The significance of the events of the last days is important because it is in these days that the leadership of New Testament Christians is cast. It is for this reason that much of this book will include the use and meaning of the “last days” and the fulfillment of the events during that time. In particular, this chapter is designed to introduce the overall context of the New Testament scriptures in order to establish a first-century application. Once this setting becomes clearly fixed in our mind, we can more readily appreciate the application of leadership, then and now.
When working a problem in geometry, the student always begins with a given set of facts from which he or she starts working the problem. The givens are never expected to be proven. They are assumed as true and accurate. Similarly, the Bible student begins with a certain set of given truths that are assumed as true. The student who is associated with a certain denominational tradition seldom question them, and to do so is to leave the truth. Of course, we know that any conclusion is only as good as the premise(s) upon which it is built. This section explores some of the givens that are taken for granted and rarely questioned. If these foundation blocks of our beliefs are wrong, however, it will lead us to many false conclusions.
In discussing the subject of “church leadership,” we have already started off on shaky ground because we have added the church concept and assumed that “church” is the appropriate translation of the Greek word, ekklesia. The result is the creation of a leadership model that fits an institution or organization. Numerous views and variations exist concerning “church leadership.”
- Traditional Clergymen and/or Priests
In Catholicism and the denominational branches nearest them, the clergy form the leadership. The widely accepted view is that whatever God gave the church in the first century (Ephesians 4:11-14), he continues to give in our present world. To suggest any other option would produce religious anarchy, chaos, and uncertainty of teaching. Therefore, the work of teaching must be handed down to others called by God and/or chosen by human will to take the responsibility of equipping saints. For this reason, the clergy/laity distinction is one that has continued unbroken down the annals of time. Apostolic succession is the Catholic teaching that claims the presence of a spiritual chain of command from the apostles to this present day. The Pope, in this system, becomes the sole vicar of Christ on earth. Catholic priests are also the religious leaders in that system who are under the direction and guidance of the Pope.
This is countered by many Protestants who propose that the numerous changes in teaching and practice through the periods of Catholic rule causes doubt in their leadership being infallible. To deny this is to endorse the view that throughout the history of man, truth is not an absolute body of knowledge but only relative to the times in which one lives. Since many Catholics would reject this approach in favor of the absolute nature of truth, they are caught between a rock and hard place. One cannot claim infallibility and yet continually change the teaching and practice from one pope or priest to another. This pattern of change in teaching and practice throughout their long history causes us to question their claim of apostolic succession. It appears that the culture and popular demands of the people play a large role in church doctrine and policy. Similar policy changes are hot topics in the camp of many denominations, today. For example, the cultural acceptance of the homosexual in the life of churches has forced some to alter their views or face a serious drop in memberships and support. Given the evidence of the past, some will continue to maintain certain tenents of faith as unquestioned principles of absolute truth, while being oblivious to their bending of practices and policies to accommodate a changing world. It is this writer’s most ardent prayer that we quit taking the given set of rules from which we look at our world. We must question the set of “givens” before attempting a solution. This “out of the box” approach is not advocating a loosening of scriptural authority. Rather, it is recognizing that the traditions of men have been elevated to the status of divine truth and supported with proof-texting strategies. This is the box from which our thoughts must leave is not the box of divine authority, but the box of human tradition.
Similarly, the Protestant denominations have their own forms of leadership that distinguish themselves from the church member. Their leaders may be called “reverend” or “Pastor” as a title attached to their names. Each denomination may have variations of teaching and practice regarding their work, but it is part of the same system that divides the church into two major classes of people; namely, the clergy and the laypeople. The clergy is supposed to represent their denomination so that their example and teaching is a pattern for the layperson. It is so entrenched in the mind that the church is often equated to the leadership in a way that the average member will use the pronouns “they” and “them” when referring to the congregation of which they are members. This is the natural result when the church is considered an institution. Because the people are distinguished from the institution, when the institutional leaders fall, they are not dealt with as other members. They are fired, placed on probation, or replaced by another representative. Even if the leaders repent of their sins, they may be able to continue as members, if they choose, but they can not resume their role as a leader. Of course, because they receive wages from the institution, they will likely move on to occupy the same role in a new place. Even though slight variations exist between denominations, they all carry a similar procedure in dealing with their clergy.
Ironically, whether Catholic or Protestant, both have traditionally supported the idea of the priesthood of all believers. For example, Luther taught the priesthood of all Christians.[1] Augustine, a venerated leader among Catholic tradition, wrote, “None of the faithful doubts that the priesthood of the Jews was a figure of that royal priesthood which is in the Church, to which are consecrated all who belong to the Body of Christ, the sovereign and true Head of all priests.”[2] One would expect an application of this teaching that leaves a significant contribution from every part of the body. Yet, both men believed that God’s church (institution) has been given priestly figures within the broad priesthood of believers and that part of that arrangement is found in Ephesians 4:11-14. We will give a full treatment of this text in a future chapter, but it is mentioned as a text that is used to support the need for special leaders. So, even though they would acknowledge the priesthood of all believers, there is still another class necessary for the advancement and growth of the church. Today, we are handed this view (tradition) as a set of given rules that few dare question.
It is important to note that once we start thinking of the called out body as an earthly institution that is granted the authority to approve, condemn and establish the truth, it is natural to arrange it accordingly and to see the arrangement of Ephesians 4 to be a reference to on-going gifts that are continually given. Murray, who writes of the apostolic ministry, starts with Paul as an example of a gift given to the ekklesia (Ephesians 4:11). He states that Paul was a marvelous gift to the Christian community. In three succeeding paragraphs, he begins each with the opening reference to Ephesians 4:11.
(1) “Such a gift to the world was St. Augustine: a man of the most powerful intellect and will, master of the thought and life of his time. Long an alien from the household of faith, he was saved at last as by miracle, and utterly subdued to the will of Christ. In the awful crisis of the fifth century, when the Roman Empire was breaking up and the very foundations of life seemed to be dissolved, it was the work of this heroic man to reassert the sovereignty of grace and to re-establish faith in the Divine order of the world. (2) Such another gift to men was Martin Luther, the captive of justifying grace, won from the monastery and the bondage of Rome to set Germany and Europe free. What a soul of fire, what a voice of power was his! to whose lips our Lord Christ set the great trumpet of the Reformation; and he blew a blast that waked the sleeping peoples of the North, and made the walls of Babylon rock again to their foundation. (3) Such a gift to Scotland was John Knox, who from his own soul breathed the spirit of religion into the life of a nation, and gave it a body and organic form in which to dwell and work for centuries. (4) Such a gift to England was John Wesley. Can we conceive a richer boon conferred by the Head of the Church upon the English race than the raising up of this great evangelist and pastor and teacher, at such a time as that of his appearance? Standing at the distance of a hundred years, we are able to measure to some degree the magnitude of this bestowment. In none of the leaders and commanders whom Christ has given to His people was there more signally manifest that combination of faculties, that concurrence of providences and adjustment to circumstances, and that transforming and attempering influence of grace in all—the “effectual working in the measure of every single part” of the man and his history, which marks those special gifts that Christ is wont to bestow upon His people in seasons of special emergency and need.”[3]
For Murray, these notable men of church history were chosen by God just as was Paul. Paul and the early leaders were only the start of an organizational order that continued down through time to lead mankind into the light of truth. However, we are not of this persuasión. It is an unproven assumption and a misuse of Scripture to promote the same structure of leadership of the first century to today’s churches. Stated briefly, the age of the outpouring Spirit to guide Christians into truth required the spiritual gifts of the Spirit. These gifts concerned matters of divine revelation, or related gifts to confirm the messenger and the message as being from God. We will develop this theme in a dedicated chapter. For now, it is important to introduce as a proposition of this work that these gifts granted by the power of the Holy Spirit were a first-century phenomenon that fulfilled a purpose in closing one age to reveal the glories of another.
[1] Babylonian Captivity of the Church, Vol. 2, p. 283.
[2] Augustine, Quaestionum Evangeliorum, ii, 322ff, quoted in Paul F. Palmer, SJ, “The Lay Priesthood: Real or Metaphysical?,” Theological Studies, Vol. 8 (1947), p. 583.
[3] Murray, J. O. F. (Ed.). (1914). The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians (pp. 65–72). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.