This series is reviewing Rethinking The Wineskin
Even more than the location of the church, the leadership of the church is the biggest and most important aspect of the early church that looks completely different today. And it is this topic, more than any other, that causes modern Christians to shun the house church movement. And I also believe that this is one of the reasons that house churches continue to struggle – we have to re-learn leadership in light of Scripture.
It all comes down to clergy.
Because the NT knows nothing of “clergy,” the fact that a separate caste of the “ordained” permeates our vocabulary and practice illustrates rather forcefully that we do not yet take the NT very seriously. (Jon Zens)
And now, a word to you who are elders in the churches. I, too, am an elder and a witness to the sufferings of Christ. And I, too, will share his glory and his honor when he returns. As a fellow elder, this is my appeal to you: Care for the flock of God entrusted to you. Watch over it willingly, not grudgingly – not for what you will get out of it, but because you are eager to serve God. Don’t lord it over the people assigned to your care, but lead them by your good example. And when the head Shepherd comes, your reward will be a never-ending share in his glory and honor. (1 Peter 5:1-4, NLT)
The New Testament refers to a type of person in the early church, referred to by several words, including “elder” (which means “mature man”), “overseer” (bishop), and “shepherd” (pastor).
In today’s church culture, we have a difficult time seeing these words as simple descriptions. We give these words weight based on recent church tradition more than based on the descriptions of these titles in scripture. But I’m convinced that the words themselves are more descriptive than we give them credit for.
The term “elder” refers to their character. The term “overseer” refers to their function. And the term “shepherd” refers to their gifting. Their chief responsibility was to supervise the believing community in times of crisis.
In terms of character – “elders” are simply mature men of God. Those who have been through good and hard times in the faith. Those who can help younger, more immature Christians to persevere during times of trouble.
In terms of function – the role is not that of visionary leadership. Every description of leadership of elders in the New Testament is that of oversight (“watch over”).
In terms of gifting – there is no doubt that elders had the gifting of care, love, and selflessness. Their calling was one of service to the church.
Elders were not church planters. Note how Paul and Barnabas only appointed elders in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch when they returned to those churches (Acts 14). There are other examples where elders are only mentioned years after a church had been planted. A new church will not grow elders for years, because it is a recognition of maturity. Before elders were recognized, the oversight of a church was handled by the apostle(s) who planted it – who would return from time to time.
The Greek words translated “ordain” in Acts 14:23 and Titus 1:5 simply mean to “acknowledge” someone that others have already endorsed. This means that the church trusted the elders.
Unfortunately, the American penchant for “offices” and “positions” has caused many believers to bring these ideas to the Biblical text and view the elders as official. Such thinking confuses the oversight of the early church with modern social conventions. It also strips the leadership terminology found in Scripture of its native meaning.
Another principle about this oversight leadership that is missing in today’s church is that of plural oversight. Just about everywhere you see the term “elder” in the New Testament, it is in the plural, even among a particular church. You will not find the concept of “lead elder” like you have in today’s “head pastor.”
Plural oversight in the church protected the sole Headship of Christ. It also served as a check against despotism and corruption among the overseers.
Should these elders be paid? Many people point to 1 Timothy 5:17 to say that they should be paid a salary:
Elders who do their work well should be paid well, especially those who work hard at both preaching and teaching. (1 Timothy 5:17, NLT)
This is one of the greatest examples of a translation using a modern interpretation of a function and simply rendering it incorrectly. Look at the footnote for the New Living Translation for this verse, attached to “paid well:”
Greek – should be worthy of double honor.
The New Century Version is much clearer:
The elders who lead the church well should receive double honor, especially those who work hard by speaking and teaching. (1 Timothy 5:17, NCV)
Viola explains this very well:
Some have tried to argue for a professional clergy from this one isolated text. But the context of the passage reveals otherwise. First, the specific Greek words that the NT uses for “pay” or “wages” (misthos and opsonion) are not used here. The Greek word for “honor” in this passage is time, and it means to “respect” or “value” someone or something.
The same word is used four times in 1 Timothy. In every case, it means respect. God is to receive honor from man (1:17; 6:16), elders are to receive honor from the church (5:17), and masters are to receive honor from slaves (6:1). Another form of the word is used when Paul says that widows are to be honored by the church (1 Tim. 5:3). (Incidentally, time is never used in first-century literature to refer to “honorarium.”)
Second, all believers are called to honor (time) one another (Rom. 12:10). It would be absurd to take this to mean that all believers are to receive payment from each other. Those elders who serve well are to receive more honor – or greater respect.
Third, the fact that respect is what Paul had in mind is born out by verse 19. Paul goes on to say that the elders are not to be accused (dishonored) unless there are two or three witnesses to confirm the accusation.
Finally, elders were leaders in the church, but they did not lead the gatherings. They did not take a visionary role or make executive decisions. They were not clerics or priests. Their ministry did not interfere with the ministry of others in the church. You will not find a justification for these roles of an “elder” in the New Testament. They simply aren’t there.
The clergy profession is a mammoth institution that is far removed from the NT concept of leadership. And its mere presence hinders the cultivation of mature, relational, functioning churches that deeply express the Headship of Jesus Christ…
The modern day pastor system of Protestantism is a religious artifact that has allowed the Body of Christ to lapse into an audience due to its heavy reliance on a single leader. This unscriptural, clergy-dominated structure has done untold damage to God’s people. It has turned church into the place where Christians watch professionals perform. It has transformed the holy assembly into a center for professional pulpiteerism supported by “lay-spectators.”
The pastoral system has turned ministry into an elitist right. It has stolen your right to function as a member of the ekklesia! And it has lamed the believing priesthood! In short, the clergy concept of church leadership invariably crushes Body life.
All of this begs the question: what about visionary leadership? Next, we’ll look at how the New Testament describes that. But if we intend to take the New Testament seriously, our thoughts about local church leadership must shift radically.