Wednesday, May 6, 2009

The Clergy System

So how did we get from the Elder led assemblies Paul established to the clergy system we currently have in the church today?

Acts 14:23 (NASB)
23 When they had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed.
1 Timothy 5:17 (NASB)
17 The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.
Titus 1:5 (NASB)
5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you,
1 Timothy 3:1-2 (NASB)
1 It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do.
2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,

Elders appointed in every Church/City to oversee and rule in the manner of a shepherd and not a tyrant was what the earliest plan or model was. So what happened? how did we get terms like Senior Minister, Bishops, Cardinals, and even Popes? We know that many things unscriptural entered into the church over time and please do not always equate unscriptural with anti-scriptural, they are not the same. Sound systems and overhead projectors are unscriptural (not mentioned in scripture) but they are not necessarily anti-scriptural (against scriptural teaching)
Ignatius one of the earliest church fathers who lived from AD 30-107 in writing Polycarp the Bishop of Smyrna in chapter VI says this: "Give Ye heed to the Bishop, that God may also give heed to you. My soul be for theirs that are submissive to the Bishop, to the Presbyters and to the Deacons, and may my portion be along with them in God".

Now we do not accept the early church fathers as inspired and certainly there is much included in their writings that can be debated and rejected. My point here is that before the close of the first century, the office of Bishop and Presbyter had already been separated into two distinct offices. Many other of the early fathers spoke in this same fashion. This seems counter to what Paul had said in Acts 20, where upon calling the Elders (Presbyters) said they were made Overseers/Bishops (Episkopos) to Shepherd/Pastor (poimene) the flock. So what happened?
It seems that the church took as its form of worship and meeting the example of the synagogue model from which many had come and even remained as their model. In the synagogue there were elders but also a ruling or chief elder. He had no more authority then the others but was elected as a sort of chairperson for the purpose of orderly assembly and meeting. A leader among equals he was called. So very soon the church seems to have adopted at first this leader among equals and called him the episkopos or Bishop. The other leaders were called presbyters or lower bishops at first but eventually presbyters were called priests under the leadership of a bishop. While this original separation came quickly in the churches history, the term priest came later by way of the teaching of a man called Tertullian. He taught that since the Lords supper was a continual sacrifice, it necessitated a priesthood. That’s another topic all together.

While at first we see elders in every church, most probably house churches, since church building as we have them today did not exist and persecution was still frequent. There came a time when this lead Bishop became the overseer of an entire city or town with the lesser bishops now called presbyters overseeing local assemblies. These later became known as dioceses. The stronger and wealthier the diocese, the more influential the lead Bishop. Rome, Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria and Smyrna were the leaders in this system. Eventually Rome became the chief city and its Bishop considered the Bishop or Bishops and later called the Pope or papa.
Over the centuries this Bishop of Rome acquired more and more power and influence and was even said to have certain authority as if speaking from God as infallible (ex- cathedra). Their thinking was that they could trace back this unbroken and successive Bishopric back to the Apostle Peter based on Matthew 16 where upon confessing Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God Jesus says "you are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church". the church in Rome saw this rock as Peter himself rather then the confession Peter made by Gods inspiration.

At the time of the reformation many different men sought to reform or change what was wrong (according to them) with the now all-powerful Roman Catholic church. they sought to change the selling of indulgences (Luther’s 95 Theses), infant baptism, the authority of the Pope and much more. the one thing they never considered however was the clergy system itself. Priests and Bishops and Arch-Bishops and Cardinals all seemed to go unchallenged for the most part. The church leaders took on the title of ministers after time with no Pope but still certain clergy hierarchy still in place.

The restoration movement under Stone and Campbell saw some early talk on Elder led churches but the few who followed this biblical model soon found they were in a vast minority. It seems people liked the system they had and so it is to this day. When we first implemented an Elder led, Elder fed system at our church I remember one minister calling and telling us we had entered upon a slippery slope. I still do not know what he meant since that is the model we see in scripture.

The difficulties are many with a Senior Minister system. First and foremost the Eldership becomes an advisory board for this Senior Minister which is not seen in scripture. Secondly at times the Eldership exerts itself too far and becomes the dictator of the Senior Minister and he is at their mercy for his job and often times his residence. Both are wrong and lead to more problems then they solve. The church is to be led by a plurality of Pastor/Elders. No Seniors among them. It is in this plurality that their authority is seen and administered and not in any one individual.

Some have suggested that this would lead to a rash of Seminary and Bible college closings but I disagree. Leaders in Christ’s church still need training in preaching, council, Theology and so much more. Churches should be willing and even desire to send their men to be the best equipped leaders they can be. With home courses now so readily available they would not even have to leave their ministries to get this training.

John

No comments:

Post a Comment