Westminster Bookstore brings some juicy titbits to our attention:

• This by Van Dam (not the Belgian action star) is a study into the role and function of elders, purporting to trace the office from the OT onwards.
• Anyone wrestling with historical theology, especially as it relates to the 17th century confessions of faith, will no doubt benefit from the perspicuity of Robert Letham on the theology of the Westminster Confession in its historical context.  I have ordered my copy.
• Those who enjoy pondering language and its employment will find food for thought in Vern Poythress’ God-centred study of language.
• Finally, in our image-saturated culture, artist and screenwriter Brian Godawa’s provocative-sounding examination of how story and imagination helps us to know God will doubtless stimulate much debate.

The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.

Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.

The Greek word epithymeo connotes more than a passing notion, or a fleeting infatuation. It is the idea of an all consumming passion, one that denies all other suitors. It denies its self-pursuits. It says there is no greater love than this.

I recently heard in an installment service the depth to which this calling reaches into the heart of a man. The selected verses were out of Colossians 1: 24-29. Their importance should not be neglected, nor should the fact that this charge given to Paul by Christ, empowered and worked in him by the Spirit, is the same charge that Paul entrusts to Timothy to pass on to other faithful men who in turn are to do the same. Paul urges Timothy as one called to be a fellow elder, to labor and suffer for Christ in this manner:

You then, my child, be strengthened by the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him. An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules. It is the hard-working farmer who ought to have the first share of the crops. Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything. Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound! Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

The abandonment of civilian pursuits coupled with the enduring of suffering has in mind only one object: the sake of the elect.

When we couple that together with: “For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable,” we find that there is no turning back, no laying down of the cross, no removing the hand from the plow once the call of God on a man to become an elder burns with epithymeo. Lest any consider this verse as only referring to general gifts, Paul goes on to describe particular calling to ministry:

For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads, with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.

As it has often been said, a man who is content to do anything other than be an elder, has not been called to be one. This does not mean that a man might not work at an occupation, but what it calls for is that even those things, eventually, be laid aside for a life with single minded purpose:

Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us who are mature think this way, and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal that also to you. Only let us hold true to what we have attained. Brothers, join in imitating me, and keep your eyes on those who walk according to the example you have in us. For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things.

Dr. J. Ligon Duncan III writes:

Now the other thing that you need to know when Paul is speaking here, is that Paul doesn’t describe elders in terms of office or status, but in terms of work. Notice that Paul says that “if any man desires this work….” Paul is concerned for the work, for the function of the elder; not so much the status or the title, or the prestige of the office. Paul’s concern in speaking of the qualification of desire is not that a man would desire a status of authority and reputation, but that he would desire a work.

Now let’s get back to the desire. That is the first qualification: he desires this work. What is Paul saying? Paul is saying that the first qualification of the eldership is that a man would desire to do the spiritual work of a shepherd in the church. Not that he would desire to be esteemed in the local congregation as one who is holding the highest rank that the church has to offer. And it is a glorious thing, my friends, to be an elder…

…But the thing that Paul wants is not a man to aspire to that honor, but to aspire to the work. He wants men who are burning with the desire to shepherd the people of God. He wants men who want to be pastors. All elders are pastors, not just preachers! Not just professional, full-time ministers, but all elders are pastors.

So what are you looking for, when you’re looking for an elder in the church? You’re looking for a man in this congregation who wants to shepherd the souls of people. Yes, they have to make hard decisions about budgets and buildings. But you know what? They do that because they love you. That’s the part of the job that they have to do. What they really love to do is shepherd the souls of men and women, and boys and girls. That’s their great desire. The other stuff they have to do: that’s their great desire. The other stuff they have to do. We’d almost have to pay them to do that other stuff, because it’s hard! But the thing that they really desire is the pastoral, shepherding ministry.

That’s the first qualification for an elder. He has to desire to shepherd the people of God. You can see that in a man. You can see that in the way a man studies his Bible; you can see that in the way a man studies to teach the word; you can see that in the way a man commits himself to the life of a local congregation, in the way he attends church (Sunday morning, Sunday evening and Wednesday night)—you can see those desires expressed outwardly in a man who desires to shepherd the people of God. He’s involved in evangelism and discipleship, he is involved in preparing to shepherd the people of God. So there’s the first qualification. He has a desire for the work of ministry that is entailed in being an elder.

And I might add that he attends to that purpose as Paul might refer, to spend and be spent for the sake of the flock as an undershepherd of the Chief Shepherd as one who laid down his life for them as the sole consumming passion of his heart. To Jerusalem, to the cross, as the Chief Shepherd, the elder forbids anything to interfere with attaining the one goal, the highest calling, set aside as one whose life and purpose is consumed by a single desire.

Peter wrote:

Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker of the glory that is to be revealed, shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. (1 Peter 5:1-4)

John MacArthur said:

…by virtue of their calling and their gifts and their affirmation by the church, they have a responsibility that is different than the rest of the sheep. Responsibility is the key word, or accountability. The Chief Shepherd will hold them responsible—he will call them to give an account someday for exercising oversight. The rest of the sheep will not be called to give an account for oversight. Only the elders, the shepherds.

The calling is not to be slighted by spending effort to fill life with civilian pursuits. The presenting of a bride without spot or blemish to Christ is too precious a charge to have interests divided. The crown is too prescious to be seen as an addendum to the things that other men desire.

John MacArthur continued:

…The Lord has always sought for leaders. In some ways, apart from the very work of God Himself in an individual’s life, spiritual leadership is the most essential element of church structure. So it is an important calling.

There is really no more important calling than this. The Lord has always sought for leaders. You can go all the way back into the Old Testament, 1 Samuel 13:14, and you read there, “The Lord has sought out for Himself a man after His own heart.” You find again the words of Ezekiel 22:30, “I searched for a man who should stand in the gap before Me for the land.” God has always looked for leaders. There is a great need in the church for spiritual leadership.

I read you somebody’s description of how a pastor ought to act, and some of you might be saying, “That’s a too demanding kind of exhortation for me to deal with.” Others might be saying, “Let me have at that. In the power of the Spirit of God, that would be what I would like to be,” and the difference is the compelling of the heart.

I never compel anyone to go into the ministry or the pastorate. If that is not an all-consuming desire of the heart, then either the call of God is not there or sin is there, which means the call of God is muffled. Either way they aren’t fit for ministry. If the call isn’t there or if the sin is there muffling the call, then who am I to call them to ministry?

…this is a demanding calling. He says it is a noble, fine, honorable work. It is a work. It is not just an honored position. It is a lifelong task.

…Paul said to Timothy, “Do the work of an evangelist.” To the Thessalonians Paul wrote and said, “Honor those over you for their position,” no, “for their work’s sake.” Paul in Ephesians 4:12 talks about the work of the ministry. It is a demanding calling. It is diligent, hard work.

…And then finally, it is a holy calling. Verse 2, an overseer then – then -takes us back, because it is an essential calling, because it is a limited calling, because it is such a compelling calling, because it is such a responsible calling, because it is such a noble calling, because it is such a worthy calling or a – not only a worthy calling, but a hard calling, a demanding calling. An overseer then must be above reproach. He must understand it’s a holy calling, because only a holy man could approach such a formidable task.”

At Jerusalem there arose debate about tasks less important, yet tasks necessary to be done. The Elders’ reply was succinct:

Now in these days when the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint by the Hellenists arose against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution. And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.”

It is too important, and as John MacArthur says, it is a work which requires diligence because it is a formidable task. Now consider, if the secondary ministries of serving in other capacities in the church was not deemed important enough to distract, then how much less civilian pursuits from which they had already been called. Jesus in calling Peter and Andrew said, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.” This is a defining moment, they were to leave home, family, occupation for the high calling of becoming shepherds of God’s flock. They were to be made holy men, set aside, made overseers, not self-willed to be. The task is too precious, too demanding, requiring the absolute attention of the laborer called into the harvest, and cannot be subjugated to the things that occupy the lives of other men. It is a monumental thing, a good and hororable thing, a consuming, arduous work, to aspire to be an elder. But it must be a desire above all else, or it is not God calling.

[This series from way back in March 2007, when there were maybe, oh, 30 readers, keeps getting attention because a lot of churches wrestle with these problems. I thought it might be helpful to re-run it, and I couldn't help editing it just a tad.]

Some churches are thoroughly progressive, with progressive elders, staff, and members–at least, most of them. Some churches are thoroughly conservative, with conservative elders, staff, and members–at least, most of them. But most are not. Most are something else. Let’s call them “moderate.”

Obviously, a moderate church has a serious, built in problem–its elders, staff, and members are theologically divided. Now, this is not an insurmountable problem, but it’s a big problem. It’s especially big because most churches have leadership that seeks to avoid confrontation, meaning that this serious problem will not be addressed. Rather, the usual Church of Christ style is to sweep the problem under the rug.

The natural human tendency to look for easy answers is almost always wrong. Consider an example. In a moderate church a young man is asked to lead singing, which he does very well. However, he likes to lead contemporary songs in addition to some of the older hymns. The younger members are thrilled with the new music, but an older member goes to the elders and complains.

The elders are well aware that they lead a divided church. Therefore, there is no discussion about what is right and wrong. Rather, they immediately consider the political impact of this situation. How will the older, more conservative members in Br. Smith’s class react? How will the younger, more progressive members in Br. Jones’ class react? What conclusion can they reach that will keep both sides happy, at least happy enough to stay, volunteer, and give?

Meanwhile, when the identical situation arises in a progressive church, the elders consider what the Bible says, as they read it. If they conclude the Bible permits this practice, they allow it. The complaining member is gently taught why the elders and the rest of the church believe as they do. If the complaining member is sufficiently unhappy, the member may leave, but only after having been taught and prayed with. But most of the time, the member decides to stay. After all, he feels loved and shepherded, even if the member is uncomfortable with some of the church’s practices.

In a conservative church, much the same thing happens. The result is different, but the process is the same. A united church stands behind its principles, teaches what it believes, and refuses to let a minority dictate practice to the majority. United churches have the delightful luxury of standing on principle, that is, actually doing what they think is right.

But the moderate church can engage in no teaching because even its elders have differing views. The staff may be divided, too. Teaching is impossible. The complaining member isn’t corrected or taught and isn’t asked to go along with the leadership’s understanding of the Bible. They have no common understanding.

As a result, the decision made is a political compromise. Perhaps the young song leader is told to eliminate the new songs, leaving the new music for the youth group’s devotionals. Perhaps the new songs are only allowed on Sunday nights.

Now, great truths can be taught in a moderate church, and one of them is submission to the body and the over-arching importance of unity. However, in my experience, these truths only get taught to the more progressive members. The complaining member isn’t asked to submit to the leadership of the song leader who actually has responsibility for the ministry or, for that matter, to the desires and beliefs of the teens or other young members. No, the assumption is that the most conservative members of the church get their way, even on matters that are sometimes legalistic in the extreme.

This has the effect of empowering the most rule-bound members and giving control of the church over to them, rather than the elders. One of the great sins of church leadership is giving control of the church over to a vocal minority that could never qualify as elders themselves. The congregation would never consider these complainers qualified to be leaders, and yet the elders give them the final say on any controversial matter. This is very, very anti-Biblical.

Worse yet, these members, being human, quickly come to expect to get their way. One day, when time has changed the demographics of the church, they’ll find that a decision was made that they disagree with, and they’ll be astonished that they weren’t asked whether they veto it. They’ll, quite predictably, be mad. This being a Church of Christ, they’ll doctrinalize their complaint, insisting the Bible requires this and only this outcome! (This is often the real root of the “worship wars” so many churches are struggling with.)

This will have the effect of raising the emotional stakes so high that the church threatens to explode. Once you’ve publicly announced that the Bible says such-and-such, it’s hard to back down. It’s too late for the elders and staff to teach a better understanding of the gospel. People are too angry to listen. The church splits.

The church, which was already struggling financially, can’t support it’s staff, scales back its programs, and begins an inevitable decline into nonexistence. The members who remain blame those who left, but the real fault is with the leadership for sweeping the problem under the rug. Had they addressed it sooner, the church would not have died. It might have even prospered.

More in part 2.

We lost a couple more families at church recently, people who were very involved. Not only is it hard to watch them go, but it’s hard to fill the void they leave behind. And given that our church is small, and that those who contribute tend to wear many hats, that void is significant. We lack bench strength; few others are ready or able to step up.

For example, one departing member played the piano in our praise band, was an elder, chaired a key committee, and had recently began filling in as treasurer. Nobody else plays piano; the music minister will have to carry the praise band with his guitar. The man who took over this fellow’s other duties is quite busy already as an elder, chair of another key committee, and more.

I’m an elder in this church, too. I don’t normally bring it up because I wish to avoid anyone thinking I have achieved some higher spiritual plane or somehow have an “in” with God. I have neither. I’m bewildered that God has asked me to fill this role because I don’t think I can even stand in the shadows of elders I’ve admired. But I’m delighted that God wants to use me to care for this congregation.

Serving in this capacity only heightens my grief over this congregation’s condition. These members leaving has sent me into a bit of an emotional tailspin. It’s hard for me to imagine how we can keep our doors open when we’re losing muscle and bone. All of us elders want our congregation to be restored and to grow again. We think God wants to honor that. But we’re in bad enough shape that our efforts won’t be enough make it happen.

We keep bringing up Judges 7, the story of Gideon and his army. God let Gideon know he was to form an army and go fight the Midianites, who had an army of 135,000 men. Gideon mustered just 32,000 men. But God whittled that number to only 300 soldiers and sent them out. Gideon and his army beat the Midianites – and with impossible odds like those, nobody could deny that God brought that victory.

We lean on this story for comfort and strength. It gives us faith that God will show us an amazing victory, too, one that can be credited only to him. My hope is that seeing God act undeniably to renew our congregation – dare I hope that many will come to know Christ because God has loved them through us? – will make all of our hearts beat wild with love for him.

This is an important question and I preach on this very issue in our Ekklesia Series (June 09). In summarising my answer the following things need to be kept in mind.

Firstly, Jesus Christ is the Senior Pastor of every Christian Church.

Every church is built on the cornerstone of Jesus Christ (Eph 2:20). Jesus is the head of the church and in all things Christ is to be preeminent (Eph 5:23; Col 1:17-18). Jesus is the Apostle who plants a church and builds a church and the Chief Shepherd who rules over the church (Heb 3:1; Mt 16:18; 1 Pt 5:4). Jesus is to be consulted as central to the church and not peripheral to what the church is doing (Col 3:16). Serving under Jesus authority are elders, deacons and members.

Elders are qualified Christians leading the church under Jesus authority.

Elders are not some special forces unit that is better than everyone else but they have been appointed by God to perform certain functions and carry out specific responsibilities on behalf of Christ and for the church. Elders are biblically qualified, theologically informed and spiritually mature Christians.  1 Tim 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 inform us of the qualifications of an elder.

Biblically qualified elders are supposed to lead the church.

Read 1 Tim 3:1-7 for a thorough understanding of the elders qualifications and role. Some models of eldership promote the idea of a separate board of lay people leading the church but this isn’t a biblical model. The church is not to be staff led and elder protected by a separate board of people who meet once a month to hold the pastor accountable. The church is to be elder led, elder fed, elder protected, elder disciplining, elder vision setting, elder shepherding and elder example setting. 1 Peter 5:1-3 gives a detailed description of how the elders are to lead.

What about women as elders?

There are 3 basic positions on women as elders. They are egalitarian (liberal), complementarian (moderate) and hierarchical (conservative). We take a mild complementarian (moderate) view on eldership which says that all church ministries are open to qualified men and women, with the singular exception of lead elder-pastor, which is only open to qualified men. Women can be associate elders, deacons, teach, lead worship, serve communion, oversee ministries and be in full time paid ministry. Scriptural texts supporting our position are: Gen 1:27; 2:18; 3:16-17; 1 Cor 11:3, 8-9; 1 Tim 2:11-3:13; Rom 16:1-2; 1 Cor 12:11.

Eldership is not to be taken lightly and should maintain the centrality of Christ as the chief shepherd, engage a plurality of elders providing leadership for the church and the lead elder-pastor should be a male in alignment with 1 Tim 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9. Keeping in mind Hebrews 13:7 & 12 as a church member.

Lead the Change!

Having spiritual purpose seems to be a musing during this rest-stop on my journey. Especially since I feel so useless in so many ways except for what I can do from the confines of a couch or a wheelchair.

Temporary, yes, but a motivation to consider what is really important in the investment of my journey.

• What am I becoming?
• Do I look more like Jesus today then I did a year ago?
• Did I make Him proud today?
• How am I treating the most important people in my life?

I think Joan Chittister put it well in her book, The Gift of Years, ”If we do not become the ’spiritual elders’ of our time, what was the spiritual purpose of all our earlier years? … will a younger generation remember what our lives said to them about experience, survival, and persistence, about living in such a way that their own mortality has meaning?”

What is your spiritual purpose? What are the questions you are asking yourself that help you focus on your spiritual purpose? We’d love to hear from you in the comment section below!

Susan 

Many sick churches (not in an X-Games kind of way) have this in common: their elders are not eldering. They neglect tasks essential to elders, and major on tasks they shouldn’t touch. They become a sort of board of directors that doesn’t Teach, Pray, Train or Protect, but instead argues about how to get the grass cut, which projector to buy, or which color to paint the foyer.

It sounds funny, but I’ve run into so many churches with this exact problem.

What happens? The church flounders without direction while the elders burnout from overwork. So, biblically, what are elders supposed to do? What will lead the church toward unity, health, and growth?

Here are a few God-given tasks that I’ve found… tasks which elders should concentrate on, and limit themselves to:

• TEACH/DIRECT

Teaching includes more than simply explaining God’s Word, but showing where the church must go. Things like direction and vision are included in teaching: Acts 15:2, 6; 20:28-31; 1 Thess. 5:12; 1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5; 1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:9; Heb. 13:7 1 Pet. 5:1-3.

If elders don’t direct, then someone else in the church will.

• PRAY

How many elders act out their personal and corporate prayer life as vital to their role as elders? : James 5:14; Acts 6:1-4

If elders don’t pray, how can we expect God’s Spirit to begin a transformational movement amongst us and our community?

• TRAIN

Training up, then the consecration of new leaders keeps a healthy church growing and leadership from growing stale: Eph. 4:11-13; 1 Tim. 4:14.

If elders don’t train up and consecrate new leaders, then leadership will grow stale and irrelevent over time.

• PROTECT

Both from inside and outside threats to unity: Acts 20:28-31; 1 Thess. 5:12

If elders don’t protect, then new and vulnerable believers will be hurt as an ugly church split over any number of issues inevitably results.
As elders accomplish these tasks they will be examples to the rest of the church (Heb. 13:7; 1 Pet. 5:3) and prepare themselves to give an account for their leadership (Heb. 13:17).

It seems simple, but convicting. So easy to get off-task. If you are an elder, how does this list match up to what you are doing?

Any correct answer will blame us all — our institutions, our elders, our ministers, and our members. And while the members are hardly free from fault, I think those with the greatest influence get most of the blame — our schools and our elders. And, of those, I think the schools get most of the blame.

I mean, we provide very, very little support and training for elders, and we have schools that turn our preachers well schooled in division and discord.

And I don’t see even our best universities doing much to help train elders or compete head to head with the odious schools of preaching. That’s not to say that they aren’t working mightily to expand the Kingdom. Some are. It’s just that the way the Churches of Christ are organized, if anyone is going to deal with our biggest problems effectively, it has to come from the universities.

And our two biggest problems are poorly trained elders and preachers trained to be servants of a false, works-based gospel.

Is the culture getting worse? Sure it is. But we should be the ones giving a reason for our hope rather than hoping for a reason.

We are living in Romans 1 times. God is making the culture evil enough that people ought to be able to see the need to return to God. We just need to introduce people to a God who truly loves them — and who transforms people into something very attractive, you know, like us. And until we are attractive enough that people see God in us, evangelism isn’t going to happen.

Do we have chronically dysfunctional churches in our denomination? Sure, but everyone has the one crazy uncle that comes to the family reunion.

Actually, we have a lot of chronically dysfunctional churches, because we have a chronically dysfunctional theology. To overcome our legalism, we’re going to have to learn to think strategically — with a conscious, coordinated effort to take the evil of legalism down. And I don’t see a lot of strategic thinking among our leaders.

Are pastors shirking their responsibilities? Some, but I generally believe in the trustworthiness of those in vocational ministry. They get beat up by plenty of others and I will not join the pile on.

Uh, in the Churches of Christ, our pastors are also known as elders, and our elders, on the whole, need help. And many of our preachers are either part of the problem of legalism, or else they labor under the leadership of men with a legalistic theology.

Is it a lazy membership that is the root of the decline? The multitude who act more like spectators at a show than ambassadors of the kingdom certainly share the blame. But I genuinely love those in my own congregation and hope for the best in all believers.

What percentage of our members are active in church work on a regular basis? In most churches it’s 20% to 30%. We need to get to 50% to do very well, I think, and the goal ought to be 80% — leaving allowance for those with health problems, who have to care for an ill relative, or otherwise committed by God to another work.

Just look at the pews filled with Sunday-morning Christians who aren’t truly disciples — and tell me we do a great job of preaching the true gospel to our people. We don’t. If we did, we’d have members who’ve been changed by the gospel.

Those of us on the progressive side of the denomination don’t get off the hook either, because we’ve often traded legalism for a cheap grace, forgetting to teach (and show) our members the joy of service. We often have freedom without commitment, which is not really the gospel either.

… And, of course (and on cue), some will call for Southern Baptists to turn leftward theologically as the solution to our decline. And, I will wonder out loud– does anyone read statistics? As I have written before, a left turn does not stem decline, it accelerates it.

The last thing we need is a fight over inerrancy. Oh, please, please, let’s find something else to write about. Surely there are better ways to earn one’s salary as a professor.

The goal, of course, has to be to move our leaders and our churches toward a theology of grace that produces bountiful works that glorify God (more on this to come). But knowing where we want to get to is not even half the solution.

In WWII, the generals knew that the goal was to reach Berlin. The truly hard part was figuring out how to get there, and then — much harder — was paying the price to land on the beach and take on the opposing army.

For us, figuring the goal out seems pretty hard, because for so long we’ve chased the wrong goal. And we’ve made a few false starts toward a less than optimal goal, so getting the goal right is not easy. It’s just that it’s only the beginning of a long, tough fight.

February 2009

Dear Father’s House Church Family,

We are writing to communicate some new vision that God has been speaking to us over the past few months. As many of you know and can even feel, we are in a new season of deep healing and spiritual growth as a church-community. God has been imparting hope into our hearts in addition to exciting vision for the future. God has been clarifying the calling, mission, and values He has given Father’s House and we know that God is leading us into something new. We as Father’s House leadership, look forward to receiving all that God has for us as a church-family.

One aspect of this new season and vision that God has been speaking to the Helmsmen about is the issue of giving Tom and Sue (our church-family’s “spiritual parents”) a much needed (and deserved) time of rest, recuperation and re-equipping. As you know Tom and Sue have been serving those of us within Father’s House for 30+ years, and without a real extended “breather” other than the short vacations they are able to take in between church responsibilities and projects. The Pastoral Team and Helmsmen consider it a true blessing that we are in a place to be able to bless Tom and Sue with a Sabbatical.

It is with this perspective that we ask you read Tom’s following letter which does an incredible job explaining and articulating what their plans are. Both the Pastoral Team and the Helmsmen know that Tom and Sue’s Sabbatical is part of a “bigger picture” of vision that God has for us at Father’s House. This decision was not made flippantly and has been discussed over a course of several months and with much prayer. We are confident that God is leading Tom and Sue to the Sabbatical, and that Father’s House will greatly benefit from honoring our spiritual parents in this regard. We look forward to all that the Gaddis’ will bring back to us from their time set apart to hear God for both their personal lives as well as for us as a church-family.

Filled with hope and vision,

Jeremy Sizemore, Mary Weber

Scott Morrell, Garth and Holly Jantzen, Val Sizemore, Rex Johnson, Vickie Mears

Check out the great thinking and shared wisdom from Drew on eldering in a decentralized movement. Although it’s probably premature to call Kaleo a movement, the vision and movement DNA are certainly present. We are hopeful that similar DNA and vision are building in ACL to contribute to a movement in Austin.

“If we want to create communities with a missional mindset, we cannot allow our churches to be held back because of a lack of professional pastoral leadership. Every believer is called to missions, regardless of a more specific vocational calling. Equipping more laypeople to lead ministries and churches is exactly what Ephesians 4:11-13 describes.

The Bible goes into too much detail about pastor/elders not to assume they were a normal part of the local church. But the qualifications are those of a godly person with one exception. The godly person must be ‘able to teach’. Beyond the standards of godliness, that is the biblical qualification for a layperson functioning as a pastoral leader in a church plant.” Ed Stetzer, Planting Missional Churches, p.78

If we’re developing missional communities that, for all intensive purposes, function as small churches in a network with each other, maybe united by a central Sunday gathering, then surely all missional community leaders must be able to teach. If the leader is not able to teach then is the missional community really a self-contained church formed and led by the Word of God?

I know that some guys (even in the more theologically conservative wing) in the missional community movement don’t think that the leaders of individual missional communities need to be elders but I think that’s something of a contradiction in terms. They want their missional communities to function as micro-churches but they don’t want them led by elders. I can’t see how you can get away from it: not elder-led=not biblical church. I know there are other ways to ‘lead’ and numerous different ways in which non-bible teachers in a church ‘lead’ others but at the core of biblical ecclesiology is elder leadership which is, as Stetzer points out, a teaching leadership. Or am I missing something here?

there is a consistent patten of plural eldership as the main governing group in the New Testament Churches according to Wayne Grudem in his Systematic Theology. 

he takes a look at the following passages:

Acts 14:23 – they appointed elderS in every church

Acts 20:17 – Paul called together the elderS of the church

Titus 1:5 – Paul’s assistant Titus was to apoint elderS in every town (assuming there was a church there)

1 Timothy 4:14 -  Timothy is appointed/ supported by the elderS laying hands on him.

James 5:14  -when you are sick call the elderS for prayer

1 Peter 5:1 – Peter in his general letter to several dispersed churches encourages the elderS amongst them to do their job of caring

Grudem makes two conclusions at this point;

1. no passage in scripture suggests that a church , no matter how small, had only a single elder/presbyter. There is a consitent pattern of a  plurality of elders in every church and in every town.

-IF this is the case then then there is as muc evidence in the bible for RECTORS as there is for UNICORNS.

2. there is not a diversity of forms of church government but rather a unified and consitent pattern in which every church had elderS governing and keeping watch over it.

- If this is the case then for the Anglican church in which I minister needs to appoint/ recognise  additional elders/ overseers/ pastors in roder to be consitent with the pattern of government we see in scripture.

The way Grudem points it out it seems so simple and clear – what do you reckon?

In no particular order here are some of the things that I keep repeating to myself recently . I will elaborate more in posts to come but I am keen for your comments.

1. I am a soldier, a farmer, an athlete, an ox. I need discipline and a good eschatology.
2. love the word of the Lord, love the Lord of the word.
3. I must always trust the word of God and the spirit of God to gather and grow the people of God.
4. I am self employed, ministry is not social welfare and no one is going to feed my family unless I find the money and the supporters.
5. God gives the strategy in scripture, we find the tactics through prayer, wisdom and boldness.
6. my first pastorate is my family - ministry is nothing if they are not loved, nutured,  led and fed.
7. there is no glory nor blessing in public successes whilst harbouring private failure.
8. stick to the ‘p’ principles.  proclamtion, prayer, personal discipling, people orintation, planning,  perserverance.  
9. God’s work, done God’s way never lacks God’s supply. (h/t hudson taylor)
10. think big and bold, work small and faithful.
11. I am not a man pleaser, but for God’s glory I seek to please all men.
12. I must contend for the faith, contextualise it faithfully, yet never faithlessly compromise.
13. I am not sufficient for these things.
14. Jesus and sovereign grace must be more, i must be less.
15. I am justified by faith in Christ, not preaching, not success, not notoriety nor popularity.
16. pastoral ministry is a role and a privilege, not a possession or a right.

Elements of Celtic Christianity are attractive to me. Not everything though. I haven’t studied too much about it. Only read a few articles here and there. Not everything is exclusively Celtic tradition, but here are some of my pros and cons:

Pros:

• Sees creation as a hymn of praise to the Creator
• Acknowledges God’s providence in daily living
• Focuses on experiencing God through all the senses
• Encourages creativity and contemplation
• Sympathizes with ethnic churches and contextualization
• Appreciates a healthy view of sexual pleasure
• Perceives the Christian life as a pilgrimage
• Emphasizes humanity in God’s image, male and female
• Views the church as a community of hospitality
• Prays earthy and yet very poetic prayers

• Disobeys biblical view of male eldership
• Denies the priesthood of all believers
• Misunderstands original sin (i.e. Pelagianism)
• Takes an exclusive house church approach
• Overly mystical about saints and angels
• Confusion about the Creator/creature distinction

As I was reading some of these characteristics to a friend, he noticed how similar it sounded to some Emergent approaches to Christianity. I don’t think he meant those characteristics should be qualified as strictly “Emergent,” but I do see some Emergent approaches adopting some of these characteristics.

Understanding that some Emergents are less ahistorical actually helps me to empathize with them to some degree. While some are vocal about re-inventing their own kind of Christianity, others are actually trying to get in touch with more ancient expressions of Christianity in a sort of ecumenical spirit. While there are valid concerns with that approach, I think it can be very beneficial as long as Scripture is continually held in high regard. I’m sure people on both sides will disagree.

Eldership at Discovery will be a team of elders overseeing and shepherding the churches in their city.  Here’s a pictoral progression of what this could look like.

Here is a simple circle.  Let’s let each circle represent a microchurch.

Each church in the network must have multiplication as it’s goal–to multiply disciples and thus multiplying churches.

As disciples multiply and churches sprout up, groups of churches will be planted in relatively close proximity to each other in the city.

As disciples multiply and churches sprout, clusters of churches will form.  Each church should have the capacity for 20 people (this may be less depending on location, but it should not be more).  Within the DCC network, at least one elder would oversee and shepherd each cluster of churches (with no more than five churches per cluster).  In the early stages, before the first cluster gels, should elders be developed, there would need to be at least two appointed.

As disciples continue to multiply and churches sprout, clusters can multiply new clusters.  Each cluster is overseen and shepherded by an elder… and thus there are now a plurality of elders with the city where these churches are located. 

As clusters continue to multiply (and elders are appointed to oversee each cluster)…

…zones are formed.  A zone is a group of clusters of churches, all of which are found within or around a city.  The elders over the clusters in each zone (in each city) collectively oversee and shepherd the church collective in this city.  Thus, there are a plurality of elders overseeing and shepherding the church of this city.

As disciples multiply and churches sprout within cities, clusters will form and zones will form within cities.  Elders will oversee and shepherd the churches in their cluster, and the elders from each zone will collectively oversee and shepherd the churches in their city.  Each zone is independent of othre zones–each zone is overseen by their own leadership team of elders and evangelist.  What is networked is the DNA (love God, love people, serve the world).  Zones can also network with each other (resources, time, skills) for regional service and global service. 

You can also extrapolate that out–networks can birth other networks in other cities.  They are loosely connected via the DNA (love God, love people, serve the world), and they can work together on common regional and global efforts.

SUMMARY
So, as our network grows–disciples are multiplied, churches sprout in each city, clusters of churches form–elders will oversee and shepherd the churches within their cluster (via communication with the church planters).  The elders within each zone in our network (each zone is organized around a city) oversee and shepherd the churches in their zone.   Therefore, each zone (city) will have their own elders.  Elders from different zones can certainly communicate to network together to share resources, plan regional and global service, training sessions, etc.

When we look at the structure of eldership in the New Testament, two scriptures must be taken into account in our thinking:

And when they (Paul and Barnabas) had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.  Acts 14:23

For this reason I (Paul) left you (Titus) in Crete, that you might set in order what remains, and appoint elders in every city as I directed you.  Titus 1:5

American churches that subscribe to the elder model for leadership have taken these scriptures to mean that each congregation is to have a plurality–several–elders over each congregation.  If that’s the model of church we used, it would certainly be the leadership model we would adopt.  However, as a microchurch network (which looks like what the early churches were–networks of simple churches organized around a city), this presents a question:  does each church in a microchurch network need multiple elders, or does the network as a collective whole need multiple elders?

As you look at how the early church seemed to be structured–networks of microchurches in a city–it would seem that each network had a multitude of elders over it, and not neccessarily each individual church (although it could be the case, depending upon how big each church was).  So, in Acts 14, it would seem that Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in each church–and the context shows that each church would be the network of churches in Lystra, the network of churches in Iconium, and in the network of churches in Antioch.  This gives some clarity on what Paul wrote to Titus–ordain elders in every city.  The churches were networked in the city they were located in, and a plurality of elders would oversee and shepherd those churches within their respective network.

So, in the next post, we’ll look at how eldership is structured in the DCC network (and any networks that will be birthed from DCC):  a team of elders who oversee the network of churches in their city.