Tithing and Clergy Salaries: Sore Spots on the Wallet
So if you’re part of a denomination or fellowship that requires tithing to pay for your pastor’s salary, according to Frank Viola and George Barna, you’re engaging in “a harmful practice that has no root in the New Testament” (p. 178, Pagan Christianity)
According to Viola and Barna, the clergy/pastors should not receive a salary from their churches:
In fact, the clergy salary runs against the grain of the entire New Covenant. Elders (shepherds) in the first century were not salaried. They were men with an earthly vocation. They gave to the flock rather than taking from it…
Giving a salary to pastors elevates them above the rest of God’s people. It creates a clerical caste that turns the living body of Christ into a business. Since the pastor and his staff are compensated for ministry, they are the paid professionals. The rest of the church lapses into a state of passive dependence. (p. 180, emphasis mine)
Mr. Frank Viola and George Barna spend the bulk of the chapter debunking tithing as a New Covenant and somehow found a way to use Acts 20:33-35 and 1 Timothy 5:17-18 to conclude that pastors should not be salaried:
Consequently, 1 Timothy 5 is perfectly consistent with Paul’s words to the elders recorded in Acts 20:33-35. There he told the elders in Ephesus that he did not take money from God’s people but instead supplied his own needs. Paul then told the elders to follow his example in this. That passage alone argues against the idea of a hired clergy or a paid pastoral staff. (p. 185, emphasis mine)
First, someone needs to teach Viola and Barna how to interpret Scripture properly. They would have salaried pastors become unsalaried and find a job, say at, Wal-Mart or wherever, because of some pet idea of theirs.
Second, a salaried pastor in no way creates ”a clerical caste that turns the living body of Christ into a business,” as they have concluded.
At this point, the plain reading of Scripture, not Viola and Barna, should be our guide.
Money will sure get things riled up. I wonder how many pastors will be willing to give up their salaried position to allow the laity to share the work of preaching?
Kevin, pastors do not need to give up their salaries, contra Viola.
This is a very sensitive subject. I pretty much agree with what Viola is saying. However, once again, you need to read more of his books to get the overall picture of what he is trying to say.
We need to take a look at the big picture. For hundreds of years there has been a clergy, a group of paid professional men, a profession in the same vein as lawyers, doctors, engineers, etc. No where in the NT will you find scripture pointing to men taking a salary, seeking jobs from church to church, looking for career advancement. This is what Viola is describing.
The body of Christ is a family. Leadership is raised up from within. What if a dad came home from work one day and told his family that there was another family across town looking for a dad and he was considering changing families? How silly is that?
But it happens everyday in our churches across the US. Once again there is no such thing as “The Pastor” of a church or a teaching elder, or associate pastor or any single man that runs the church. Its all plurality. Its elders = shepherds = bishops.
Elders are older men who oversee and feed the saints. An elder cannot be a young man fresh out of seminary. Elder = older. These are gray haired men who care for and disciple the saints.
However, this does not mean that a young man doesn’t have a gift of teaching or shepherding or whatever. They just aren’t leaders in the church. That’s where the participatory church meeting has it’s validity. Everyone has an opportunity to minister. It’s going to take a whole paradigm shift for the church to come out of the centuries old professional priesthood model.
For sure there is nothing wrong if a body would choose to financially bless the elders. But for me there is a lot more credibility to a leader that has a real job in the real world. Now that may sound offensive to many of you, but I am not saying that what paid professional ministers do is easy. It is not. It’s just not the real world.
I don’t believe Jesus ever meant for the leadership function to ever become a “Profession”. Ultimately it becomes hirelings looking for the best church with best chance of advancement. Now is that the heart of every man that is in the ministry. Absolutely not! But it is the fruit of the model we embrace.
Sorry for the long post, but it’s going to take a lot of discussion to see the whole picture.
Blessings:)
I’m not convinced that salary = hireling. What if the primary problem is not an individual who receives a salary, but rather an entrepreneurial model or, better, an entrepreneurial spirit, that comes out of our American culture, success defined as “bigger, better, more” o r “look at me?”
The ego needs of fallen humanity don’t require a “salaried professional” to bear dark fruit. Money is just one expression of power, and really a minor league expression of it.
The “house church,” “simple church,” flavor of restorationism has become quite a growth industry in the US. The marketing of books, the promotion of conferences, and the “we’ve got the answer” flavor looks quite like the many “movements” that regularly emerge out of our church culture to satisfy our compulsive need for novelty.
We’ve got real problems. No question. I’m thinking, however, they are much, much closer to home than we would like to consider.
The “house church,” “simple church,” flavor of restorationism has become quite a growth industry in the US. The marketing of books, the promotion of conferences, and the “we’ve got the answer” flavor looks quite like the many “movements” that regularly emerge out of our church culture to satisfy our compulsive need for novelty.
Yes, indeed! Let’s not forget that!
I am a tad hesitant to enter this debate as Bible Study is still very new to me BUT I am fairly certain that TCR is correct: Reading plain scripture will end this debate rather quickly. in Luke 10:7-8 Jesus states rather clearly that a worker is worth his wages. (I checked a BUNCH of translations and none of the differ on this other then to change wages to pay etc. etc.)
So that ends it as far as I am concerned. Pastors deserve salaries.
And there in lies the problem with the argument put forth by Viola and Barna: They are not actually reading the Scriptures! 1 Timothy 5:17-18 is in direct contradiction to Viola and Barna’s comments!
As I said I am new to this but I think I know enough to realize that Viola and Barna are way out to lunch on this particular subject.
As I said I am new to this but I think I know enough to realize that Viola and Barna are way out to lunch on this particular subject.
Tomg, you’re right. This is what happens when someone becomes overly zealous.
Apparently, Scripture must be set aside for their own growing tradition: “Then Jesus said to them, “You cleverly ignore the commands of God so you can follow your own teachings” (Mark 7:9, NCV).
Jack,
Have you read Pagan Christianity? I question the exegetical ability of both Viola and Barna. It seems like they’re experts of mangling Scripture, for lack of a better expression.
First, Acts 20:33-35 does not mean that a pastor who has devoted himself to feeding the flock needs to go and find a secular job and not receive a salary.
In fact, in the context of 1 Cor. 9:14, which says,
The natural and plain reading of this text is simple, like the priests who devoted themselves to temple service and made a living from such, in the same way, those who devote themselves to the ministry of the Word should make their living from such. Now how difficult is that to grasp.
Second, there is such a thin as “teaching elder.” Again, we only have to let the text speak for itself:
“Especially those whose work is preaching and teaching,” a language which clearly says that other elders are not teaching and preaching elders.
I don’t believe Jesus ever meant for the leadership function to ever become a “Profession”. Ultimately it becomes hirelings looking for the best church with best chance of advancement. Now is that the heart of every man that is in the ministry. Absolutely not! But it is the fruit of the model we embrace
I quite agree with you and the intentions of Jesus and the abuse of the pastoral ministry.
But I want you to keep it mind that it is Jesus who has given gifted people to serve in the ministry to equip his people (Eph. 4:7-15).
Of course there are abuses. They are rampant. Now, where there are abuses of one’s giftedness there are equally proper uses of one’s giftedness.
TC, There you go again comparing Scripture with Scripture!
Viola and Barna would do a great service to the church if they simply would stop writing.
Stan,
If they had handled Scripture appropriately to begin with, I wouldn’t have to do what you charged me with.
TC,
Yes I have read Pagan Christianity. It has been about a year since. I have also read Barna’s Revolution, which is more of a statistical analysis of what is going on in the church outside of the institution. They(B/V) confirmed a lot of what I was seeing in the church at the time. However, I am not an apologist for either one of these guys. They see only part. Like someone said in one of the other threads, they have started a dialogue on issues that needed to be discussed.
Viola says, though that if you read only Pagan Christianity and not the follow up books you will only get one side of what he is saying.
I do believe Acts 20:33-35 is a very powerful statement about how elders are to conduct themselves. Paul said, ” In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way…” referring to how he supported himself while he was there. I think he was telling them to support themselves and work hard like me. But 1 Tim 5 says what it says. I don’t think that Lk 10:7-8 has anything to do with pastors salaries. per what Tomg said.
However, I don’t believe whether a pastor is paid a salary or not, is the issue. The system is is the issue. It’s the one pastor over a church system that is at fault here. If you really have a plurality of elders, and you are really discipling the saints and raising up leaders, there is not really a need for a full time paid staff member or members.
Viola makes a bold statement and of course those who make their living preaching are not going to like it. How many of you who are professional ministers would still do what you do if you had to work a secular job? If the church was truly a body of “everyone is a minister”, then I don’t think there would be the need for one man to direct and do everything.
All elders are to be “apt to teach”. All elders are to feed the flock. All elders are to oversee the saints. Acts 20, 1 Pt 5. I don’t know how to reconcile that with 1Tim 5:17.
I personally would not receive a salary for what I do in the body. I would not accept a position as a paid elder in a church. That’s my conviction.
I think we need to look at the “professional” aspect of it all. I don’t see that as something Paul prescribed.
I think he was telling them to support themselves and work hard like me. But 1 Tim 5 says what it says. I don’t think that Lk 10:7-8 has anything to do with pastors salaries. per what Tomg said.
Even if Paul was telling those elders to support themselves, it sure doesn’t follow that Paul meant for his example to be the norm.
If you really have a plurality of elders, and you are really discipling the saints and raising up leaders, there is not really a need for a full time paid staff member or members.
If you have one of the elders who has devoted himself to preaching and teaching, then Scripture, no Viola and Barna, says that he must be paid well.
Why? Because a text like 1 Tim. 5:17-18 is more normative.
Regarding Luke 10:7, Paul quotes it to substantiate his claim that elders, as he described, must be paid. That is how Paul applied that Lukan text.
Viola makes a bold statement and of course those who make their living preaching are not going to like it.
Because Viola has failed in the area of proper exegesis.
I personally would not receive a salary for what I do in the body. I would not accept a position as a paid elder in a church. That’s my conviction.
To each is own.
I agree with T.C. and Tomg here.
More crap! Are you ready to believe me yet TC?
Honestly, this is just ridiculous! So, unlike any other ‘professional’ who has studied hard for their work at both undergrad and post-graduate levels I am not entitled to receive money for my vocation?
Okay TC, here is a challenge: Drop this book and read Eugene Peterson’s “Under the Unpredictable Plant”!
Let’s see… 4 years in undergraduate work, 3 years in graduate study, maybe even 4-5 more years in post-graduate study–give me that Wal-Mart application! I find the whole notion of ministers not receiving their income from doing the work of the gospel silly at best.
You know what your problem is TC, you make too much sense. That bothers some people.
Mark,
I’m not ready to relegate the title just yet, but some of it is crappy.
Believe it or not, I just bought Peterson’s “Living the Resurrection.” It looks good.
Jason,
Bottomline, this guys need to learn how to do proper exegesis. I’m planning a post on their exegetical fallacies.
Yeah, maybe they need that first 7 years.
Peter,
I never set out to make sense.
I don’t believe in tithing but I do think a pastor should recieve a salary from the church. But I also think they should really earn that salary and not just count most of their time as sermon prep.
Now in the context of house churches where there probably isn’t even 20 members a full salary might not be appropriate. Maybe a part time salary or love offerings but you should probably get a 2nd job or something.
Bryan L
Yes, that tithing issue remains thorny. Still hasn’t been settled.
And I agree with your thoughts on the house issue. It’s only realistic and wise.
Brian L,
I wouldn’t want to diminish the value of “sermon prep.” Arguably it is the most de-valued work in America.
We pay for things, toys, entertainment, technology, “results,” and more. It is a reflection of what we value as a people.
Rather than short changing “sermon prep,” I would argue for more of it. What does “sermon prep” consist of that we desperately need more of?
1. Exegetical study, as per this chain of discussion. Not just on the text being explicated on a given preaching event, but of the whole counsel of God.
2. Cultural decoding/anthropoligical sensitivty. What is really going on in our world. What would the Lord have the church say and do?
3. Pastoral Care. What are the people of the felloship struggling with? Are they in debt bondage? How are they addicted in our compulsive cultural environment? How well are they walking with God? Do they know how to handle teh Word of God effectively?
4. Theological acumen. What are the theologians saying? Who are the influencers in the church and are their teachings sound?
5. Finally, prayer. I’m always dismayed by frequent polls that pop up revealing how little pastors/preachers pray. Too often they are too busy satisfying the spiritual children in our churches who recongnize neither the importance of prayer nor the value of the study.
Part of the fallacy of the Viola/Barna suggestion is that this kind of work would be done well without those whose lives are dedicated to the task of “sermon prep.” My hunch is they can make the argument because we have lost a sense of importance of the procalation of God’s Word.
My hunch is they can make the argument because we have lost a sense of importance of the procalation of God’s Word.
Yes, indeed!
Kyle:
I think there is an over-valuing on the sermon in many circles of Evangelicalism, especially among the those who are big advocates of expository preaching. But before I really go into why I think it is over-valued, I’d like to know how much time on average it would take for all those things you mentioned ( minus prayer)? How much time would a preacher expect to spend doing those things?
Bryan L
Brian,
The classic answer is, “a lifetime.” I devote 2 days a week to study. On top of that is constant engagement with books, peers, parishioners, and media. If I’m not focused on something else, son’s basketball game, doing the yard, attending to my wife, I’m reflecting, making connections, seeing what I didn’t see before. It really is a lifestyle.
As I intimated above, the preaching event is critically important in the midst of Christian community. It is one of those moments when God’s Word breaks into the gathered people of God.
I’d rather be a part of a good preach than anything else, in the role of either peacher or receiver.
Certainly there are other Biblical disciplines oriented around the Word, ea. reading, discussion, meditation. All are critical. I believe we’ve lost something valuable as a culture in devaluing the sermon.
Mark, Jason,
When I read the scripture I don’t see anything about being rewarded for the number of degrees or for the amount of time we spent preparing for a career in the ministry. Paul called all of his confidence in the flesh “dung”. Phil 3.
I just find that a poor argument. I don’t know your hearts, but if you really think that because you have a bunch of seminary degrees that you deserve reward or you deserve compensation, I think you have been misled.
If I am misinterpreting what you meant then please forgive me.
I believe one of the main problems in the church and this is Viola’s main point, is the professional priesthood system is corrupt. It’s a flawed system. That doesn’t mean you guys aren’t working hard, laboring for the saints. There’s just a better way.
I am not here to castigate or criticize men. It’s the system. I don’t know why I never went to seminary. Everywhere I turned when I was in my twenties and thirties(fifties now) I was told I was to be a pastor and I had great things in store for me.
I was zealous and on fire to serve God. So the only thing to do was to go to seminary and become a pastor. That is the way our system works. So I don’t blame any of you guys that have done this. I would just pray that you look at the scripture through the lens of the apostles teaching and not the lens of tradition.
Ekklesia life is about community, not about looking at the back of peoples heads every
Sunday morning listening to a sermon. Discipleship does not happen delivering a sermon. That’s why there has to be a plurality. More men have to be involved in the discipleship process. It doesn’t happen from the pulpit.
Jack,
I agree with you 100% that “It doesn’t happen from the pulpit.” If by “it” you mean the life of discipleship. The life of discipleship happens during life. However, it sounds like you’re writing off the sermon event because some think the sermon should carry all the freight. That’s like throwing out food because we all know that life is more than eating.
Church must mean “community” rather than “performance.” But my, Jesus did “teach with authority.” Shouldn’t we?
I think preaching is crucial to the life of the church.
Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage–with great patience and careful instruction. (2 Timothy 4:2 TNIV)
How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news! (Romans 10:14-15 TNIV)
Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage–with great patience and careful instruction. (2 Timothy 4:2 TNIV)
Paul was speaking specifically to Timothy. Timothy was an ambassador for Paul. I would suggest that this was not an instruction to local elders. It’s a good word, but to use is as text proof for local elders preaching is out of context.
Rom 10:14-15 is has nothing to do with the local church. It is referring to evangelizing the lost. My focus here is not how we preach to the lost or evangelize; it is how we should be when we as believers gather. I still don’t see any examples of local elders preaching a sermon every time the saints gather.
The system is the professional priesthood that was never really reformed in the reformation. It should be about the priesthood of the saints. I suggest we need participatory meetings directed by leaders. It does not take a seminary trained, paid professional to do this. It takes men who are called by the Holy Spirit to oversee. Acts 20:28.
Are all teachers?
Stan, Scripture says it is, but Jack above things the “system” has messed things up. Whatever that means.
TC,
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this issue here. It helps me to articulate what I see. Am I wrong in what I see. I don’t think so, but I’ve missed things in the past. We all have.
My main point in all of this, whether we’re talking about paid pastors or even the need for pastors, is in the context of how the local church should gather.
Of course we need leaders in the church. Of course there are instances when the body might want to support one of the elders. But I don’t believe salaries should be the norm. That’s the way I see it.
I have been an observer and student of the church for thirty plus years. Also a participator. The point is, when I looked at what we were doing in our churches, coming twice on Sundays, and once on Wed and each time listening to the pastor preach or teach, I found a disconnect when I read the scriptures.
I didn’t see discipleship going on. I didn’t see men and women growing in the Lord. I saw people showing up for services and then going home. I didn’t see community or relationship. I didn’t see the body serving one another, loving one another and the numerous other “one another’s” you find in the NT.
It’s incredible on how much the NT talks about the interaction of the saints with one another. Where is that in our churches today? The gospel flows out of the community of the body. Just like I have to let student pilots touch the controls of the airplane, pastors have got to let the saints be part of the gathering.
We have got to look for specific prescriptive instruction in the Word for how the “Local” body is to gather. We cannot use descriptions of how the Apostles planted and started the church. Paul preaching all night in Acts 20 is not prescriptive for elders in the local church. That is what Paul did and the word used there is more indicative of dialogue than preaching.
I am not trying to diss anyone here or take anybody down. I would just like for men in the profession to take a step back, look outside the box, and maybe see the big picture of what our call is. Ask yourselves some hard questions about the maturity of the saints you are shepherding. Are they growing? Are they being released? How often do they get a chance to teach or participate in the gathering?
What are we afraid of?
Jack,
My main point in all of this, whether we’re talking about paid pastors or even the need for pastors…
What?! You question the need for pastors?
So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. (Ephesians 4:11-13 TNIV)
No room for debate on the need for pastors. Period.
I think the “system” is, as Jack expresses it, “the professinal priesthood.” I locate the heart of the problem in the modern entertainment/consumeristic culture. The set-up is not in the pulpit but in the pews. The mindset, the expectations of those present are driving the system, not the preacher per se. Criticizing the preaching or the preacher feels like “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” The proclamation of the Word is not issue. The social construct of church as “theater,” preacher as “entertainer” and congregation as “consumer” is the issue.
Now here’s the rub, that social construct is not necessarily (although it could be) in the mind of the preacher. Most reasonably, it is in the minds of the people who come expecting church to be like every other venue they frequent. Entertainment. Titilation. Subjective assauging of fears, anxieties, boredom, what have you. The fix is not tossing out the preacher/preaching (the baby) but doing the hardwork of discipleship so the believe comes anticipating a word from the Lord and prepared to obey.
The proclamation of the Word is not issue. The social construct of church as “theater,” preacher as “entertainer” and congregation as “consumer” is the issue.
Indeed.
The fix is not tossing out the preacher/preaching (the baby) but doing the hardwork of discipleship so the believe comes anticipating a word from the Lord and prepared to obey.
I’m with you.
Kyle:
I believe sermons are important but I think we should be realistic in assessing their true impact on the body. Unfortunately it seems preachers and seminary grads have a hard time doing this and tend to elevate the importance of the sermon higher than it may actually be. I probably would too if I spent thousands of dollars and hours in school training to preach and it were my livelihood : )
How much time is enough? I don’t know but after a while the amount of time spent working on the sermon outweighs the benefits when you consider the actual impact it will have on the church. I say a day should be enough and a pastor shouldn’t spend all week thinking and fretting over it. There is plenty else to do in the church, things that will probably have a way bigger impact on the body than the 30-45 minutes you spend preaching to the congregation on Sunday.
Again, I think sermons are important (I like to listen to sermons) and have their place in the church but I don’t want to give the impression that they are more valuable than they actually are. The stuff that is preached that has the biggest impact on people is probably stuff that you didn’t need to spend days studying and preparing to come up with.
Bryan L
Is this one of those issues where it becomes easy for us to “trade” Scripture. I spoke last so mine trumps yours etc etc. And even sometimes opposite understandings of the same proof text!
I ask myself whether when Paul chose to make the point that he exercised his profession as tent maker, so as not to place financial demands on the whole church, was he not making specific responses to specific accusations. But the Corinthians passage, and others set out a general principle that we should support those who we call to serve us in whatever way is necessary. Assuming (and this may be an “if”) we want some to be released and available to serve God’s people full time , then we must pay them sufficient for the purpose. Otherwise they must exercise another trade and profession to support themselves and their families. And like it or not, that creates obligations and demands on time, which any Christians employee should recognise. Having full time ministers may not be obligatory, but I do not see it as unbiblical . Personally I would even suggest there is good reason for a leadership team to include a mix of “full time” and those more fully to the world most of us occupy. By contrast some, such as the late Dr Lloyd Jones would appear to have been less than enthusiastic about the very idea of part time preachers, with licensed lay ministries such as my own (Reader in the CoE) no doubt in his sights. See his book ‘Preaching and Preachers’.
We considered the issue of tithing on this blog earlier this year. My take remains that it is a worthy principle. However I could not teach it as an obligation under the New Covenant. We give back to Him according to our means, freely, with joy, a good heart, and generously. It is between us and the Lord how that works out. I will say from experience that He may show us how we can give more than we might have first expected! But that is The Lord for you.
Colin, great points. “Trading scripture.” I agree.
For me though, I have chosen not to participate in the paid professional system. I have seen too many blessings of God work with unpaid leadership.
The clergy/laity distinction just doesn’t go very far to bring about true community in the body.
The clergy/laity distinction just doesn’t go very far to bring about true community in the body.
And how is this directly affected by a salaried pastor? Is this the natural outcome?
Colin said:
Colin, this is a well-balanced approach.
We considered the issue of tithing on this blog earlier this year. My take remains that it is a worthy principle. However I could not teach it as an obligation under the New Covenant. We give back to Him according to our means, freely, with joy, a good heart, and generously. It is between us and the Lord how that works out. I will say from experience that He may show us how we can give more than we might have first expected! But that is The Lord for you.
I’m with you.
Just wondering…
In the Bible… Did anyone ever “tithe” silver, gold, or money?
Stan,
No, not questioning the need for pastors/elders/overseers. Thats just the topic of this thread.
Please read the whole post.:)
Even though Viola reacts in an extreme direction in his book, you cannot use his polarized views as a definitive conclusion to ignore some of his analysis. I have disagreed with him many times in his book, but it is healthy to question our traditions not our God.
Our church culture would find it hard to believe that a ministry can survive with non-full time pastors who are supported through freewill offerings. We think that God’s work would be chaotic and broke.
Imagine the panic if the church were to announce that tithing is no longer commanded? God forbid that ministries would operate on a freewill financial system based on faith rather than on a tax system that was legally enforced to support a levitical tribe with no inheritance.
- jared
Jack
Much agreement.
Like your hands on approach to flying.
Gotta do it.
Similar to sports. Practice is one thing,
But the real game is for real.
Christianity is not a spectator sport.
Christianity always was and always will be a participation sport.
Not a whole lot of “participation” Sunday mornings.
Not a whole lot of “when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.”
When you’re a believer you’re in the game.
Pastors? Hmmm?
Just wondering if these verses about “pastors/leaders”
will ever be preached from the pulpit?
Jeremiah 2:8
The priests said not, Where is the LORD?
and they that handle the law knew me not:
the pastors also transgressed against me,
and the prophets prophesied by Baal,
and walked after things that do not profit.
Jeremiah 10:21
For the pastors are become brutish,
( beastly, carnal )
and have not sought the LORD:
therefore they shall not prosper,
and all their flocks shall be scattered.
Jeremiah 12:10
Many pastors have destroyed my vineyard,
they have trodden my portion under foot,
they have made my pleasant portion
a desolate wilderness.
Jeremiah 22:22
The wind shall eat up all thy pastors,
and thy lovers shall go into captivity:
surely then shalt thou be ashamed and confounded for all thy wickedness.
Jeremiah 23:1
Woe be unto the pastors
that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!
Jeremiah 23:2
…thus saith the LORD God of Israel
against the pastors that feed my people;
Ye have scattered my flock,
and driven them away,
and have not visited them: behold,
I will visit upon you the evil of your doings,
saith the LORD.
Jeremiah 50:6
My people hath been lost sheep:
their shepherds have caused them to go astray…
Isaiah 9:16
For the leaders of this people cause thee to err;
and they that are led of them are destroyed.
Isaiah 3:12
O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err,
and destroy the way of thy paths.
Brian,
We’re probably on the same page here. Preaching is not the work of the church, but it is an important aspect of the work.
We have a profound inability to think in our culture. The classic commentators include Neil Postman in Entertaining Ourselves to Death and the earlier Marshal McLuhan in Understanding Meida: The extensions of Man. Chritopher Lasch in The Culture of Narcissism is a disturbing critique of the way our thought process are distorted in our self-indulgent day.
The sermon is really a prophetic act in the community of God’s people. For me it seeks to answer the questions “What’s going on around us, What’s going on in us, and What does the Lord want us to do about it?
Unfortunately, preaching has become self-help advice, group therapy, and motivational hype to build the organization.
About twenty years ago was in a pulpit of one of Wesley’s Methodist chapels in England. On the pulpit for the preacher to read every Sunday were the words, “Sir, we would hear Jesus.” That sobered me.
If we can embrace the idea of the church as a unique corporate unity, a new reality kind of like the one-flesh of marriage (suggested by Ephesians 5:25-33), the proclamation of the word in the gathering of the body becomes something more than a pep talk or class room lecture. I’m convinced the Holy Spirit is at work in way that trancends conventional communication. Something is really going on in Romans 10:14-17, don’t you think.
A Amos,
I think Jeremiah is refering to kings, rulers, not religious functionaries, although the priesthood might be included. You’ ve to to throw Ezekiel 34 into the mix.
As I think through these kinds of issues, I keep in mind the description of the primitive church in Acts 2:43-47. The spent much time in the temple as the gathered community of God, certanly thousands present, and in homes, Viola’s vision of the appropriate church setting. I’m convinced we’ve got to learn to do it all.
One of the greatest horrors in our day is what I call the “idolatry of the local church.” As I see it, church is both smaller and larger than the normal setting of church in America. I see church as far more fluid than a conventional 501.c.3 corporation with defined officers. As I keep saying, however, the problem is more in our heads than in our social structures.
A Amos,
I think Jeremiah is refering to kings, rulers, not religious functionaries, although the priesthood might be included. You’ ve to to throw Ezekiel 34 into the mix.
As I think through these kinds of issues, I keep in mind the description of the primitive church in Acts 2:43-47. The spent much time in the temple as the gathered community of God, certanly thousands present, and in homes, Viola’s vision of the appropriate church setting. I’m convinced we’ve got to learn to do it all.
One of the greatest horrors in our day is what I call the “idolatry of the local church.” As I see it, church is both smaller and larger than the normal setting of church in America. I see church as far more fluid than a conventional 501.c.3 coroporation with defined officers. As I keep saying, however, the problem is more in our heads than in our social structures.
we do not take a salary from the congregation for which we are overseers – but then again, neither do they give in such a way that we could….
Jack said:
The clergy/laity distinction just doesn’t go very far to bring about true community in the body.
TC said:
And how is this directly affected by a salaried pastor? Is this the natural outcome?
TC, Good question. Remember I am not talking about the heart of individuals, I am talking about a system.
First, I don’t think we can draw a clergy/laity distinction from the scriptures. Secondly, I believe one exists in most churches across America. What this does is creates a caste system of two classes, where the clergy is superior to the laity.
This creates a complacency within the “laity” where their job is to sit in the pew and listen to the clergy preach their sermon. This goes all the way back to Rome. It’s spectator sport all the way.
For community to happen there has to be participation from the whole body. Discipleship means leaders walk along side those being discipled.
In my home church situation because I do not take a salary, I am not part of that separate cast system. I can walk along side those I disciple; they look at me as just a regular guy. I am nothing special. I am a sheep just like them.
Case in point, our main fellowship hired a young guy to be “the” pastor and preach. The other elders did not want the responsibility of preaching and scheduling and keeping track of the sheep. Immediately, the church turns it’s focus on him, that he has all the answers and has to do all of the ministry. There is no way one guy can disciple all the people in the body. What does that say about the elders? IMHO it means that don’t understand what leadership is about. All the elders are responsible for overseeing, and feeding. You cannot delegate it off to one person.
I don’t know if that answers your question or not. I don’t think the salary in of itself is the issue. It is all the baggage that comes with it.
First, I don’t think we can draw a clergy/laity distinction from the scriptures. Secondly, I believe one exists in most churches across America. What this does is creates a caste system of two classes, where the clergy is superior to the laity.
Jack,
It’s unfortunate that an unhealthy clergy/laity distinction has developed over the centuries.
But let’s not forget that Scripture itself has made ministerial distinctions. Start with Acts (6, 14, 15, 20). Then the Letters of Paul continue this structure (Phil. 1:1; Eph. 4:7-15; 1 Thess. 5:12, 13; 1 Tim. 5:17-18) and others (Heb. 13:7, 17, 23; 1 Pet. 5:1-4).
That’s a biblical structure we cannot simply shake off with a rhetorical overhaul.
This creates a complacency within the “laity” where their job is to sit in the pew and listen to the clergy preach their sermon. This goes all the way back to Rome. It’s spectator sport all the way.
You’re making a fundamental mistake, so too Viola and Barna. Coming together to minister to each other is not one dimension. Of course others than the pastor need to participate, as we see in 1 Cor. 14:26ff, but this must be done in an orderly manner, which is Paul’s point.
There comes a time when the preacher must preach and others must listen and learn. What’s wrong with that? In fact, that’s what we see in Scripture.
For community to happen there has to be participation from the whole body. Discipleship means leaders walk along side those being discipled.
This statement by you claims more in theory than in actual practice. Somebody has to listen and learn.
This priesthood of all believers sounds mighty good and wonderful, but I’m afraid its application is problematic for you and Viola and Barna.
In my home church situation because I do not take a salary, I am not part of that separate cast system. I can walk along side those I disciple; they look at me as just a regular guy. I am nothing special. I am a sheep just like them.
What caste system? I’m afraid your charge is unwarranted.
Do your people look to you for insights and so on? Do they really want to hear your angle on an issue? You know what I’m talking about.
Case in point, our main fellowship hired a young guy to be “the” pastor and preach. The other elders did not want the responsibility of preaching and scheduling and keeping track of the sheep. Immediately, the church turns it’s focus on him, that he has all the answers and has to do all of the ministry. There is no way one guy can disciple all the people in the body. What does that say about the elders? IMHO it means that don’t understand what leadership is about. All the elders are responsible for overseeing, and feeding. You cannot delegate it off to one person.
Because they made a mistake of hiring someone to do what everyone else ought to be doing.
Please, don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. I warn.
Let’s find meaningful ways of applying Eph. 4:7-15.
First question. How do you do italics in these posts?
That’s a biblical structure we cannot simply shake off with a rhetorical overhaul. (I agree)
There comes a time when the preacher must preach and others must listen and learn. What’s wrong with that? In fact, that’s what we see in Scripture.
( I agree, and hope I am not saying that elders don’t have a time to teach, while others listen. The point is, when the saints gather, it is not about the pastor teaching or preaching. It’s about the body being a body, provoking one another to love and encouraging one another. Heb 10:24,25. How does this happen when only one man is the center of the gathering?)
This statement by you claims more in theory than in actual practice. Somebody has to listen and learn.
This priesthood of all believers sounds mighty good and wonderful, but I’m afraid its application is problematic for you and Viola and Barna.
(TC, I don’t understand what you mean. To me it’s not theory at all. We practice it all the time. Refer back to my example of flight instruction. If I don’t allow my students to handle the controls they will never become pilots. If the saints aren’t allowed to be part of the gathering, then they have knowledge but no practical application. I found out I did not know much until I started teaching flying. If we expect the saints to be functional in the gospel, then we need to give them the opportunity to participate. See Col 3:16.)
TC I’ll respond to the rest later. This is good stuff. I really don’t disagree with any of your points. What I can’t reconcile is the praxis I see in the local church and what I read in the scriptures. The saints file into the sanctuary, sit in the pew, sing a few songs, pastor orates from raised podium for 45 min., gives an invitation, says a prayer, the saints file out of the sanctuary, go home and watch their favorite team on TV, then repeat the whole process again the next Sunday. I don’t think that is how Paul meant the gathering of the saints to look like.
I think it’s going to take leaders, pastors, elders who can think outside of their traditional denominational box, who care more about the saints than they do about their sermons, salaries, title and position. It’s going to take leaders, and maybe I am missing it when it comes to the clergy/laity distinction; men who are willing to separate themselves from a system that creates people who are willing to sit in the pew week end and week out and think that that is what Christianity is about.
Thanks again for your response. It challenges me!
I believe preaching is very important to the body of Christ. If preaching were to be done by unstudied laity, I might venture to say that the quality of prophetic teaching and preaching may be sacrificed. Study through seminary does make a difference. But if we sent all the laity to seminary that would solve the problem.
Could someone please show me where this clergy/laity distinction comes from, besides the tradition of the catholic church?
With all due respect to you Kevin and the rest of you guys, I just don’t see where the scripture embraces that, in light of Mt 20:25-28, 1 Pt 5:3, 1Cor 12:20-30.
As leaders we are servants. Churches are not run by CEO’s. We cannot use the same leadership philosophy that the world uses. It’s not top down, it’s bottom up.
I said this earlier, Paul counted all of his confidence in his education and his place in society as dung. How can we not follow in his example.
I am educated, but in the Kingdom of God it makes no difference. Other than Paul the other apostles were basically unlearned men. This baffled the pharisees who were caught up in appearances and social status.
Should not this be of a concern to us?
Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority, because they keep watch over you as those who must give an account. Do this so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no benefit to you. (Hebrews 13:17)
Stan
Interesting verse. Heb 13:17
“Your leaders” Hmmm?
Who is your leader Stan? Your pastor?
What man are you following? Who’s sheep are you?
Who do you submit to? Who watches for your soul?
Then who is their leader? Their pastor?
What man is he following? Who’s sheep is he?
Does he submit to anyone? Anyone watching for his soul?
Then who is his leader?
And what man is he following?
And does he submit to anyone?
Is anyone led by the Spirit?
Is anyone following Jesus?
Is anyone submitting to Jesus?
We are to test the spirits, Yes?
We are to know those who labor among us, Yes?
Don’t you need to know who is leading those who are leading you?
Just in case they, the leaders, believe a lie?
And the lie gets passed to everyone down the line – you?
Stan
Not your fault.
I was beat up and spiritually abused with that verse before.
Doing Italics in comment: Jack 1. Insert an i in the open set and then another i in the close, but after the /. I hope that helps.
The point is, when the saints gather, it is not about the pastor teaching or preaching. It’s about the body being a body, provoking one another to love and encouraging one another. Heb 10:24,25. How does this happen when only one man is the center of the gathering?)
I’m in agreement. Yes, let’s get rid of the one-man show!
The saints file into the sanctuary, sit in the pew, sing a few songs, pastor orates from raised podium for 45 min., gives an invitation, says a prayer, the saints file out of the sanctuary, go home and watch their favorite team on TV, then repeat the whole process again the next Sunday. I don’t think that is how Paul meant the gathering of the saints to look like.
We have an accord on this. Your critique, I’m afraid, is both true and sad.
How do we get away from this subcultural evil that is so rampant in most of our churches on any given Sunday?
It’s going to take leaders, and maybe I am missing it when it comes to the clergy/laity distinction; men who are willing to separate themselves from a system that creates people who are willing to sit in the pew week end and week out and think that that is what Christianity is about.
Well, I’m glad you’ve taken the time to clarity what you mean by “a caste system.”
A tradition of many years is hard to rid ourselves of, it seems. But I’m in agreement here, too.
The important thing is not getting rid of the pastor, it’s about getting rid of this one-man show. And how we go about doing that is important.
I don’t support chopping down the pastor. That’s not the answer to the problem. I support raising up the laity so that they become the pastors, teachers, deacons, elders, etc.
I don’t support chopping down the pastor. That’s not the answer to the problem. I support raising up the laity so that they become the pastors, teachers, deacons, elders, etc.
Kevin, that’s the genius of Eph. 4:7-15.
Whether you like Pagan Christianity or Not,
I think we all agree, they do cause one to think,
search the motives of their heart and
go to Jesus for understanding.
And going to Jesus is a good thing? Yes?
Just wondering…
“Tithing and Clergy Salaries: Sore Spots on the Wallet”
How can you have a biblical discussion on clergy salaries
if there is “no clergy” in the Bible?
And tithing?
Did anyone ever tithe money in the Bible?
And Pastors,
Doesn’t the Bible warn us about, and exhort us to,
“hew down “the graven images” of their (our) gods.”
Don’t we make the “Title“ Pastor a “graven image?”
“Engraven” on dipomas, that are hung on office walls,
“Engraven”on business cards, that are handed out,
on the Sunday morning bulletin, on the street sign,
and anyone who reads them knows who “the Pastor” is. Yes?
Is that “self-honoring” and “seeking glory?”
Seems Jesus warned “His disciples” about those things.
Has the “Title Pastor” become a “graven image?”
Micah 1:7
And all the “graven images” shall be beaten to pieces…
Isa 42:8
I am the LORD: that is my name:
and my glory will I not give to another,
neither my praise to “graven images.”
Jer 50:38
A drought is upon her waters;
and they shall be dried up:
for it is the land of “graven images,”
and they are mad upon their idols.
A land of “Titles and idols” in the heart. Ezek 14:3-7
Senior Pastors, Associate Pastors, Youth Pastors,
Single Pastors, Reverands, Right Reverends,
Most Right Reverands, Fathers, Priests, Clergy,
and the list goes on…
Are any of those Titles/idols in the Bible?
Didn’t Jesus make Himself of no reputation,
take on the form of a servant,
and humble Himself? Phl 2:7”
No wonder there are those who won’t read
Pagan Christianity. Hmmm?