I believe most church leadership and ministries are organized in an unbiblical manner. Now I’m not suggesting that we trash the whole thing and start over. No one and no church congregation are perfect. No one, but Jesus Christ alone, is capable of following the Bible to the letter because we are all sinners. However, when it’s something so simple to follow as it’s written in black in white in the bible, it’s very difficult for me to understand why it’s not being done. Why do so many churches seem to use black highlighters with the Bible? As with the singles groups, it seems like church leadership caves into the will of the congregation versus following the Lord’s will. Just like ancient Israel. The more I read the OT the more I see a pattern of disobedience which is very similar to ours (as a church, but especially as a country); right down to child sacrifices (see my previous article on abortion).
What are the qualifications for an elder and a deacon? 1 Timothy 3 also Titus 1:5-9
Perhaps an earlier picture of elders and deacons? Acts 6:1-7 It would also seem from scripture (first appearing in Acts 15:2) that there is a difference between apostles, elders and deacons. It seems as though there are 3 ruling bodies within the early church. However, whereas the elders and deacons are intended to be stationary (for the most part) apostles are expected to be itinerate. So what modern term best describes an apostle? Missionaries? Church planters? It seems an apostle is concerned with the larger church, while elders and deacons are focused on the local congregations.
It makes sense to have the elders and deacons over ministries, versus pastors. That is, pastor in the way we define this term now. Actually in biblical terms a pastor is a shepherd, so using this definition then a pastor should be either an elder or a deacon. Apostles should be itinerate preachers and missionaries (whether domestic or international).
Why get so caught up in names and definitions? It all boils down to accountability. When you have a ‘Spiritual All-star’, like so many senior pastors are in this country (whether they intend to be or not), who’s going to have the nerve to actually give this kind of guy true accountability? Everyone wants to be liked and accepted by the spiritual All-stars, so the answer is very few folks. For crying out loud, most senior pastors are synonymous with the church name. “Central Baptist Church, starring Dr. Joe Williams. Come worship with us and you might have an opportunity to meet this incredible all-star yourself.”
The way I see it the deacons are to be held accountable to other deacons and ultimately the elders. The elders are accountable to each other and ultimately God. Depending on which translation you read; bishops, elders and overseers are suppose to be the same thing. Pastors, apostles, teachers, prophets and evangelists are roles within the church, not designations of leadership, nor exclusive to church leadership (Ephesians 4:11). I don’t mean to get caught up with names, words and definitions. Such things are a meaningless waste of time. However, our perceptions of the words aren’t, nor are our interpretations of scripture. From my 29 years of experience in the church I’ve seen that pastors and elders have become two very different positions. Pastors are essentially spiritual All-stars and islands unto themselves (i.e. very little to no accountability). Elders have become the buddies of their leader, the senior pastor, I suppose they occasionally lead a Sunday school, help with the behind the scenes running of the church and generally feel pretty good about themselves that they have been found worthy to be knighted an elder.
No more senior pastors! According to scripture all of the elders should have the gift of teaching (1 Timothy 3:2). All elders should take on the responsibility of ruling their households (in a Christ like manner), continual study of the word, prayer, running a particular ministry, and teaching. There should not be one man identified as the superstar pope of the church, as most of our churches are structured. This isn’t biblical. There should be a rotation of speakers, based on their knowledge of the word and ability to speak. The church should encourage the growth of all gifts within the body. Teaching shouldn’t be limited to one man for 30 years. Some elders, though they have the gift of teaching, should be more focused on running other ministries in the church. The deacons should help the elders with the day to day activities within the church, including the running of the church. Also the deacons should be focused on integrating the congregation, whether through organizing and planning social events, accountability groups, men groups, women groups or community groups. The elders should focus on teaching, creating ministries, ruling over the various ministries and the deacons, as well as discipling particular laymen in the church. The wives of the elders and deacons should be used per their gifts. For some of them encouraging their husbands and caring for their family is their ministry. For others leading certain women ministries (under their husband), teaching and discipling other women should be their ministry (Titus 2:3-5). The elders and deacons should have enough discernment to be able to see the gifts the Holy Spirit has given to their wives and encourage them to pursue certain ministries (if their wives desire it), within biblical boundaries. The bible only indicates that women should not lead or teach a man (1 Timothy 2:11-14). There are many other ministries a woman can serve in, not the least of which is her own family.
The only paid ministers of the church should be the elders, and not all of them may need to work full time in the church. If they can hold a full time job outside of the church and still perform their duties as an elder then they shouldn’t be paid by the church. Only those positions which absolutely require a full time commitment should be paid, including other staff positions. Even Paul, a full time apostle and minister to the early gentile churches worked (2 Thessalonians 3:6-10). Deacons, their wives and the wives of the elders, should be of sufficient number to handle all other duties within the church. Anyone who serves regularly in the church should be a deacon, or wife of a deacon/elder. The only other exception to this would be the child of a deacon or elder or someone who is known, directly under a deacon and known to be of good repute (essentially someone who meets the biblical requirements for a deacon, but for whatever reason isn’t).
I believe the verses I references point out many of the things we’re not doing in our churches. I can’t remember ever attending a church which really seemed to believe in discipleship and accountability. I’ve had friends who were involved in Campus Crusade who indicated that both of these activities were going on. Why is discipleship and accountability limited to college ministries? This must be why so many of these folks yearn so much to go back to college. They remember feeling like they belonged to something real. Having wiser and older folks, of the same sex, holding you accountable and taking the time to build a friendship, be vulnerable and disciple is extremely radical in our society. However, you know what? It’s also extremely biblical and we’re not doing it, outside of some college ministries. Having bagels and donuts at 6am on a Friday isn’t discipleship or accountability, it’s fellowship, which while good and scriptural, shouldn’t be the extent of our relationships.
Here’s what this entire article boils down to: discipleship and accountability, from the top down. We are all sinners and the leaders are no different from any of us laymen. Trust me, if church leaders are godly men, then they will thank you and God for taking the time to encourage, prayer for and admonish them. Now I’m not referring to off the cuff pot shots or compliments. I’m referring to prayerfully considered statements, whether encouragement or admonishment. Actually, if done right, admonishment can be an even more powerful form of encouragement.
I digress, before I get onto too big of a rabbit trail, and conclude.
3 comments:
"Having bagels and donuts at 6am on a Friday isn’t discipleship or accountability, it’s fellowship". I wonder if this is referring to Men's breakfast at ECBC. If it is, I think that characterizing it as merely fellowship really, really misses the point of the program. Dicipleship and programs of older men teaching younger men are something that work best when grown out of Christ-centered relationships that have developed beyond the church-imposed table number or community group. Meaningful mentorship comes from people who know and are concerned for eachother. Men's Group on Friday morning is a place where such relationships can happen and develop over time (as in More than 6 months to a year). Some people are going to benefit more from this than others as they seek out and do their part in reciprocating relationships. Others will see Friday morning as a bleary-eyed waste of time. But still, the church is doing a good thing by trying to create an environment where such relationships can happen. And it is a thing that makes dicipleship happen, not just fellowhip.
I've never been to the ECBC breakfast, so thank you for your insights, opinions and observations on it.
That quote was intended more as a general comment rather then specific to any particular church, though I have to admit I thought of the men's breakfast at ECBC. Please keep in mind that I really like ECBC (I'd say all around it's the best church I've ever attended), respect the leadership and I love the bros and sisters in Christ I've met there. I will use examples from ECBC from time to time because this is the most recent church I've been closely affiliated with. However, ECBC does follow a very similar format to many other churches I've attended (including the current church I'm attending). I realize just as no one (other then Christ) is perfect, no congregation is perfect. Just as every believer requires accountability, so do all church leaders. I also realize it is very easy for me to criticize, especially as a lay person, but then this is my blog and so I will post my opinions. I'm aware my tune may change, if it's God's will for me to enter into a full time ministry. I'm also sure God is fully capable of showing me any error in my thinking, as well as soften my heart in areas which are shrouded in a hard shell of sin and bitterness.
Anyway, that is my universal disclaimer for this entire blog.
What I'm trying to do with these articles is encourage others to think for themselves instead of simply believing whatever a church leader says or does. We need to question everything and work towards a walk with Jesus Christ which is more faith based then flesh (intellect, numbers, money, etc...). Not that any of these fleshly things are bad, in and of themselves, it's the reliance (or love) of these things which is bad. All you have to do is read a couple of history books (or even just the Bible) to see how bad things can get when people blindly follow human leaders, religious or otherwise.
We should continually ask ourselves: “Is this the best way to glorify Christ?” All striving for excellence should stem from this. “Is this the optimal way to minister to singles, married folks, men, women and children? Is this the best way to disciple others? Are we really holding each other accountable? Should it take 6 months to a year, or more to form these types of relationships? Is this more friendship building or discipleship building?” Not that there is anything wrong with friendships. Friendships are great and much needed, but so is discipleship. Keep in mind there can be a huge difference between discipleship and friendship. Friendships are built up over time with trust and mutual admiration. Conversely, discipleship relationships should spring up, rather quickly, from our mutual love of Jesus Christ and recognition of brotherly responsibilities. Then accountability should spring from this relationship. Friends, and especially spouses, should never be the first line of discipleship and accountability, as the mutual admiration factor and/or personal involvement can hinder effectual accountability and even hurt the relationship. On the other hand mutual respect and love, in discipleship, should encourage accountability.
"Friends, and especially spouses, should never be the first line of discipleship and accountability". Perhaps never is a little strong here? Other than books and preaching, good friends (like you), peer relationships, and business friendships with older christians have consistently been the most dicipling, growing, and convicting presences in my life.
I had a formal 'diciplers' in college through Campus Crusade which was very, very helpful, but primarily in the realm of teaching me the scriptures and basic outlines of theology, justification by faith, and the nature of God.
My dicipler is now a good friend and was one of the groomsmen at my wedding. The time of formal dicipleship rightly passed into christ-centered friendship and mutual love concern.
While now I very much still benefit and seek out that type of informational theology & dicipleship that my first dicipler gave me, what I PRIMARILY need and benefit most from are Christians walking with me, showing me clearly by example, encouragement, and how to specifically live as Christ in a blurry world.
I had been reading Johnathan Edwards and John Piper consistently when I met you, Bill, but your lived example taught me much more about loving Christ and Man than the last several books I had read, and stayed with me much longer.
Dicipleship has a very important role, especially with new believers, and ought to be pursued thoughout the life of the believer. But Christian friendships serve the cause of dicipleship long after formal dicipleship has imparted it's initial and greatest gifts.
Post a Comment