|
THE
"ONE MAN PASTOR" SYSTEM IS NOT IN THE BIBLE
-by Andrew Strom
Most churches today are
run using the 'Senior Pastor' model, where one man does most of
the ministering and is looked up to as "the man of God". Few
could deny that pastors are truly the ones who are running the
church today. (-Though it could be argued in a number of places
that the "big tithers" run the church and have the pastor under
their thumb. Such a sick arrangement is just further proof of
the damage being done by this "One-Man Pastor" model. It is wide
open to abuse).
Personally, I get along
well with a lot of pastors that I meet. But I guess that writing
on this topic will cause people to question my motives and
accuse me of being "rebellious" and having 'problems with
authority', etc. But honestly, this is not the case. I simply
believe that it is time for us to examine the facts of the
matter - and acquaint ourselves with what the Bible truly says.
After all, only the Truth can set us free.
Amazingly enough, in
the Book of Acts, which is the history of the first 30 YEARS of
the early church, the word 'Pastor' is NOT EVEN MENTIONED ONCE.
-Which is pretty astounding considering how often we use it
today.
There were elders and
'overseers' (-these terms are inter- changeable) in the New
Testament church. But that is totally different from the
position of "one man pastor" that we have today.
So how did Pastors end
up running everything? And what effect does this have on the
church?
Well, when you study
history it becomes obvious that we mostly got this concept from
Rome - not from the Bible. As Beckham: "Emperor Constantine
developed a church structure that has lasted for seventeen
centuries... People go to a building (cathedral) on a special
day of the week (Sunday) and someone (a priest, or today, a
pastor) does something to them (teaching, preaching, absolution
or healing) or for them (a ritual or entertainment) for a price
(offerings)."
In most cases, what we
are seeing today is the continuation of this "Clergy and Laity"
system that dominated the church during the Dark Ages. There is
very little difference, really. The titles have changed but
apart from that it is basically the old Roman Catholic system of
professional 'Priests' running everything. We call them
'pastors' but the position is basically the same.
Now we pay them to be
our "minister". Never mind the fact that we are ALL supposed to
be ministers!
What this results in is
two different 'classes' in the church. -The "ministering" class
and the "churchgoing" class (or 'laity'). -Which is something
that God utterly detests? He cannot stand His people being
divided up into 'classes' like this. It is the doctrine of the
"Nicolaitans" (Rev 2).
But is it really that
bad? What harm does it really do?
Below are the specific
ways that this "one man pastor" model does enormous harm to the
church:
(1) It puts one person
on a pedestal - above all others. In many churches this
veneration of the pastor closely resembles Idolatry. His word is
law and the entire church revolves around this one man.
(2) This leads directly
to PRIDE. The position that we place these men in is terribly
dangerous for them and for the whole church. It is very
difficult NOT to develop pride when treated in this way. Pride
is the most subtle and spiritually fatal of diseases. It wreaks
havoc wherever it finds a home.
(3) Control,
manipulation and spiritual abuse become common where power is
concentrated in the hands of one 'venerated' figure. Power
corrupts. Flattery corrupts. Veneration corrupts. And before you
know it, people are being terribly damaged and wounded by the
control and the "management techniques" being exerted from the
top. Then new teachings on "covering" and "submission" are
wheeled out, to lend an air of legitimacy to the oppression that
is being visited upon people. Everyone is told to 'submit' and
not to question. The "one man pastor" system lends itself to
this whole scenario like a hand in a glove. It is virtually made
for it.
(4) It turns the church
into a bunch of "spectators". In other words, everybody sits
around and watches while the 'professionals' do most of the
work. It is their "job" after all. -This is an absolute
disaster. For we ALL have gifts and callings and anointing from
God.
(5) The position lends
itself to "robes and titles" - or perhaps expensive 3-piece
suits! Jesus said to his disciples, "You are not to be called
'Rabbi,' because you have only one Master and you are all
brothers. And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have
one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called
'teacher,' for you have one Teacher, the Christ." (See Matt
23:5-12, NIV). -None of this seems to stop men from taking on
"titles" today.
(6) Many pastors by
their nature tend to be "play it safe" types. They don't like
the boat being rocked and they are often resistant to real
change.
(7) Because the
position of Pastor is usually the "only job going" in the
church, it forces many who are actually evangelists or prophets
to become Pastors, just so they can get to minister. Often they
are quite out of place, and many times this leads to disaster.
(8) All of this creates
such a load on the shoulders of the man that is appointed Senior
Pastor, that this job has one of the worst BURNOUT rates in the
western world.
(9) At the end of the
day, just like church buildings, the best reason for rejecting
this model of leadership is that it is simply NOT IN THE BIBLE.
So how did they do
things in the New Testament?
Well, the first thing
we need to realize is that the apostles were not
"professionals". Apart from Paul they had never been to Bible
College. (-These were run by the Pharisees!) Most of the
apostles were simple fishermen and tax-collectors. But they had
spent MUCH TIME WITH JESUS. -That was their qualification.
And it is clear that
Pastors were never in charge of the church. It was the APOSTLES
who were given that role (Editor: the apostles served as the
initial overseers of newly founded assemblies until qualified
elders could be raised up. Once elders were established in each
local assembly, the oversight was their responsibility). But
they never "lorded it over" the people. And wherever they went
they appointed elders or overseers (plural) to watch over the
church in their absence. Unfortunately, some Bible translations
use the word "Bishop", which gives the impression of a
'hierarchy'. But this was not in the original. As Greek scholar
W.E. Vine states: "'Presbuteros', an elder, is another term for
the same person as bishop or overseer. See Acts 20:17 with verse
28." So these were just simple "elders" - that's all.
It was only when the
church fell into serious decline and then into Romanism that the
complicated "hierarchies" began. Before this, it was all very
simple.
Perhaps one day it will
be so again? |
