|
Coming Down From
The Mountain
October 2, 2006
From Ron and Karen
Schwartz
Some myths
regarding Christian leadership.
Myth #1. “There
is nothing wrong with being respected and honored. Everyone
enjoys it.”
It was not the
nature of Jesus to be set on a pedestal. He wanted to mix in
with the people of God. His desire was for people to see Him as
they did themselves. He desired to know them on a personal
level and to be a support and encouragement to them. Their
trust in Him was natural because He was one of them. Jesus
demonstrated for us what He meant by being “the servant of
all.” Servants don’t see themselves as anything: they have no
title, they do not rule anyone, and no one esteems them. The
best they can ever hope to be is adequate - to simply do what is
required of them.
Luke 17:7-10 KJV
7 But which of you, having a
servant plowing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by,
when he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat?
8 And will not rather say unto
him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, and serve
me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat
and drink?
9 Doth he thank that servant
because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not.
10 So likewise ye, when ye
shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say,
We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was
our duty to do.
When you consider
this, you must agree that most Christian leaders do not have a
servant’s mindset. To begin with, they believe that they are
profitable. In fact, many believe that they are the only ones
who are. Many see themselves as the most important element of
the Church. They see themselves as essential. They enjoy
standing or sitting up front on their raised platforms. They
enjoy commanding silence as everyone listens. They enjoy their
private entrance, having the final word, having people come to
them for approval. In short, they enjoy being esteemed. The
last thing they believe is that they are unprofitable.
Where is the
humility among the contemporary Christian elite? Modern
Christian leaders are focused on building their empires. They
advertise it instead of Christ (i.e. John Doe Ministries, or
Jane Doe Prophetic Center). Ask yourself, what would change in
the life of the average Christian it one or more of these
ministry empires simply vanished. Christians would still serve
God, they’d still raise godly children, and they’d continue to
be a light to this world. Nothing would change. These
Christian ministries exist simply to serve themselves. And in
the end they are only profitable to themselves.
I enjoy spending
time with Christians who know nothing about me. During these
brief moments, I find myself close to a heart that has God
living in it. I don’t have to go up onto a mountain to be near
God; I can find Him in His people. What they say echoes the
voice of the Holy Spirit. Each child of God has a unique
relationship with Him and therefore a unique perspective.
Imagine the privilege we enjoy in being able to spend time with
one of God’s children. That’s what many Christian leaders lose
in being esteemed. They lose the ability to enjoy God’s
children the way He does. Perhaps if they spent less time up
on the mountain…
Myth #2. “As
Church leaders, all we are to do is what we feel God has called
us to do.”
There was a time
in church history when there was no TV, radio, magazines, books,
Christian forums, or email, and even traveling across town was
done on foot. It’s easy to understand that in a culture such as
this, access to information is valued. During the first century
church, prophets and teachers would travel from city to city
bringing the message God gave them to local assemblies who were
eager to hear more of the evolving revelation of God. People
wanted it. But things have changed within Christendom.
Today, in order
for a teacher or prophet to get an audience, they have to create
one. Pastors “protect” their flock by preventing others from
coming in or by requiring them to join their organization (in
some manner). Teachers and prophets are no longer welcome in a
local assembly (unless they belong to that specific
denomination). So more and more ministers are discovering that
in order to get an audience, they need a church. Take Meridian,
Mississippi, for example.
Some documents place this city of
40,000 to have one church for every 146 adults. This does not
even consider all the house churches, Bible studies, and other
religious groups. Sullivan County, Tennessee, brags of having
one church for every 40 people, and some sources have Hoboken,
New Jersey (pop. 38,5000), to have one church for every city
block. Many cities are now invoking local ordinances to limit
the number of churches.
The closed nature
of pulpits and a need for people to share the message God gave
them has given rise to the popularity of house churches. Many
mature Christians often become rejected by their pastors and
labeled as troublemakers. More often than not, it is because
they grew enough spiritually to become a peer to the pastor.
The pastor often feels threatened by the views of an influential
member who does not see completely eye-to-eye or questions his
control or decisions.
This individual is eventually seen as
competition and pressured into leaving. I have met hundreds of
individuals who describe this same story: a pastor uses
manipulation, politics, and gossip to drive out a mature
Christian who dares to question him. The pastors believe that
such Christians must be subjugated regardless of their spiritual
maturity. Many house churches have begun because pastors just
don’t know what to do with mature Christians who question them
or disagree with them.
People should not
have to create a new church group in order for them to express
their gift(s) in the Lord. If a house church begins, it should
be because this is the direction and leading of the Lord, not
because someone needs an avenue to express his message. The
biggest reason for stagnation in churches is due to the
limitations that pastors put upon their congregations. People
are no different from their pastors. They want to do what they
sense God has called them to do as well. Why must they leave
their churches to do it?
By discouraging
the freedom of other types of ministries to operate within the
local body of Christ, pastors have forced all ministers to
become pastors. I do not believe that this is what God
intended. Teachers and prophets are no longer welcome to travel
abroad bringing their revelation to the rest of God’s people.
Today, they must create circuits of churches that will receive
them. These become a sort of mini-denomination. But most
prophets and teachers succumb to the barriers and turn into a
pastor of a local assembly.
Myth #3. “As
leaders, we are to administer, manage, and direct the service as
we sense and discern the direction of the Spirit. We are to
discern the spirits.”
Almost all pastors
believe this and will even say it out loud. Their congregations
also know they believe this way. But have they ever considered
how their congregations interpret it? Most Christians are
self-conscious about their spiritual knowledge and gifts. Most
become so overly concerned that they will do something wrong and
get corrected by the pastor that they never do anything. So
what do we see as a result of this? All of Christendom
expecting pastors to do everything. People don’t evangelize,
operate in their gifts, or do anything else because they might
do it wrong and then the pastor will step in and they will find
themselves in trouble.
Most Christians know of friends who for
one reason or another have gotten into trouble and are now no
longer a part of the church. To avoid the trouble that often
comes from stretching their wings, people often do nothing. So
everything falls on the pastor to do. As a result, pastors walk
around complaining that everything falls on them, but the truth
is they really enjoy it! If they do everything themselves, then
they know things will be done “right,” and everyone will know
how important and how truly indispensable they really are.
A church should be
a school where people feel free to make mistakes, a place where
they feel free to exercise their spiritual gifts because they
know they are supposed to, a place where they know that they
will not be rebuked or scolded for getting it wrong, a place
where they can mature and, in time, help others. This is how
the original Christians operated. When one church (the church
of Corinth) fell into chaos, Paul set in place a temporary
structure to help them operate correctly. He did not prohibit
the use of gifts. He helped them get it right. However, if one
of today’s pastors entered a church like that, he would “put his
foot down” and effectively end most (if not all) manifestations
of spiritual gifts. In no time flat, Corinth would be
transformed into today’s powerless pastor-controlled church.
Where in the scripture does it say
that all other gifts and ministries must be in
submission/subjection to the gift of the pastor?
Consider the
following scripture:
I Corinthians 12:27-28 KJV
Now ye are the body of Christ,
and members in particular. And God hath set some in the church,
first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after
that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments,
diversities of tongues.
Where are pastors
in this list? They are at the bottom of it (governments), just
above diversity of tongues. Why, then, do pastors feel that all
other gifts in the church must be subject to them? Why do they
believe that they are the ultimate authority? The truth is that
pastors were meant to operate WITH other ministries, not OVER
them.
Someone sent this
to me. A single page from the journal of John Wesley reads:
"Sunday a.m., May
5 -Preached in St. Ann's; was asked not to come back any more.
Sunday p.m., May
5- Preached at St. John's; deacons said, 'Get out and stay out.'
Sunday a.m., May
12 - Preached at St. Jude's; can't go back there either.
Sunday p.m., May
12-Preached at St. George's; kicked out again.
Sunday a.m., May
19- Preached at St. Somebody Else's; deacons called a special
meeting and said I couldn't return.
Sunday p.m., May
19 - Preached on the street; kicked off the street.
Sunday a.m., May
26- Preached out in a meadow; chased out of meadow when a bull
was turned loose during the service.
Sunday a.m., June
2- Preached out at the edge of town; kicked off the highway.
Sunday p.m., June
2- Afternoon service, preached in pasture; 10,000 people came."
Have you every
wondered if perhaps a John Wesley has ever visited your church?
How was he treated? Was he dismissed? Perhaps a growing or
mature Christian who challenges your views may someday become a
prominent Christian leader. Would you find in his journal such
an entry concerning your church? What about an angel? Could it
be that a person who questioned the wisdom of your decision was,
in fact, an angel you “entertained unaware?” How was he
treated? How was he received? Do you absolutely know that you
treated all God’s children with the dignity and respect due one
of His children?
I know many
pastors, and they are all different. Each of them would
probably handle each situation differently. So who is correct?
To whom should people listen? With the pastoral mentality of
being the final authority for their churches, people just better
hope they find that pastor who is absolutely right all the
time. Statements like, “we are to administer, manage, and
direct the service as we sense and discern the direction of the
Spirit” are COMPLETELY subjective.
Depending on your own
spiritual gift(s), you may sense something different from what
others sense in a meeting. If you are not a prophet, you might
not realize that God wants to speak prophetically. But those
gifted in that area will know. If pastors are to manage and
direct the meetings, how are those who are gifted in other
ministries able to operate? Unless pastors believe that they
possess all ministries and all the spiritual gifts, how could
they possibly know which way to direct a meeting? Such
statements clearly say, “God cannot do anything without running
it past me first.” It places all gifts and ministries in
subjection to the ministry of the pastor.
Having been a
pastor before, I understand why pastors see themselves as a sort
of parent over people, especially young Christians. But why
would pastors feel the need to take on a parental role to people
who have been ten or twenty years in the Lord? Is there no
point at which people grow out from under their supervision?
Will they never be allowed to grow up? And if they do grow up,
will they need to leave the church?
Also, if “a”
pastor represents the final authority in a local church
government (and given the closed nature of most church
operations) who, then, could ever correct them? Would they
always be right? Pastors who operate this way had better never
get it wrong. Remember the warning of Jesus concerning the
little ones:
Matthew 18:4-6 KJV
Whosoever therefore shall
humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the
kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoso shall receive one such little
child in my name receiveth me. 6 But whoso shall offend one of
these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him
that a millstone were
hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of
the sea.
Myth #4. “As
pastors, our job is to be like Moses. We hear from God and
deliver His word to the people.”
This myth implies
that God cannot or will not speak directly to His people. It
contradicts such scriptures as:
John 14:26 KJV
But the Comforter, which is the
Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach
you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance,
whatsoever I have said unto you.
1 John 2:20 KJV
But ye have an unction from the
Holy One, and ye know all things.
Jeremiah 31:33-34 KJV
33 But this shall be the
covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those
days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts,
and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they
shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more
every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know
the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them
unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD; for I will forgive
their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Such a statement
implies that people held in prison in foreign countries are less
knowledgeable about God since they do not have access to pastors
or other Christian leaders. It means that they cannot be as
spiritually developed as those with pastors. I’m not suggesting
that pastors do not have a word; I AM suggesting that the word
they have is no greater or more important than the word He
speaks to any of His other children.
This myth also
implies that God’s New Testament model is to have classes of
Christians. It implies that not everybody is invited to go up
the mountain, and that God wants a close relationship with only
a few, or an inner circle, if you will. God has never wanted
this. It was this way in the Old Testament only because “…the
natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for
they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because
they are spiritually discerned (1 Corinthians 2:14).”
However, in the New Testament “…God
hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit
searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God (1 Corinthians
2:10).”
God once chose men
to speak through since His people did not have his indwelling
Spirit. But that is no longer the case. God no longer has to
come down in a cloud or appear through an angel to give us
instruction. He no longer needs a Moses to voice His will.
This is because “…when
he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all
truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he
shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to
come (John 16:13).”
Conclusion
It is generally
accepted that Joshua followed Moses (at least part way) up Mount
Sinai when the law was given. The scripture is quite vague
here. Also, the scripture is not clear whether Moses asked him
to go along or God wanted him there. What we do know is that
both leaders whom God would use to bring His people to the
Promised Land to conquer it were missing when the people built
the golden calf. What would have happened if Joshua had stayed
“among” the people? Would his voice of authority have been
enough to prevent God’s people from committing idolatry? Did
him going up the mountain affect anything?
I typically try to
stay away from presenting a model. However the nature of this
document makes it unavoidable. For if these statements are
myths, what, then, is right?
Try to imagine an
“evolving plurality” of elders (i.e., pastors or bishops), a
group of natives (as opposed to missionaries or “transplanted
leaders”) of the area (i.e., they lived there long enough to
call that place their home) who make up a leadership team.
Their function is NOT to direct and manage the meeting but to
mentor other young Christians to be able to take over the
mentoring function themselves.
Their meetings belong to God.
Therefore, decisions are not made by a few elite but by the
entire body. In this model, leadership is not closed. “Closed”
means that only a select few can be leaders and they continue to
lead until they vacate their office. Instead, everyone is able
to grow into leadership. There is no limit. They are
responsible for the financial and everyday affairs of the
church, but they exercise no control over the people. They
provide wisdom, insight, and suggestions, but their role does
not cross over into control or rule. They are role models.
The team exists to make each leader aware that their opinion and
view is not sacred and that they must work with the rest the
body. In short, it is to prevent any dominant individual from
exercising dominion over others. In this type of plurality,
some leaders may not feel directed to teach. Some may feel
directed toward outside ministries, like prison ministries, food
pantries, etc.
Being a part of
the plurality obligates each of the other leaders to aid each
other in every way necessary to help them be successful in the
endeavors to which God has called them. It guarantees that
dominant people do not take advantage and bully others with
their views. It exists for the protection of the congregation
as opposed to the control of it.
In short,
plurality is NOT:
· a
decision-making body (a committee), or
· a group
that controls and directs the meetings.
Instead, plurality
should:
· be open
(allowing others to grow into eldership),
· protect
people from domineering personalities,
· offer
mentorship as opposed to lordship, and
· insure
that the vision each member of the body has from the Lord is
realized.
With committees,
everyone is looking out for self. It is easy to identify a
committee because you will find people seeking to control
others, whereas pluralities are all about empowerment of
others. Committees use politics (manipulation) to gain
advantage; pluralities operate through the unity of the Spirit
to produce balance. In a true plurality, no one has control but
God.
So what about
structure? Is having structure wrong? Is it wrong to have a
meeting structured, organized, and orchestrated? Not if that’s
what you want. Structured meetings guarantee that other
spiritual gifts (other than those who orchestrate the meeting)
will not have a part in the meeting. I generally encourage
structured meetings for Bible studies or meetings with special
purpose, guest speakers or presentations. In these meetings,
study notes can be prepared in advance and the teaching can be
highly focused. There’s nothing wrong with this. However, if
you are looking for a type of meeting that allows ALL (including
youths) to grow and develop spiritually, then structure is not
the solution. Meetings can also be mixed with both spontaneity
and structure.
For maximum
spiritual growth, all people must feel free to use their gifts
regardless of whether or not they are elders. The elder’s
authority does not include judging (discerning) the spiritual
gifts of others. This should be left to either the body
(congregation) or by consensus of those who have like gifts.
Consider the following scripture:
1 Corinthians 14:29-30 KJV
29 Let the prophets speak two
or three, and let the other judge.
30 If any thing be revealed to
another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
In a mature group,
pluralities should form (informally) around spiritual gifts.
Teachers and prophets alike should learn to work together rather
than against each other (competition). Trying to create this
model out of pure human effort will lead to division and
control. If everyone seeks the welfare of others and the Holy
Spirit is allowed to operate, these things will develop quite [super]naturally.
The important
things to remember:
· Unless
deliberately structured, no one except the Holy Spirit should
have control over the meeting.
· No one’s
spiritual gift is more important than another’s.
· Our
purpose in the body of Christ is to grow into the image of
Christ and mentor others.
· Everyone
should participate in the body of Christ according to the gift
that is at work in him or her.
· No one
has the exclusive ear to what God says to His people. No one.
Amen
kmsrjs@triton.net
(use the
same address for MSN Messenger)
http://members.triton.net/kmsrjs/thoughts.htm
|
|
