5. How should 'team' leadership and the pastor's role in practice work itself out in the local church and what is the biblical basis for this? Is there one pattern or does it depend on the leadership style of the minister?
Plurality in leadership was established by the Lord Jesus himself, when he appointed 12 men to be apostles. That surely became a model for the apostles as they began to establish new churches (Acts 11:19-26), and once Paul and Barnabas had led people to the Lord in Lystra, Iconium and Pisidian Antioch, they returned to those cities, and "appointed elders for them in each church" (Acts 14:22-23).
Paul later spells us the requirements and roles of local church leaders in his letters to co-workers, Timothy and Titus (1 Tim 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9). The elders had overall care of the local congregations. They were all to be men of godly character, and had to be able to teach.
Paul tells us that the ascended Christ "gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists and the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service" (Eph 4:11-12). I take it that the apostles and prophets were foundational (Eph 2:20), and that their work is continued today by evangelists and pastor/teachers (the Greek construction here suggests that the pastor-teacher is one gift). The goal is "that the body of Christ might be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fulness of Christ" (4:12-13). That is a huge responsibility. It is the people who do works of service and the pastor who equips them to do it. But he can only carry out that work effectively if there are other church members willing to serve. In our church, we recognise such church members as 'deacons' (1 Tim 3:8-13), though in actuality there are plenty of members who do not hold office but do, nevertheless, carry out diaconal work in many forms.
I take it that a full time pastor is an elder who is paid in order to release them from the additional pressure of having to do another job for a living. It is not always possible for a local church to pay their pastor, so he may have to take an additional job in order not to be a burden to the flock (Acts 18:1-4). I don’t see that as being held up as anything more than a practical necessity for a limited time (5).
I am uncomfortable with the idea that a pastor might operate according to his 'leadership style'. My concern is that this might be used as a smokescreen for ungodly behaviour. Take, for instance, the pastor who is highly directive. He may have adopted his style from the corporate world, priding himself that he is decisive and runs a tight ship. The fall out will mount up over time as church members are sidelined for not measuring up or because they voiced an objection to his overbearing leadership. He might justify his actions as necessary for the church to 'move forward'. I heard of a pastor who said, "You can't make an omelette without cracking eggs", which of course is a tell-tale sign of an abusive situation.
The word 'minister' means one who serves, as Jesus did (Luke 22:27). So there is no place for heavy-handed leadership. That is not to deny that sometimes a minister or other elder might need to have a difficult conversation with a church member. But a minister's primary task is to teach; it is the task of the church as a body to enact discipline (Matt 18:15-20). If this distinction is observed, it should go a long way to prevent the minister from becoming a tyrant.
No comments:
Post a Comment