Last week, we looked at the three structural models for today’s church, which unconsciously
functions in society today as if it were a type of business—a ”sole proprietorship” (episcopal), “stockholder-officer” (presbyterian), or “partnership” (congregational). Are any of them what the Bible teaches they should be?
A common thread runs through each of these models (thus throughout all of American churches today), and that is the concept of the PROFESSIONAL CLERGY–men who are “called to the ministry.” It is considered normal for all to see “the ministry” as a profession that will financially support those in it. I believe that this universal practice, probably more than any other factor, militates against a biblical church!
The typical way for that “calling to the ministry” to be realized is for a young man to, FIRST, feel the call, go to seminary to be trained for the ministry (his chosen profession), get a job in a church, draw a paycheck, and THEN he is ready to do the work of the ministry. This, of course, is the same way a young man enters medicine, law, engineering or any other profession.
Eventually, assuming he is successful in his profession, he will graduate to the position of Senior Pastor, irrespective of the type of government his church follows. Thus, the practical, day-to-day functioning of all traditional churches is basically the same: the pastor and his staff of professionals “have church” for the laymen.
The vast majority of Christians today see nothing wrong with this approach to the ministry. They do not realize that this system bears no resemblance to the ministry as portrayed on the pages of the New Testament.
This model of the professional clergy has been a major stumbling block to the modern church. We are sons of Adam, and, as his descendants, we have inherited his propensity for docilely following rather than leading. “He is getting paid to do the ministry,” we reason subconsciously as we observe our pastor. “He will do it.” No one sees anything wrong with this attitude. “Let the pastor do the work” is almost “baked-in” and impossible to avoid if the ministry is viewed as a profession that the pastor is paid to do. This attitude has hindered the church’s effectiveness in accomplishing the mission God has given us to do—our Great Eternal Purpose of Ruling over the Earth as laid out in the Bible! (Genesis 1:26-28)!.
An understanding of New Testament church government will help us to see more clearly how the church is one of the weapons God has given mankind, along with family and civil government, to achieve God’s ruling plan for us.
However, any church with godly leadership, that preaches the gospel of the unconditional grace of God clearly, will have a positive effect for the kingdom of God, no matter the church government—be it episcopal, presbyterian, or congregational! For example, some who have lost the use of their arms have learned to eat, paint beautiful pictures and accomplish other amazing deeds with their feet, but they are handicapped in the execution of those tasks. If God’s eternal purpose is that He rules over the earth through us, do we not want to see that rule extended unhindered wherever we go?
When we are ready for that to occur through us, we will eventually follow as carefully as possible the blueprint for the structure and function of the church as laid out in the Bible, because the church’s job is to equip us to rule! Yes, the NEW WINE must have a NEW WINESKIN!
Each of these three contemporary church models contain elements of that biblical blueprint, and churches that are unconsciously following it will, certainly, to a degree, have effective ministries. But the question is, can we find a way to self-consciously combine the biblical elements of each to maximize those ministries? Why “eat with our feet” when we can effectively use our hands by following God’s design?
Many churches that are part of a denomination or an association of churches that follow one of the traditional church models, have already adapted their government to more readily meet their needs; there often is an unconscious mixture of styles.
For example, a typically episcopal church pastor has found that he needs help in decision-making, so he has shared his authority with a council of elders to make decisions with him, no longer being strictly a “sole proprietor.” However, this blending has often not been by design. Flexibility has occurred as a reaction to pressures and difficulties, not as an attempt to be as biblical as possible. It has been pragmatic and not principled.
Portions of the model we will be proposing for church structure and government is already being used by some churches, though maybe not consciously. I believe the model we will present is a thoroughly biblical one; its principles are either spelled out distinctly in the Scripture, or can be derived directly from clear scriptural principles. This model contains elements of each of the three traditional models.
Next week we will explore how that is already being done and ways we can make those efforts more effective!
