6/30
2001
Jesus calls us to join Him in HIS
church.
| as of 6/30 2001 |
|
|
| |
||
| Christian Viewpoints on Church Organization and Leadership |
In the first century A.D., the Christians formed congregations, but no organization above those local groups. In each group capable men were named to teach and lead the other members. These men were called elders, pastors, and teachers. Cecil Hook comments about these leaders in an attached study. Most congregations did not have only ONE pastor as is often the case today. See Viewpoint Study #89 about this.
Leadership in God's church, and teaching of truths now found in the New Testament (books in the Bible) started with the apostles of Jesus Christ. God especially inspired certain other prophets and prophetesses with spiritual knowledge they were to share to guide the other Christians. At first, miraculous language gifts were sometimes used within their meetings, and God inspired both the speakers and those who were able to interpret what they had spoken in languages unknown to most of the congregation.
The local pastors (the elders) were also called bishops. Lynn Anderson in Viewpoint Study #9 is quoted about church leaders. So far as the Bible reveals, there were no officials over any congregation or Christians (who of course were made part of a congregation when they chose to walk the Way of Christ) except the traveling evangelists (missionaries, we're apt to call them today) whose primary work was to take the gospel where it had not yet been heard. The evangelists apparently helped new congregations find qualified local leaders, and, after helping those pastors learn how to rightly handle their responsibilities, went on to build more new congregations.
All Christians were and are priests. The church had no class of priests or clergy with special responsibilities and privileges. There were no archbishops, cardinals, or popes. All Christians could baptize. Any saint (every Christian is a saint) could preside at the Lord's Table of Remembrance. We all still can do so. David Bayless suggests, in Viewpoint Study #78 that the right way to evangelize is the same way the early church did it. He says we should imitate Paul who imitated Jesus -- that this is how we can best serve and please both Jesus and His Father.
Denominations are bad rather than good. Following Bible methods starts with evangelism, but goes far beyond just evangelism. For us to organize ourselves into denominational groups is not necessary. It's not desirable. It's contrary to the practice of the early church, and contrary to the expressed desire of Jesus that we all should be "one body." It's still best that each congregation be independent -- obedient in all ways to the Head of the body as we best understand His Way. It's not necessary to have officials above the congregation. It's not necessary to have organizations in each state or in each nation who have power over the local church. But fellowship in larger gatherings sure is grand. See Viewpoint articles on Christian unity.
September 28, 1998 -- Jim, In comments below, how right you are! There is a terrible problem in that many only "attend" church, living lives totally different from what happens at their assemblies, and I'm speaking against this. You point out well indeed that we must not REMAIN isolated. Whereas most of our work may be done in the world, apart from the Christian body, we surely draw strength from, and are obligated to perform our function, as part of a local body of believers. You're entirely right. Thanks for saying so.
Date sent: Mon, 28 Sep 1998
From: Jim K McGuiggan <106475.3377@compuserve.com>Subject: Re: Viewpoint, Continued
To: Ray Downen <outreach@sofnet.com>
>
> there is no such thing as an individual christian--that is, as an
independent entity. while each individual is distinct, they aren't
independent. a finger is not an eye but it is part of the body and is in fact no 'finger' unless it is part of the body. even a severed 'finger' can be spoken of as a 'finger' only in view of the body concept.
>
> we don't worship or believe in the church -- we believe in the Head of the church, but it remains true we have no relationship with the Head unless we are related to the body. -- Jim McQuiggan
>Besides which, GOD adds us to the body, and we
should rejoice in being where HE placed us! -- Ray Downen
> To: outreach@sofnet.com
> From: (Mark E.)
> Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998> --------- Begin forwarded message ----------
(NOTE -- The letter below is not addressed to Viewpoint, nor is the writer or recipient of the letter known personally by me. The one who forwarded it to me is a long-time friend.)
> > After reading many of your studies off the Internet, I feel confident in bringing to you a problem that I would like godly, Pastoral advice and input on.
> > My wife, kids and I attend a (Protestant) Church here in ~. My brother and his family also attend. My brother is a leader in this same Church, which is partly why this problem is so difficult to deal with.
> > His children are so different than ours. Our two oldest (one High school, one Jr. High) are both on the Honor roll. None of my kids have been kicked out of school, several of his have. His kids have been both brought home and taken from home in Police cars, none of ours have. His kids continually verbally and physically abuse ours, as well as steal from our kids and from local stores. They are really out of control. And he is a church leader.
> > The last thing that happened was that his oldest son stole money from our oldest son a few days ago. His oldest son then stole a neighborhood bike, rode to the freeway and hitchhiked to a nearby city where the local police later found him at the bus station.
> > Today my brother pulled our oldest son out of his Sunday School class and basically accused our daughter of having stolen the money instead of his son! This behavior has gone on for years but he is trying to save his reputation and that of his kids at the expense of my children, and that is where I draw the line! This is really damaging my family and I have to do something!
> > I want to do what is right, proper, Christian and Biblical. My brother is a leader in the church, and I want to proceed properly. I respect the office of church leader, but not his actions as a person or parent. What do I do? Any input will be greatly appreciated.
NOTE -- Yes, the story above could be entirely fiction. The "hero" tells a good tale which might even be true. Who most needs help if the story IS true? The accuser? The accused? The congregation?
Mark, ~ Your friend Ken has a real problem, according to the description he gives of the situation. As I understand him, briefly stated the facts are that two brothers in the same congregation have families with children still at home and growing up. The elder's children are said to be unruly, unlawful, and hateful. The complaining brother says that, in contrast, his children are obedient, law-abiding, and loving.
If the two were not blood brothers, the situation described would still be extremely unpleasant.
Jesus, as described by Matthew, urges that when a brother has a complain against any other brother (in the church) the one who feels wronged should approach the other and ask that the matter be made right. If the offending brother repents and makes restitution, all is well.
If not, the offended brother should ask two or more respected and loved brothers to go WITH him to talk with the offender. If the offending brother repents and makes restitution, admitting his wrong and wanting to make it right, all is well. If not, the offended brother should publicize the wrong and lack of repentance, to the congregation, which is expected then to call for repentance by the wrong-doer. If the offending brother repents and makes restitution, admitting his wrong and wanting to make it right, all is well.
If not, the entire congregation is expected to treat the offender as a non-member until repentance and restitution is publicly made. If the offender holds ANY church office, that office must be voided until the restoration of the offender to good status before God and the congregation.
The offended brother runs the risk of being himself found guilty rather than innocent in any matter of controversy. His complaint and charges should be based on facts which are provable, and not on opinion. In case of the congregation not choosing to believe the charges, they would need to ask one of the brothers to leave that congregation rather than continue there in disagreement.
Since one of the requirements for holding office as a church leader is that he must be the husband of one wife with believing children who are NOT accused of riot or unruly, and since another of the requirements is that he must be of good report inside and outside the congregation, It seems likely that any man accused of not meeting these qualifications should resign any office in church leadership until or unless he can prove himself innocent of the charges.
I am wondering why Ken chooses to stay in a congregation which would retain in leadership a man such as Ken describes his brother to be. This situation surely calls for the wisdom of Solomon to find a solution which would prove good for all involved. If there is a congregation where brothers walk close with Christ in reachable distance from Ken's residence, I think Ken should give careful thought to visiting that congregation with a view toward moving his family and his godly service to the other congregation.
If no such congregation exists, I'm wondering if it might not be best to talk with close friends about starting a Christian church which would attempt in all things to be loyal to God's Word. If Ken's brother is guilty as charged, no congregation should retain him in any leadership role. If he is innocent, the congregation would seem to be better off by not having continuing conflict between two differing and strong personalities.