The Church in a Day of Ruin (Part 6)



                 Characteristics of the Early

                    Church:Ministry in the

                         House of God

"The House of God … is the
pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).

Members of the body of Christ
today are used to the idea of a clergy-laity distinction or of a one- or
few-man ministry in the local church. Is this how it was in the early Church?
What do we learn about ministry of God’s Word in the Church as described in the
New Testament?

In Part V of this series, we noted
the teaching of the New Testament of the priesthood of all believers,
rather than one man in each local assembly leading the worship on behalf of the
entire congregation. Just so, the New Testament stresses the fact that all
believers have received spiritual gifts and all have a ministry to carry
out in conjunction with the body of Christ. The following scriptures bear this
out:

"I say … to every man that
is among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to
think soberly, according as God has dealt to every man the measure of
faith. For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the
same office, so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members
one of another. Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is
given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of
faith…." (Rom. 12:3-8).

"The manifestation of the
Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the
Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same
Spirit…. All these works that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every
man severally as He will" (1 Cor. 12:7-11).

"And He gave same, apostles;
and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for
the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of
the body of Christ" (Eph. 4:11,12).

These passages show clearly that every
believer in Christ has received a spiritual gift. The next verses show that every
believer has a responsible role to play in the assembly:

"The body is not one member
but many…. If the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the
body, is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where
were the hearing? … But now has God set the members every one of them in the
body, as it has pleased Him. And if they were all one member, where were the
body? But now are they many members, yet but one body" (1 Cor. 12:14-20).



Those with positions of oversight
and leadership in a local assembly are warned in Scripture not to lord it over
God’s people:"The elders who are among you I exhort…. Feed the flock of
God that is among you, taking the oversight thereof; not by constraint, but
willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being lords over
God’s heritage, but being examples to the flock" (1 Pet. 5:1-3). 
"Lords over God’s heritage" is a very interesting expression given
subsequent developments in the history of the Church. The Greek word for
"heritage" is kleeros, which basically means "lot"
or "inheritance." The words "clergy" and "cleric"
are derived from this Greek word. Thus, the only reference to
"clergy" in the New Testament applies this word to the flock of
believers as a whole, and not to the leaders.

An early abuse of leadership in
the Church is discussed in 3 John 9-10:"I wrote unto the church, but
Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, receives us not …
neither does he himself receive the brethren, and forbids those who would, and
casts them out of the church."

In Part IV of this series we
discussed a type of assembly meeting called the open ministry meeting,
described in 1 Corinthians 14. Here is a meeting where every brother in the
assembly is free, as led by the Holy Spirit, to minister the Word of God for
"edification, and exhortation, and comfort" (1 Cor. 14:3).

While elders, overseers (or
bishops), and deacons were appointed in each local assembly in New Testament
times (these will be discussed more completely in the next issue), there is no
hint in the New Testament of one man appointed to be the priest, pastor, or
clergyman of a local assembly.

Who was appointed to be the pastor
of the 3,000 souls that made up the infant church at Jerusalem following the
day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41)? All 12 of the apostles were part of that company;
their teaching and their wonders and signs were prominent. But there is no
evidence on one being more prominent than another.

How about the assembly at Antioch? Barnabas and Paul spent a year in Antioch establishing the new assembly there in
the Word of God (Acts 11:19-26). Paul and Barnabas, neither separately nor
together, established themselves as pastors of the church at Antioch. Rather,
they spent their time helping the new believers to grow in their knowledge of
God’s Word and to develop their own spiritual gifts. After a year, we read,
"There were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and
teachers, as Barnabas and Simeon … and Lucius … and Manaen … and
Saul." There were now several gifted and devoted brothers in the Antioch assembly. They were all leaders by virtue of their gift and devotion to the Lord,
but there is no indication of any one of them being the pastor or president of
the assembly.



In the apostle Paul’s several
epistles, he either greets or sends greetings from many named fellow believers.
He speaks often of his "fellow laborers" and his "fellow
prisoners" (for example, Philem. 23,24), but never once makes mention of
pastors or leaders of a particular local assembly.

It is not simply the author’s
opinion that the New Testament teaches nothing about a system of clergy and
laity in the Church. The following quotation is from the Schaff-Herzog
Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge
edited by Professor Philip Schaff of
Union Theological Seminary along with "Reverends" Samuel Jackson and
D. S. Schaff:"It may be considered settled that there is no order of
clergy, in the modern sense of the term, in the New Testament; that is, there
is no class of men mentioned to whom spiritual functions exclusively belonged.
Every believer is a priest unto God. Every believer has as much right as
anybody else to pray, to preach, to baptize, to administer communion (Rom. 5:2;
Eph. 2:19-22; 3:12; 1 Pet. 2:9; 1 John 2:27; Rev. 1:6; 5:10, etc.)…. Baptism,
the Lord’s Supper, preaching, and prayer—like singing, taking up a collection,
reading of the Scriptures, and reading of notices—may be performed by laymen
with precisely the same spiritual effect as if the highest or the most godly
minister in the land had been the administrator…. Although, in the New
Testament, there is no clergy in the modern sense of the term, very early in
Church history do we find the distinction between clergy and laity," etc.

If not ordered by scripture, how
and why did such a clergy-laity distinction develop. Schaff explains:"It
does not follow [from not being found in the New Testament] that therefore the
clergy are superfluous. Experience has shown that certain persons are by
natural endowment better fitted for spiritual functions than others, and also
that, in the Christian communities, there will be leaders to whom will
gravitate the major part of the work. The clerical order took its rise,
therefore, in the very necessity of the case. Decency, order, and efficiency
demanded that certain persons should make it their business to conduct the
services, and have the oversight, of the congregations."

Notice the human reasoning in the
preceding paragraph that seeks to justify that which has no foundation in the
New Testament. And what has been the outcome of such a human arrangement? In
large measure there has been a stifling of the development and manifestation of
spiritual gifts by the believers in congregations having a one-man or few-men
ministry. The following personal anecdote is one of many that could illustrate
the point:A long-time friend of mine went to seminary and became pastor of an
independent Bible church. Having had some familiarity with assemblies that did
not have ordained pastors, he sought to encourage his congregation to develop
and use their spiritual gifts in preaching and other ministries in the local
church. Because of their long history of being dependent upon the ministry of
one man, my friend’s efforts ended in utter failure.



Coming to present day practices,
what if the appointed pastor of a local church is gifted as an evangelist but
not as a teacher? or what if he is gifted as a teacher but not as an
evangelist? The following are excerpts of two letters written to a Christian
magazine a few years ago:

1. "When we moved two years
ago, my family and I joined a new church. After a year I realized I wasn’t
growing spiritually. The pastor’s sermons are always the same:salvation. That
alone is wonderful, but he never preaches on anything else, morning and
evening."

2. "My church is not
evangelistic. When a few of us talked with our pastor about reaching out to the
community, he answered, ‘Evangelism is just not my gift.’"

I have heard and read many times
about the frustrations expressed by pastors who are expected to have every
spiritual gift and to carry out every possible function of an assembly. To
illustrate this, here, from another Christian magazine, is a job description
for an ideal pastor:"Jack-of-all-trades. Must be strong preacher—deep yet
clear—and simple teacher, capable of instructing adults and children. Expert
counselor; warm, outgoing personality for visiting newcomers and members of
church family; adept at comforting sick, bereaved and elderly. Emcee with great
sense of humor for social events. Top-notch administrator. Pastor or wife must
be gifted secretary; budget does not allow for one. Wife must be able to play
piano (or at least guitar); children should also possess musical talent. Must
be content with salary we are willing to offer." This was written
"tongue in cheek" to illustrate what, too often, are the unrealistic
expectations of a congregation that is seeking a pastor.

The irony and tragedy of these
situations is that while a pastoral search committee is putting advertisements
in papers all over the country, devoted believers possessing a whole range of
spiritual gifts often are already present in that same church.

A properly functioning assembly
according to the scriptures is one in which all the members are assuming
their God-given role and serving and ministering by means of their
Spirit-imparted gift. In an assembly where leadership is granted to the Holy
Spirit alone, there is liberty for all of the gifts to be manifested in
appropriate, Spirit-directed balance. In the assembly Bible studies there is
liberty for those gifted in knowledge and teaching to bring out the doctrinal
aspects of the passage, and those gifted in wisdom, shepherding, and exhorting
to point out the practical applications to people’s lives. Those with other
gifts are likewise free to share lessons from the passage that may have
impressed them and that others with different gifts, different sensitivities,
may have failed to notice. This liberty is not thwarted but is often enhanced
in instances where a brother may take the responsibility to open the
discussion, keep bringing it back on the track of the particular passage or
topic under study, keep the group from bogging down on one verse or part of a
verse, and draw out the participation of others by asking various questions
concerning the passage or topic.



In a local assembly, regular
meetings may be announced for different brothers in the assembly to give
lectures on various scriptural topics. These may include lectures on doctrines
of Scripture, practical applications of Scripture and exhortations, meditations
on the Person and work of Christ, presentation of the gospel of salvation,
etc., according as the Lord may lead the brother.

Other typical activities and
duties usually relegated to the so-called "pastor" or "chief
elder" of a local church, such as visiting the sick, exhorting
backsliders, baptizing converts, conducting weddings and funerals, and so
forth, may likewise be carried out by different ones in the assembly who, by
virtue of spiritual gift and desire to be of service to the Lord, will take
responsibility to see that these needful activities are carried out.

If any reader would like to learn
more about gatherings of believers that do not have clergy-laity distinctions,
and where they might find such a gathering in their locale, please write to the
editor at the address given on the inside front cover of this issue.

I have purposely avoided reference
to the Nicolaitans in Revelation 2:6 and 15. Certain writers, notably F.W.
Grant, H.A. Ironside, and John Ritchie, believe that the Nicolaitans were the
originators of the clergy-laity system. They base this on the meaning of
"Nicolaitan," which is "victory over the people" from nike
("victory") and laos ("people"). (In Greek
mythology, Nike was the winged goddess of victory, and the manufacturers of the
athletic shoes take their name from this Greek goddess.) In some churches, a
clergyman may indeed exercise an almost tyrannical control over the
congregation, thus having "victory over the people." However, in many
others cases, such as the one I described earlier involving my friend, it may
be the laziness of the congregation, or ignorance of what is expected of them,
that by default compels one man to "do it all." So this is not
"victory over the people" but "negligence of the
congregation."

Other writers, such as William
Kelly, Hamilton Smith, Walter Scott, Charles Stanley, T.B. Baines, Edward
Dennett, and A.J. Pollock, believe that identification of the Nicolaitans with
the origin of the clergy-laity movement is tenuous; rather they believe it more
likely to apply to an immoral sect that used the grace of God to indulge the
lusts of the flesh. Because there is such uncertainty and disagreement as to
the exact sin of the Nicolaitans, it seems unwise to use these scriptures
concerning the Nicolaitans as an argument against the system of clergy and
laity. There are enough scriptures that provide clear teaching on the
subject to render unnecessary the resorting to unclear scriptures to
make a point.

Finally, let those assemblies that
practice a "many-man ministry" rather than a "one-man
ministry" beware of falling into one of two extremes:



1. Let no brother become a
controller like Diotrephes (3 John 9,10). I have known assemblies where, in
principle
, there was renunciation of the clergy-laity system, but in
practice
, one man had arrogated to himself almost absolute control over the
assembly. He was "King of the Hill." No decision could be made by the
assembly unless he agreed with it. Any teaching in a Bible study that he
did not agree with was summarily denounced. This is the spirit of Diotrephes.

2. Let us not so neglect our
spiritual gift (1 Tim. 4:14) and our responsibilities in the local assembly
that other, less qualified but more devoted persons, are compelled to do the
work that could better be done by ourselves.

This article began with a
quotation from 1 Timothy 3:15. The House of God will not succeed as
"pillar and ground of the truth" when only one person, or even a
small subset of the local assembly, has total responsibility for ministry of
God’s Word. (See Part III of this series for more on the meaning of
"pillar and ground.") It is when the spiritual gifts of all
the believers are exercised under the control and leading of the Holy Spirit
that the House of God will in practical reality be the pillar and ground of the
truth.