Is there really any biblical support for a separation of clergy and laity? 1 Peter 2:5 says: "You also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." So it seems we are all priests before God, and thus need no mediator since Christ has accomplished this for us (1 Timothy 2:5). But didn't they have priests in the Old Testament, and doesn't that carry into the New Testament with pastors? Not that we need priests, but pastors simply serve as "ordained" leaders. Why else do we have passages such as:
Hebrews 13:17 -- "Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you."
Perhaps this passage is speaking to civil authorities, not a special class of Christians called the "clergy." I've been reading a great book by George Barna, and he makes some excellent points. One thing he seems to indicate is a church absent of any hierarchy. But isn't there scriptural support for leaders with genuine authority in the church? House churches seem to think not. But I have yet for a house church leader to respond to the passages of Scripture I have had questions about. Please be the first to do so. Here are the Scriptures that make no sense to me if church leaders have no authority. Please weigh in on this issue by explaining these verses. I have heard many good arguments, but no one has ever broken down these Scriptures to me in a way that favorably supports a non-hierarchical leadership structure in church:
"This is why I write these things when I am absent, that when I come I may not have to be harsh in my use of authority — the authority the Lord gave me for building you up, not for tearing you down" (2 Corinthians 13:10).
What about all of 1 Timothy 3? It talks about overseers/bishops/elders and deacons. It is a clearly a role with qualifications.
"The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, "Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain," and "The worker deserves his wages." Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses" (1 Timothy 5:17-19).
"The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you. An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless — not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it" (Titus 1:5-9, similar to 1 Timothy 3).
This is not a challenge, it is a plea for help understanding this issue of church leadership and genuine authority in the church. It seems to be the only weak point of Barna's argument as far as the scriptures are concerned.
8 comments:
I would definitely recommend reading part 2.......called "Re-imagining church" .....then post if it answered your questions :)
keep seeking Bro...and be blessed!!!
EROPPER
Thanks Eric, that's the same advice Frank Viola gave me. I do intend to read his book, Reimagining Church, next. I'd really appreciate it if someone could briefly address these specific scriptures now for me though, as they are really on my mind. I will read the book, but could someone simply address these passages of scripture for me? Thanks!
Acts 20 contains Paul's exhortations to the Ephesian elders. Once gone, they were to take full responsibility before the Lord for the local church in Ephesus. Not people some place else, but they alone, before the Lord. Not one person, but a plurality of elder who fed the flock of God, over which the Holy Ghost made them overseers, responsible to the Lord directly in the local chuch.
According to this Biblical pattern, we thus have plurality of pastors and teachers within the local church, and the local church's autonomy.
Well said, M. Sounds like the premise of a book I was recommended to read entitled "Biblical Eldership."
Dan, You are asking some very key questions! It's encouraging to see that you're longing to find answers to these questions that truly come from the bible, and not just the opinions of people....
There is no question that there is authority within the body of Christ. However, it is a kind of authority that is radically different than any other on the face of the earth. We see this alluded to in the verse you quoted in 2 Corinthians, which says "the authority the Lord gave me for building you UP, not for tearing you down"...
Unlike any other group of people in all of history, we are lead by Christ, through the Holy Spirit. The spirit is given to all believers, and He is not limited to certain locations, or a certain number of people. We have authority to preach the gospel, and over spiritual realms and strongholds, all this comes from the Spirit at work within us.
Now, do we receive the Holy Spirit as a result of entering into a relationship with God through faith in Christ? Or, through submitting to people in positions of authority within a church? When we stand before the throne of judgment, will we be able to appeal to our submission to people who called themselves pastors or elders? Or will we stand or fall based on whether we trusted in Christ alone?
Again, I ask, is authority within the body based on position, or on the maturity a person has in their relationship with Christ, as they are empowered by the Spirit? The bible calls us to "submit to one another"... and also Christ says,
"But you are not to be called 'Rabbi,' for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. 9And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. 10Nor are you to be called 'teacher,' for you have one Teacher, the Christ. 11The greatest among you will be your servant. 12For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted."
Obviously the God calls us to teach one another, to build one another up, and yet Christ says we are not to call anyone 'teacher', which seems a very clear warning against the idea of setting up POSITIONAL leadership.
Also, Paul, who as you pointed out understand that he carried a burden of authority within the body, says "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! (Galatians 1:8) Here we see Paul saying that even if HE, and apostle, should preach a different gospel, then they should ignore him. He certainly doesn't appeal to the notion that he should be listened to simply because of who he is, or what he's been called. In Acts we also see Paul commending the Bereans because they didn't receive his message based on Paul's reputation as an apostle, but rather they checked everything he said against the scriptures, to determine if it was true. It is the Spirit of truth, the gospel itself, that has the real authority. As long as we remain in step with the Spirit, we carry that authority with us. As soon as we depart from Him, we are simply men and women with a worldly agenda.
As far as the "appointing" of elders or overseers, we have to ask, was that the act appointing people to an 'open' position, like filling a job vancany in a corporation? Or was Paul instructing Timothy to go back and acknowledge the individuals who already WERE filling this role, so as to affirm the mature follwers of Christ were, so that others could emulate them? And therein lies the distinction. Positional leadership consists of a limited number of people, who become 'leaders' because they receive a title from someone 'above' them. They see their position as being one that is unique to the rest of the body. Exemplary leadership is defined not by any official title, but by what the individual is actually DOING. The goal of this kind of leadership is to be an example to others, with the idea that everyone in the body can achieve the same level of maturity and significance in the work of the kingdom. It seeks to raise others up in their maturity, so as to eventually erase the divide between the spiritually mature and the spiritually infantile. Positional leadership exists by continually reinforcing the distinction between those on each side of the leadership 'fence'.
I could talk abou this forever, but this is already way too long. I'm glad you are exploring these things, as they have completely blown me away in my understanding of the Kingdom, and how we fit into it. I hope you continue on the path of asking the tough questions, you won't be disapointed...
In Christ, Daniel
Thanks Daniel for giving some scriptural feedback! Particularly the verse about Jesus saying 'call no man teacher'. I think that verse is often left out when discussing leadership roles in the church. Thanks, and I will continue asking the tough questions!
Dan
P.S. Daniel, I'm also writing about this at 390days.com if you're interested, I'd love to get your input over there as well!
Hi Dan, you've got some good comments already, especially Daniel's. (Too many Dans here, it's confusing :-)
I've written a reply myself but it's on my own blog. Hope that's OK. Grace, peace, and joy in the Lord.
Post a Comment