October 31, 2007
Responsibility 102
One of the newer buzz words today is ‘coach’. Training sessions have been refurbished into Coaching Clinics. In promoting a scheduled Coaching Clinic my church bulletin said, “If you are responsible for the health of your family, small group, or ministry team this gathering is for you.” Certainly when my children were young I did have a responsibility for their spiritual health. Since both are now thirty-something, neither of them would let me have that responsibility…even if I wanted it. No doubt small group leaders and ministry leaders have obligations as teachers; however the spiritual health of the body actually lies with the elders, who are the shepherds and overseers. Personally, I think we put undo pressure on the lay leader’s service if we impose the criteria of elders on them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Gail;
-----Do church’s still have elders? What I have been mostly familiar with in the church actually looks more like a board of directors. I’ve seen them act responsible for the preservation of the church’s property, organizational structure, and ideological perspectives. I know these have a certain benefit to the spiritual health of the congregation, but that benefit is far from basic. There is something more, something missing. The role of today‘s “elder” is not entirely the same as what it was at the church‘s beginning.
-----Paul did reveal to Timothy that the elder was responsible for taking care of the church (I Tim 3:5) which would include preservation of property, organization, and ideology. But in Timothy’s day, the property and organization of the church was very much simpler than they are today, nor was the ideology as intricate as it is today. When Paul writes to the Ephesians about those given for the equipping of the saints, the elders are missing from the list, yet he tells Timothy they must be good teachers, and he tells Titus they must be able to give instruction in sound doctrine. Their role in standing before the class or workshop seems secondary to something. Paul showed more interest in the character traits of the elder, and especially those traits that were basic to interpersonal relationships. That should give us the first clue at the major difference between the New Testament elder and today’s church elder. The author of Hebrews insists on obedience to the elders and Paul refers to the elders who rule well, while Peter demands elders to be examples rather than domineering rulers. If that seems a bit contradictory, it evens out when we consider the instruction of Romans chapter 14 giving every individual freedom of conscience regarding issues that are not expressly stated in the Word and requiring each of us not to bother others accordingly. This speaks to elders, also. Therefore Romans 14 restricts the authority of the elders referenced by Hebrews and Paul to only matters expressly stated in the Word. As such, the elder becomes a guardrail for those in the church more than a steering wheel, assuring that no one in the church goes out of bounds Scripturally, and that no one out of the church drags unscriptural drivel into it. Herein is his Scriptural rule.
-----But one of the Scriptural mandates overlooked by today’s elders is Romans 14 itself. The personal freedoms given each individual are exceedingly important for the church. Yet the elders of today’s church believe God has given them a little army of PFC’s to go out into the community and do their bidding. Unity, the elders note, is working together on the spiritual programs they deem important. But the Christian’s relationship with the Lord is personal and individual. The Holy Spirit comes from the Lord into the person and there correlates between the person, the Lord, and the others. Therefore, the Lord is the head of the individual through the Spirit, not the church, the elders, or programs. So through this headship over the individual, the Lord becomes the head of the church as it is made of individuals. And through each individual the Lord has given services to the church in the gifts He gave to each one. In their operation of those gifts come the bodily function of the church. What the individuals are and where the individuals go is what the church is and where the church goes. Therefore the individual is a basic unit of importance to the church. As bricks are to the wall, individuals are to the church.
-----But bricks are not laid in any position and direction they may possibly desire to lay. Bricks are all laid out in relation to one another and to the wall‘s blueprint. This is what one would expect of those who follow a Master who regards the greatest command to be love for God and love for one another. By the I Cor 13 definition, love is about the other. Paul teaches more than regard for the other, he teaches attention and service to the other. Which is not surprising, for Jesus referred to the concept of servant frequently. So the alignment of the bricks is in relation to one another, which is exactly what one would expect from a pile of bricks who all accept each other (Rom 15:7). And like the mortar that is placed between the bricks are the ideas of: I Corinthians 12 - the members belonging to the body and to one another, Rom 14 and 15 - indifference to differences, pleasing one another, and accepting one another, Philip 2:4 - looking to one another’s interests, and Gal 6:10 - doing good to all men. Together, they all form a matrix of relationship that yields a coherent structure.
-----And that is why Paul referenced prominently the character traits regarding interpersonal relationship when defining the character of the elder. That is why Peter commands the elder to be an example. People love and try to emanate others who stand out among those of their group. So the elders of the New Testament are the spark plugs of the church, the Louis Wright’s, Karl Mecklenburg’s, and Rod Smith’s of the team. Scripturally, their positions as commanders are only at the guardrails, and their position as board members is far in the background.
-----But we have these roles reversed today, and everyone seems happy to have it that way. Today’s elder is first the determiner of the use and possession of church property, the ways and practices of the group’s interactions (very unscriptural), and the keeper of the church’s doctrine (which generally goes beyond what is written.) I have met only a couple elders in my years of new life who have had any interest in knowing others beyond just knowing a face and a name. In fact, my observation of elders has been that of men who mostly walk up and down the church isles on Sunday mornings dispensing smiles and handshakes rather than intimacy and relationship. I have observed a certain openness and interaction they have for only the higher echelon - the spiritual elite, so to speak - those movers and shakers among us. Today’s elder desires to stack the bricks and exact each placement with unhindered control. But he has little desire to fuss with the mortar. Yet, according to the Scriptures, it is through genuine relationship that Jesus’ spiritually full and rounded men (and women at our church) are responsible for the spiritual health of the church, the mixing and buttering between the bricks of the mortar. It is for the generation and maintenance relationship in the church that they also have responsibility.
Post a Comment