related to the Greek word “laos”, which means “people”. The Greek word “laikos”, which means “laity”, is not found in the New Testament. All in the body of Christ, whether “saints, bishops, or deacons” (Phil. 1:1), are the “people” (”laos”) of God. “People of God” is a title of honor bestowed upon all who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 6:16; 1 Pet. 2:9-10).”
“It was not until the third century that “clergy” was employed to designate a limited number of persons who functioned in the Christian assemblies. One of the worst outcomes of the “clergy” doctrine was that it communicated the notion that without the “clergy” present there simply was no church. Baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and many other church practices, could not happen unless a “clergyman” was present.”
“Because the New Testament knows nothing of “clergy” the fact that a separate caste of the “ordained” permeated our vocabulary and practice illustrates rather forcefully that we do not yet take the New Testament very seriously. The “clergy” practice is a heresy that must be renounced. It strikes at the heart of the priesthood of all believers that Jesus purchased on the cross. It contradicts the shape Jesus’ kingdom was to take when He said, “You are all brethren”. Since it is a tradition of men, it nullifies the Word of God (Mark 7:13).” (JZ)
Where do we go from here?
I agree that there is no “business” pattern set forth by scripture. However, the model of Shepherd/Leader extends through the Old Testament (Abraham, Moses, David) to the New Testament (Jesus, Peter) which is consistent with God’s order.
That is not to say that the laymen are simply silent followers. Paul said follow me as I follow Christ, one must obviously know what it looks like to follow Christ, to determine if Paul is indeed following Christ. That obviously is a pattern set forth by scripture that is not followed today, because many don’t know what following Christ looks like and that’s partially the laymen’s fault.
To muzzle the laymen is to say that God only speaks through me. I believe that the input of EACH laymen is vitally important to the growth and maturation of any fellowship. Although as husband and father I’ve been charged with teaching and leading my family, it is not to the neglect of their input or what they see and feel. I tell my kids, I don’t have a problem with your getting upset about what is allowed or not allowed to go on in our home. They are capable of presenting their perspective, but ultimately for the sake of order and guidance, decisions must be made.
I don’t see it as being any different in a fellowship. There maybe varying points of perspective about a myriad of issues presented by laymen. But for the sake of order and guidance the Shepherd/Leader must make decisions. Decisions based through prayer and the information presented or even not presented.
Of course if your fellowship is… 10,000, no 5,000, wait maybe 1,000… okay, 500 that presents a different challenge.
Truthfully… the “Culture of the Church” is not designed for the maturing of laymen. It is designed to feed and program laymen to chase the dangling carrot. Designed simply to keep ministries afloat. That’s why the business model makes sense to the “Culture of the Church” and to have an option for laymen input may not make good business sense. Unless it’s “controlled” input designed to generate a preconceived result of course.
The problem is, we have too many options as Believers in America, and everyone believes they have… the Truth!
-Selah
I Ain’t Nobody!
Hey DJ,
You said:
“But for the sake of order and guidance the Shepherd/Leader must make decisions. Decisions based through prayer and the information presented or even not presented.”
Let me ask a question (which I actually asked in the post). What if our churches were kept to the size of say 50 to 75. Do you believe this problem would persist?
Secondly you said this:
“However, the model of Shepherd/Leader extends through the Old Testament (Abraham, Moses, David) to the New Testament (Jesus, Peter) which is consistent with God’s order.”
Would it be fair to say that NONE AT ALL of the Old Testament Israel functions as the pattern for the church? In other words would I be safe to say that the New Covenant is so radically different from the Old that no way Israel operated in worship can really be instituted in the church. Here are my reasons for saying this
1. The Old Covenant was maintained by priest from a certain tribe. The new makes us all priest.
2. The Old Covenant had a place to worship and offer sacrifices. The place of worship under the New is actually a people and the ultimate sacrfice has been made but we are to present “ourselves” as living sacrficies which is our worship (Romans 12)
3. The Old Covenant said “stay away” the new says come and worship ” (Heb 12:18)
So the two are so radically differnet that I don’t think there should be any attempt on our behalf to get pointers on how the church should function.
Thaks for the comment Hutch! Also I should have included Zen thanks for opening that door. Can you provide a link to that?
Lionel-
You can visit my blog
http://www.ncthouston.blogspot.com
for an article that quotes Jon Zens and others and includes my two cents worth regarding “abusive church leadership”-we know that is an oxymoron! Grin
Jon Zens website is:
http://www.searchingtogether.org/
Then click on “articles” for a variety of papers on this subject.
NOTE: I do not agree with all of Jon Zens positions but he has some very thought provoking and well researched articles on how the local church functioned prior to the third century.
He and others have also bravely struck out and started local churches that more closely resemble what we see in scripture.
If your not careful, the “powers that be” will start to try to discredit you by labeling you with their catch all phrase “emergent”. Grin.
God Bless you brother.
Keep up the good work.
In Christ,
Mike Hutchison
1. Who should make decisions in the church?
Scripture indicates that the congregation makes decisions in the church including who they recognize as lead servants/older spiritually mature brothers/elders.
2. Why do churches feel they need to be “elder” ruled? Where is that exactly besides Roman Catholic residue?
The Reformation was a vital time in church history and was a very good start, much still needs to be reformed.
3. Does the way churches appoint leaders and make decisions testify to our confidence in the Holy Spirit as it relates to the “priesthood of all believers”?
Yes.
4. Are laymen too dumb to contribute too ALL decision making in the church? I know leaders will say “I would never say it” but I don’t have to tell my wife I hate her guts all I need to do is knock her over the head for 10 years.
Laymen and clergy are synonymous terms and both mean: The people of God.
The idea of a seperate caste of men who rule over the church is absent from the scriptures that relate to the structure of the new testament/new covenant church.
5. What would the church look like if we were to go to a pure consensus?
I like this quote:
Ignorance of the structure of the church as presented in the NT scriptures and error regarding who is to actually do the work of ministry
“The Congregation organizes itself (I Cor. 11:33-34; 14:39-40; 16:2-3) Disciplines fallen members (I Cor. 5:3-5; 6:1-6) Warns the unruly (I Thess. 5:14) Comforts the feeble (I Thess. 5:14) Supports the weak (I Thess. 5:21) Abounds in the work of the Lord (I Cor. 15:58) Admonishes one another (Rom. 15:14) Teaches one another (Col. 3:16) Prophesies to one another (I Cor. 14:31) Serves one another (Gal. 5:13) Bears one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:2) Cares for one another (I Cor. 12:25) Washes one another’s feet (John 13:14) Loves one another (John 13:34-35; 15:12,17; Rom. 13:8; 1 Thess. 4:9) Is to be devoted to one another (Rom. 12: 10) Shows kindness and compassion to one another (Eph. 4:32) Edifies one another (Rom. 14:19; 1 Thess. 5: 1 lb) Bears with one another (Eph. 4:2; Col. 3:13) Exhorts one another (Heb. 3:13; 10:25) Incites one another to love and good works (Heb. 10:24) Encourages one another (1 Thess. 5: 11 a) Prays for one another (Jas. 5:16) Offers hospitality to one another (1 Pet. 4:9) Fellowships with one another (I John 1:7) Confesses sins to one another (Jas. 5:16)”
“With dramatic clarity, all of these “one another” commands incarnate the decisive reality that every member of the believing community is to bear the responsibility of pastoral care in the assembly. Leadership, therefore, is a corporate rather than a solo affair. The idea that elders exclusively direct and rule the affairs of the church, make decisions for the assembly, deal with all of its problems, and supply all of its teaching is alien to Paul’s thinking and bereft of Biblical support. Stated simply, the New Testament knows nothing of an elder-ruled, elder-governed, or elder-directed church. And it knows even less about a pastor-led church.”
6. Is this illogical? And if so is this because maybe our churches are too big or the leaders aren’t really doing there roll in the maturation process (Ephesians 4)?
No, its scriptural and God’s best for the church.
What’s good Lionel!
You asked:
Let me ask a question (which I actually asked in the post). What if our churches were kept to the size of say 50 to 75. Do you believe this problem would persist?
Yes, people are contentious! Churches of this size should be more desirable. I’m not defending a leadership model that elevates man to a singular leadership position where that man stands on the mantra of “his vision” for the people. I think Hutch has rightfully said that our fellowships should be a corporate affair! But I believe that there should be a point man, not one that is elevated to a position above the people, but is rather in position with them!
You asked:
Would it be fair to say that NONE AT ALL of the Old Testament Israel functions as the pattern for the church? In other words would I be safe to say that the New Covenant is so radically different from the Old that no way Israel operated in worship can really be instituted in the church.
I don’t believe the model is covenant dependent, it’s merely an expression of God. Just as parents express God’s love to their children. They are to be “leaders” in the household teaching, training and raising their children not as co-equals, but as the children they currently are. Which within the family unit should be a corporate affair. Children can be unruly, rebellious and challenging.
If we extend that to a fellowship of 50 - 75 individuals at various levels of spiritual maturity, why would we believe that some sort of corporate leadership structure would then be un-necessary?
Christ successfully lived this model and leaders aren’t to be elevated to rosy “caste” positions. Jesus, Peter and Paul all resisted such elevations. Leaders are to serve! We humble ourselves and serve with the people, for the people do not… I repeat, DO NOT belong to us, they are Christs… His purchase!
I Ain’t Nobody!
Brothers I have a few questions for clarity sake:
1. Are you guys saying that “input” and “leadership” are the same thing?
2. If there were no leaders in the church then isn’t Hebrews 13:17 null and void? And doesn’t that also put Hebrews back into the “questionable” bin as far as it’s inclusion in the canon of scripture?
Now let me address Lionel’s questions with the understanding that I have so far:
1. Scripture should make the decisions. Whatever the situation may be, it should be openly discussed and scripture should be the final rule.
2a. Acts 14:23 “When they had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.
b. Acts 20:17 “From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church.
c. I Timothy 5:17 “The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.”
d. Titus 1:5 “For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you,
e. James 5:14 “Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord”
Now I don’t think the Roman Catholic church started in Paul’s day as they suggest. (actually they go all the way back to Peter but that’s another story) These “elders” are spoken of as a distinct group and have certain functions in the church that Paul doesn’t seem to either include as normative for all members nor does he seem to think that it infringes upon the priesthood of all believers.
3. The way we function in the local church is definitely a testimony, though I don’t think we realize what that testimony is suggesting. It suggest a LACK of confidence in the Holy Spirit to direct us in choosing. It also betrays our knowledge that we’ve allowed the neglect of church discipline which has led to spiritual immaturity and lack of discernment amongst those on whom it should have been practiced. Therefore we lack confidence that the Holy Spirit is working in one another at all.
4. If “laymen” are too dumb for anything it is due to bad teaching, lack of fellowship, lack of “spurring one another”, lack of church discipline and ultimately a lack of sacrificial love towards one another. (of course this is not an exhaustive list of things lacking)
5. The millenial reign of Christ, LOL!!! We would look like what Christ meant when he said “By this shall all men know that you are my disciples. When you have love one to another.”
6. It is not illogical to believe that this can be achieved by the Holy Spirit working through men and women who love Christ enough and His bride enough to stay in and to start church fellowships to do their part in bringing it about. Our churches may be too big but not as big as our egos and self involvement.
Lionel-
If this is too long, feel free to delete it. I am not trying to hijack your post.
Lawrence-
It is hard by just answering the questions posed by Lionel to give you a full and complete view of what I believe God’s Word says about church structure and leadership/authority.
Although I are convinced the bible does not teach elder rule, it does in fact teach elder leadership. Believe me there is a big difference. The older more mature brothers give leadership and direction as fellow members of the congregation. The big issue is what does “biblical leadership” look like and what dose the word “submit” mean in the original languages and as understood by the original writers and recipients of the scriptures?
Here are some quotes from men whom I have greta respect for as they address the issue. I agree with these ststement 100%.
“There is room for only ONE true authority in the local church, and that authority is the Lord Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit. Christ Himself is the absolute Head (authority) of every local church. If any other authority besides Christ’s comes into the church, then the church is ruined as long as it gives ground to other “authorities.” This is a basic and vital point (Col. 1:18; Eph.4:5,15).”
“Our Head has given us the authoritative Word - the Scriptures - in particular, the N.T. documents. The Scriptures are our sole source of exercised authority. Those who exercise Christ’s authority in the assembly truly do so only as they hold forth the Word of God.
The Lord Jesus must be Head in a living, practical way (Col. 2:9-10).”
“All believers are responsible directly to the Head (Jesus), and also are responsible to one another (Rom.14:4; Rev.l:5-6; 1 Tim. 2:5; Eph.5:21).”
“All believers are priests and all are gifted. Therefore all must take their place in the assembly in a living way. All can pray, worship, witness and minister in and to the church according to their gift and experience in the Lord (Rev.l:5-6; Eph.4:7,16; Rom.12:3-8; 1 Cor.12-14)
There are certain brethren who not only are gifted but also themselves gifts to the church. These have the ministry of the Word (Eph.4:11-12).”
“There is no ”office” as such in the local assembly. Most people have the idea that “office” is an official position. Most believe that if a person is “officially” placed in the position of elder, pastor, bishop, etc., then because of that “office” they have “authority.” It is in this sense that there is no such thing as an “office” in the N.T. But there are functions (Rom.12:4; cf. Vine’s N.T. Dictionary). A function is the action, duty or work that a particular person should perform. Example: an elder should oversee. ”
“We have constructed a lot of notions about “office” that rest on human tradition, and are not found in the N.T. The King James has “office” in Rom. 11:13, 12:4 and 1 Tim.3:l. In Rom. 11:13 the Greek word is diakonia or “service.” In Rom.12:4 the Greek word is praxis, or “action/function.” In 1 Tim. 3:l, “office” is not in the text. The verse simply says, “if any one aspires to oversight’ (episkope).”
“Christ ’s authority is manifested in the assembly through the gifts and ministries of the Holy Spirit. Since the Spirit is the only true authority of Christ in the church (cf. 2 Cor.3:17-18), then we need to know how He brings forth His authority. One way He does this is through His gifts and ministries.”
“The ministry God appoints is authority …. The fact that someone has the supply constitutes his authority …. Whoever is gifted has a ministry and whoever has a ministry has authority”.
In one sense the entire body shares in authority (Eph.5:21; 1 Pet. 5:5). This means that we recognize one another’s gifts, knowledge, or experience in the Lord and we submit to the Holy Spirit in each member. Even sisters share in the authority according to their gifts and experience in the Lord. However, they are not to exercise authority in the church as overseers.”
“Christ’s authority is manifested in the assembly through the more mature brothers (elders). The Holy Spirit (the authority) manifests His authority by speaking to the church through the church. The older (spiritually) a brother is, the more experienced he should be in hearing God’s voice and knowing His voice. An older brother should have more discernment (Heb. 5:14). This is the bottom line of eldership.”
“Elders are simply the more mature brothers who function as overseers. Elder, Overseer, (Bishop) and Pastor all refer to the same persons. “Elder” refers to their spiritual maturity, and overseer/pastor refers to their functions. The church should submit to its elders in view of their experience and gifts which make them accountable (Heb.13:17; 1 Pet.5:5). Submission will come into proper focus if they are properly recognized.”
“How are elders appointed? By the Holy Spirit (Acts 20:28). How does the Holy Spirit appoint elders? He does it by manifesting the elders’ maturity, gifts and character. There is no place in the New Testament where churches choose their own elders. Rather than appointing elders, the churches recognized elders. The objective criteria that is used in recognizing elders can be found in 1 Tim.3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9.”
“If elders emerge in a church by political maneuvering, an opportunistic coup, or by being forced upon a people, then nothing can go right. But if people know the men who labor among them, see their manner of life, and then recognize such men - then submission by the people is put into proper perspective.”
“There is no such thing as an “office of the pastor” in the local church. In fact, men do not become elders by being placed in the position of overseers/pastors. Rather, men function as overseers because they are elders, gifted as shepherds (pastors). This is a critical point. If we do not see this we have opened the door wide for authority in the church other than Christ’s through the Holy Spirit.”
“The N.T. knows nothing of a church with “a” pastor. The N.T. always speaks of oversight in terms of plurality, not singularity. We must give heed to this.”
“The idea of a sustained period of time in a local church with one pastor is unknown in the N.T. Most churches in our day have a man in the church they call “the pastor.” But this is a long-standing tradition, not a Biblical teaching. The practice of a one-man elder, pastor or bishop only facilitates the danger of imposing on Christ’s headship.”
“Those who refer to the single “angel” of the seven churches in Revelation as a basis for a one-man pastor system are basing an important, vital doctrine on a flimsy analogy (we know that the Ephesian church had a plurality of elders, not one ”angel”/pastor; Acts 20:17). Handling texts in this way only shows the lengths to which men must go to sustain a doctrine which has no N.T. support.”
“Christ is the one Man who has authority over all the churches, and He gives pastors to equip the flock.”
“It may often be the case that one brother will have more spiritual influence in the assembly. Peter often “spoke” for the twelve, but even he designates himself as a “fellow-elder” (1 Pet.5:l). There is no doctrine in the N.T. of “the pastor,” or “chief elder.” If one brother happens to have more spiritual influence because of his gifts and experience, then let it be so. Plurality does not mean that all elders are to be equal in their spiritual influence. This is absurd and impossible. The one with more spiritual influence should be the servant of all.”
“The rule for all church meetings and affairs is the Headship of Christ, the priesthood of all believers, and each member contributing to the body’s edification.” (JZ)
“At the core of distorted authoritarian teachings is an unbiblical view of leadership. The Scriptures are clear that we are to submit to authority in such passages as Romans 13:1; Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13 and Ephesians 5. But what does that mean?”
“The biblical patriarchs—Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—had been called out of paganism, and so they continued practicing certain pagan customs. God didn’t change everything all at once. Their view of authority was a rather harsh top down structure. The one at the top was the boss, and all the rest were underlings—basically his servants.”
“The disciples still harbored a similar view, and on several occasions were arguing over who would end up at the top of the authority structure. Who would sit at the right or left hand of Jesus? Jesus set them straight, however, and turned the authority structure on its head: Calling them to Himself, Jesus said to them, “You know that those who are recognized as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them; and their great men exercise authority over them. But it is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant; and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be slave of all. (Mark 10:42-44, NASB)”
“Not only is this what Jesus taught, but He exemplified it! In fact, He went on to say: For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many. (Mark 10:45, NASB)”
“Christian authority is not merely a circumstance of birth order or gender, which bestows a position of power in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus Christ, who as God, is the only rightful heir of all “authority” (Matt.28:18) demonstrated by His sacrificial life on how Christian authority is to be attained and wielded.”
“Authority is earned by sacrificial living. All of us are to focus on serving those around us. It also means that the higher one ascends to a position of leadership in the church, the more accountable they become to a larger number of people. It also means that those who follow do so because they are able to observe and trust those who lead (1 Thess. 1:5). Hebrews 13:17 says: Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you. (NASB)”
“The word rendered obey literally means to be persuaded. It does not mean to hear and unquestioningly comply. The word submit literally means yield. All of this is preceded by something said 10 verses earlier: Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith. (Hebrews 13:7, NASB)”
“All of this flows perfectly from what Jesus said in Mark 10:45. Remember or call to mind those servants who are leading you. Think about how they live and the way they “wear” their faith. You will know they are trustworthy when you observe the selfless lives they live. They have earned and continue earning that trust daily as they serve. Moreover, because of that, we are “persuaded” as persons who also are serving as we yield to their wisdom and are not throwing unnecessary roadblocks in their path.”
“Although there are many true servant/ leaders in the Church, there seems also to be no shortage of “leaders” who are more than happy to rule like little kings.“ (DV)
A misunderstanding of the true nature of biblical authority will have disastrous results within the church, it is so important to guard against unbiblical authority that any elder or any other leader exhibiting and teaching anything but proper doctrine regarding Christ’s commanded servant leadership approach must be called to repentance and if genuine repentance is not forthcoming, must be expelled from the congregation. Matthew 18:15-20, 1 Corinthians 5:1-13, Galatians 6:1-5, 1 Timothy 5:17-20, Titus 1:10-16, Titus 3:9-11, 2 Peter 2: 1-22, 2 John 7-10, 3 John 9-10, Jude 11-16. (MH)
“The ministry of the whole Body is to overshadow the supervisory/exemplary role of the elders, it would make our churches far more healthy and vibrant. The elders, being the more mature brethren, are merely responsible for modeling pastoral care by nurturing their younger brethren in Christ (Acts 20:28-29; Gal. 6: 1; Heb. 13:17b). And their goal, along with the prophets, teachers, and evangelists, is to empower the saints to take responsibility for the flock along with them (Eph. 4:11-12, 1 Thess. 5:12-13). (Elders can simultaneously be prophets, teachers and evangelists; but not all prophets, evangelists, and teachers are elders.)”
“While some believers take the lead more than others due to their peculiar gifting and relative spiritual maturity (i.e., the elders), the emphasis of the NT is upon the responsibility of the entire assembly, Thus, leadership and pastoral responsibility fall upon the shoulders of every member of the church rather than upon the back of one person or a select group. In God’s ecclesiology, brotherhood precedes, exceeds, and overshadows eldership. “
“The function of the pastors/elders and teachers is to equip the saints so that they can minister. Edification is not conceived of as being achieved by the ministry of one part (the “pastor”), but by a mutual ministry of every part. All believers are ‘ministers’ (believer-priests) who have been gifted by God so that they may lovingly build up their spiritual brothers and sisters…. each Christian has received a spiritual gift… A gift is a special ability given graciously by God to each person in Christ’s Body to help others toward spiritual maturity. In light of this, the service of elders and deacons must be viewed against the backdrop of the general priesthood of believers. They serve as an important part in the edification of the body; they do not constitute the only sources of edification in the body. Ephesians 4:11-16.”
Giving in the New Covenant scriptures was used mainly to alleviate legitimate physical needs first for those in one’s own family especially widows and then for those within the congregation and greater Christian community/help the poor, to support those on a legitimate/qualified missionary journey and in exceptional cases towards personal love gifts for a faithful elder who has labored hard for a season at preaching and teaching. The idea of paying a church staff to “do ministry” is alien and unheard of in the New Testament scriptures. The work of the ministry including the teaching and pastoral care is to be done by the congregation of which the older and more spiritually mature brothers/elders are a part. Elders like the rest of believers are to have their own gainful employment as to not be a burden to the congregation as modeled by the apostle Paul. All believers are to exercise their gifts within the congregation as their spiritual or reasonable act of worship to God and not for financial compensation. The amount and place that a believer gives towards the work of Christ are between him and his Lord alone. (MH)
(JZ) John Zens (DV) Don Venoit (MH) Yours truly
Why are those funny faces showing up in my posts? They are kinda cool, but I did not place them there.
Hutch,
Thanks for the clarification! I definitely agree with the use of the term “function” to give a clearer meaning to the “roles” that are played by elders. Every part of the body has a function and no part can say that it doesn’t need another part. God’s Word is always able to provide adequate direction for all things concerning the body and it’s operation in this world.
Hey Bro Lawrence, I wasn’t implying that input is synonymous with leadership. Only tryin to say that the current “Church Culture” isn’t designed to allow for input from laymen. At least in any form that would jeopardize the status quo!
Hebrews 13:17… are we required to submit to a leadership that has effectively usurped the authority of Christ? I would cautiously say… if one is part of such a ministry, they should extricate themselves but, until they do… submit.
Hutch has hit a lot of poignant points, but the one that sticks out is:
“The N.T. knows nothing of a church with “a” pastor. The N.T. always speaks of oversight in terms of plurality, not singularity. We must give heed to this.”
“The idea of a sustained period of time in a local church with one pastor is unknown in the N.T. Most churches in our day have a man in the church they call “the pastor.” But this is a long-standing tradition, not a Biblical teaching. The practice of a one-man elder, pastor or bishop only facilitates the danger of imposing on Christ’s headship.”
I can’t even express how prevalent this issue is! Christ said if HE be lifted, HE’d draw all men. What we effectively have being celebrated in the “Culture of the Church” now, is what I call the “lesser” light. Christ is the true Light, but man has effectively replaced that with the “lesser” light. The “lesser” light has elevated himself to the one man minstrel show called the Pastor! He’s celebrated, he’s elevated, he’s the “new” star of the show, eclipsing the true Light which is able to bring life!
Just as plants take in the sunlight for healthy growth, Christ is the Light that we need for healthy spiritual growth. If that light is eclipsed, nothing grows correctly. Life withers away and is useless. Where there is no Son, there is no life! Gray are many of the congregations within the “Culture of the Church”… and whoa unto us!
-Selah
I Ain’t Nobody!
Brothers-
This is an honest and open questions:
Where do we go from here?
Have any of you seen or been a part of a local assembly where proper order is maintained yet the congregation is allowed to function as presented in scripture.
My wife and are searching.
In my opinion it seems almost impossible for for an established church to transition as someones income and/or “position” is always involved or threatened! Grin.
When we have found congregations that do allow the congregation to minister, a lot of times things are not done in order: Example: two or three being allowed to bring a message from the Word and the older/more mature brothers/elders making sure the message was biblical or not.
I have witnessed aunt Edith giving us a word about how we should all sell our homes move to the country and start growing our own food without even a gentle challenge or correction.
There has to be a middle ground where the body of Christ can function as a family of believer priests.
Where do we go from here?
I think there comes a time where we get other convicted Christians (this conviction) and begin to pray for guidance, leadership, and direction. I think Paul says “make your prayers and supplications be known”. I believe we can do this from a sincere heart, with much grace, a lack of judgmentalness, and without causing divisions. I believe that if this is Christ desire for His church that He would grant us our desires. There are a couple of guys that I hope to meet with in the Dallas area on this issue and me and good friend have been praying about it for a while. My man Tyris (co-author) has this type of gathering. Check out http://www.ccwtoday.org
I do agree with you Hutch. This is very scary but many like the brothers at http://www.ntrf.org and http://www.assembling.blogspot.com (he co-pastors a church called Messiah Baptist Church http://messiahwf.blogspot.com/ ) also there are some fellas out at http://www.solidrock.net/ who have this type of church also.
Lots to drink in, especially in the comments, but here’s a quick hit that immediately came to mind:
“2. Why do churches feel they need to be “elder” ruled? Where is that exactly besides Roman Catholic residue?”
1 Timother 5:17 Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. (ESV)
There are other passages that could be used to support (a) designated leadership and (b) a plurality that “shepherds” the flock of God, but this one emphatically speaks to elders “ruling” in the body.
More could be said about what that means, doesn’t mean, and/or shouldn’t mean, but that’s another post.
Yeah Gunny we will definitely have to talk about that “rule” and the way ruled is defined today. Ruling doesn’t equate to decision making I think persides, oversees, protect maybe. But rule as an authoritative sense.
Yeah, “rule” is an unfortunate mistranslation in 1 Tim 5:17, and sometimes in Heb 13:17. “Lead” would be a better translation - more consistent with other uses of the same word in Scripture.
I’ve yet to find any Scripture that gives pastors / elders authority over other believers.
-Alan
Hey Hutch, I belong to a very small fellowship (less than 20) made up of believers who have come out of varying situations. One thing that is obvious, people aren’t automatically open to sharing. These concepts are foreign to many. Especially when you’ve been taught to believe you can have your best life now, and have been part of a system that often celebrates… a man’s accomplishments. For us, it’s been a process of getting to know one another, learning that we can trust each other and we won’t be hurt when we open ourselves up, like we were hurt in Church! That’s a BIG issue to overcome with people because unfortunately, sooooo many have been hurt by “professing” Believers in the church.
And let me say this, when I speak about the one man minstrel show called the Pastor, I’m referencing those individuals (even when done in ignorance) in the “Culture of the Church” who have allowed themselves or even worked to elevate themselves to some prestigious level. Somehow we seem to miss Luke 15:16 which says -
And He said to them, “You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God.
The only way up is down. Man humbles himself, God elevates! So rather than seeing how big we can get, we should be seeing how low we can humble ourselves.
At the same time, God can use whom He choses to use and I believe that there are Pastors that God is honoring and using because they have drawn nigh unto Him and have a heart and love for His people!
I just wanted to clarify that because in a previous post it may appear that I was lambasting all Pastors. There is a line from the movie The Matrix. “One can not see beyond what they believe”. I believe that to be true. If you were raised in a system and believe based on that system that you are called to Pastor, that’s all you know. And I know from experience that it’s very hard to look at something objectively as long as you’re a part of it. Not impossible, but hard. Especially when it’s providing your livelihood.
I think Lionel is right… sincere prayer (devoid of our agendas) is the answer!
I Ain’t Nobody!
Lionel & djdesignz-
Those are wise words. I’ll keep praying.
As usual, great and thoughtful discussion here. I have a lot to learn in the area of church polity.
The only thing I can add regards the word “consensus”. “Where two or more are gathered” there are at least as many different opinions. Whether you have a large church of hundreds or thousands or a small church of 50 or even 2 (what’s with the divorce rate?), the biggest challenge is engendering a church culture of mutual submission. That’s the only way to achieve consensus.
Hey Brother Jim,
Long time no hear. How is that beautiful family friend?
Well said Mr. Pemberton!
I Ain’t Nobody!
Brother Lionel,
Brother Lionel,
Don’t know if you knew of this already…but in light of the wonderful ministry that Brother Redmond does for the Lord, I was searching the blog world the other day…& in researching, I discovered that Brother Redman was essentially “voted” out of his church for various reasons (though apparently it was due issues regarding elder-led leadership). For more info,
http://www.pulpit-pimps.org/?p=660
To be clear, no—I don’t have all the facts, so of course I don’t wish to give that impression. And as David Prowlison said on the issue
That aside, I did think it was something that we could all pray about for Redmond’s sake….as from what I know, his example has been more than oustanding (though then again, from everything you’ve given out about him and from what he has taught consistently over the years, who’d expect any less?)….. a and on a side note, I thought the dynamics of things (as told thus far) seemed to be a bit intriguing—in line of other comments regarding the danger of having church by “vote”….though seeing how often the issue has been discussed here on this site, as well as in many circles within the Home Church Movement, I was wondering what your thoughts would be thus far….as for many already having issue with the concepts of elder-leading by consensus, it already seems as if many with the impression of it being ungodly could see it in a worse manner possibly. But again, please pray for Brother Redmond and His Own…
Gabriel,
My heart goes out to Brother Eric. I got an email after he was “voted” out and my heart is heavy for a brother who is so Christ Centered and dedicated prayer and the word of our Lord.
On the question you ask. My heart has not changed at all. Let me tell you why. In many churches where a vote is taken to out a pastor there is something I disagree with. That is the case of transplated leadership.
I am 100% against this though I have many friends who do it. We have churches who have men come in but they have no history with the church. I believe in homegrown leaders only! Men who have grown from children, men who have served that community and they are already followed, and the only way they become leaders is when others recognize they are already serving as leaders.
The other issue is I have no issue with what that church did. I hate it happened to someone I respect and someone I actually look up to in ministry. He is a wonderful mind, and godly brother. However, if a group of believers feel that they don’t want him to lead them then they are fully free to remove him. Someone told me that “if nobody wants to follow you then you are not a leader” on that I agree. I don’t believe that someone should submit to a position but to an individual.