The Pastor King. an examination of the modern pastor role

[Paidiske]

I was visiting a meeting a while back ...

It sounds as if the pastor here was spiritually abusive.

Here's the thing, though; informal house churches can be just as spiritually abusive. And when they are, it can be harder to deal with, as there are seldom the kind of accountability structures and disciplinary processes available. One very healthy thing about more institutional churches is that we (usually) have those things in place and functioning relatively well.

 

[LoveofTruth]

It's hard for me to speak about this particular congregation, since I've never visited it to see it in person.

But more generally, most traditional denominations/churches do have more than one person that makes decisions for the church. In the spirit of Acts 15, we have gatherings of "elders with the whole church" in which we make decisions together. These gatherings are given names like "councils", "synods", or "conventions". The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 is an early example of this. Representatives of different regions or congregations within the denomination/church gather for prayerful decision-making.

(For example, I just attended our diocesan convention last week. Representatives from Episcopal congregations across New Jersey gathered -- with prayer, discussion, and reflection -- to make decisions that will affect all of the Episcopalians in New Jersey. I was one of the representatives from our congregation. For another example, every 3 years, Episcopal bishops, priests, and lay leaders across the US gather to make decisions that will affect our national church. There's no one king that makes church decisions for all of us. We do indeed have gatherings of the elders within our church. The Episcopal Church is quite "traditional", in the "traditional theology" sense of the word. Other "traditional" churches have similar mechanisms in which their bishops/priests/pastors/lay leaders/elders gather for discussion and prayerful decision-making.)

Yes, I am aware that many assemblies have others that can add their input. But from what I have seen over many years of visiting and working among these places they have generally a one man at the top called the "pastor" or Priest" or "Pope", etc. usually the body doesn't make decisions or even speak freely in the gatherings of the church.

For example in some of the man made by laws they have this written about their one man called the "pastor"

Article IV Section 1, A

"The Pastor shall be the spiritual overseer and all of it's activities" and

"The Pastor has freedom of the pulpit" * Article IV Section 1, C)

It also says in their man made By-Laws that make the word of God of no affect, speaking about this exalted man over all called the Pastor,

"he shall provide for all the services of the assembly, no person shall be invited to speak or to preach in the assembly without his approval" (By-Law II, section 1.

But these things are similar in many assemblies. Yet they are not right and fight against the scriptures and God's order. They hinder the free ministry of the saints EVERY TIME THEY GATHER, and quench the spirit in the gatherings setting up a Lord over the flock. Even if such men are kind and have faith they are hindering the body in this role.

When we read of this pastor having power and freedom over all to control the activities this is similar to the Roman Catholics one head leader called "the Pope", we read,

"The Roman Poniff...as pastor of the entire church has full, supreme, and universal power over the entire church." ( #882 in the Catechism of the catholic Church). He is also said to be the head (#883).

If you examine your gatherings for the most part there is a pastor or priest at the head of everything. Even though they will call for a few meetings of the church to discuss matters, the regular meetings and function of the church is controlled strictly by them and no one is allowed to freely speak as God leads every time they gather.But scripture commands this freedom among the saints.

I would be curious to see your By-Laws book ( so called) or the writings that describe the function and rule of the one man called the pastor or priest.

In the Jerusalem assembly when they came together to discuss very serious matters about the church and Gentiles and the law etc. There were many speakers and no one man over the whole gathering. We even read that the decision seemed good to the Holy Ghost with all the rest.

Even when I have seen some assemblies have a large assembly for the church to discuss and vote on issues and try to come to sconsensus, it is not free really, there is tight control by the Pastor or Priest and even the control over the body can be among exalted dominating elders. We see that Paul had to warn against false apostles in Corinth, and they were in error in the oversight. One thing Paul says about them is that they exalt themselves and bring them into bondage.

You also used the expression “Lay persons", you said "Episcopal bishops, priests, and lay leaders "

I have found this also to be not right. There is no Clergy or laity distinction in scripture. The word Clergy comes from Kleros and means the inheritance of God . All believers are the inheritance of God and the world "laity", comes from Laos, meaning the people. And this simply refers again to all the people of God. We find no one man or Clergy over others in scripture. We simply see more mature brothers called "elders" who are functioning as overseers to watch over and feed and exhort the gainsayers by sound doctrine. But all the body can edify itself and minister and use all the gifts God gives.

 

[LoveofTruth]

It sounds as if the pastor here was spiritually abusive.

Here's the thing, though; informal house churches can be just as spiritually abusive. And when they are, it can be harder to deal with, as there are seldom the kind of accountability structures and disciplinary processes available. One very healthy thing about more institutional churches is that we (usually) have those things in place and functioning relatively well.

Yes, he was abusive, for thirty years or so he had supreme control with no elders.

Yes, a home meeting can also have wrong order and dominating leaders. We read about such a hime meeting in 3rd John 9, 10 about Diotrephese who loved to have the preeminance and would not receive the brethren and kicked them out of the church. John wrote and warned about him,

I have found that when I am led to such a group I will also withstand such men and write to the church about it. I have done this on occasion.

God does have ways of dealing with this. But if the foundation of God's order and the free functioning of the body in Christ was not laid right, these errors can be seen among many gatherings.

 

[PloverWing]

If you examine your gatherings for the most part there is a pastor or priest at the head of everything. Even though they will call for a few meetings of the church to discuss matters, the regular meetings and function of the church is controlled strictly by them and no one is allowed to freely speak as God leads every time they gather.But scripture commands this freedom among the saints.

I think much is going to depend on the personality of the pastor and of the congregation. I have seen what you describe, that even in a nominally democratic congregation, a pastor with a strong personality can dominate the conversation in meetings. I've also seen pastors with a gift for leading genuine discussions in which multiple voices are heard, respected, and listened to.

I would be curious to see your By_Laws book ( so called) or the writings that describe the function and rule of the one man called the pastor or priest.

The by-laws of our parish, I have discovered today, are not on our church's website. I need to go talk to someone about that. Our website needs updating in a number of ways.

The Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Diocese of New Jersey are here: https://dioceseofnj.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/2023-Constitution-and-Canons.pdf . Canon 51 (p. 46) is probably what you're looking for, as it outlines the responsibilities of the rector/vicar, wardens, and vestry in a congregation. (In our church, "rector" and "vicar" are terms for pastors, and "warden" and "vestry member" are terms for lay leaders.) On paper, Canon 51 does make it sound like the pastor is a one-person ruler, but this sentence carries more weight than you might think: "The Rector or Vicar may from time to time appoint fit and proper persons to perform under his or her supervision, such duties relative to the service and the decoration of the church buildings as may be properly done by laity." In practice, in the congregations I've been in, it's not just "from time to time"; a great many "fit and proper persons" are in charge of Scripture reading, music, Sunday School, altar preparation, and so forth. The pastor is the one who steps in if things are going very badly, but mostly it's the lay people who are doing a lot of what's going on in the worship and work of the congregation.

The roles of the priest and the lay people in Sunday worship are described in the Book of Common Prayer, The Online Book of Common Prayer . "The Holy Eucharist Rite Two" is what we do most Sundays, and "Morning Prayer Rite Two" (under "The Daily Office") is what we do on Sundays when the priest is away. If you read the services, you'll see specific roles for "celebrant" and "people". In both kinds of Sunday service, lay people read the Scriptures, and all of us join vocally in the prayers and in the singing. On a normal Sunday, the priest preaches (which is a small portion of our service, maybe 10 minutes) and consecrates the elements at Communion. When the priest is away, a lay person will lead Morning Prayer and preach.

You also uysed the expression Lay persons", you said "Episcopal bishops, priests, and lay leaders "

I have found this also to be not right. There is no Clergy or laity distinction in scripture.

If this is truly your belief, then you might find a good home in the Society of Friends (Quakers). They also do not distinguish between clergy and laity. I have worshipped with them, and I have found the Friends to be a deeply wise and spiritual community.

 

[Marilyn C]

First I read your whole post. I agree with nearly all of what you say. But the question is where does one go from here? If one get's saved where are they to fellowship? Maybe in big cities you have things done in the type of way you believe but what about small towns? If there's no such a set up like you say what's a person to do? Not fellowship? That's not good.

As we are discipled, mentored then you would meet with that one and as you then get help to disciple another, so the group grows. That is how we do it in our area.

 

[LoveofTruth]

I think much is going to depend on the personality of the pastor and of the congregation. I have seen what you describe, that even in a nominally democratic congregation, a pastor with a strong personality can dominate the conversation in meetings. I've also seen pastors with a gift for leading genuine discussions in which multiple voices are heard, respected, and listened to.



The by-laws of our parish, I have discovered today, are not on our church's website. I need to go talk to someone about that. Our website needs updating in a number of ways.

The Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Diocese of New Jersey are here: https://dioceseofnj.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/2023-Constitution-and-Canons.pdf . Canon 51 (p. 46) is probably what you're looking for, as it outlines the responsibilities of the rector/vicar, wardens, and vestry in a congregation. (In our church, "rector" and "vicar" are terms for pastors, and "warden" and "vestry member" are terms for lay leaders.) On paper, Canon 51 does make it sound like the pastor is a one-person ruler, but this sentence carries more weight than you might think: "The Rector or Vicar may from time to time appoint fit and proper persons to perform under his or her supervision, such duties relative to the service and the decoration of the church buildings as may be properly done by laity." In practice, in the congregations I've been in, it's not just "from time to time"; a great many "fit and proper persons" are in charge of Scripture reading, music, Sunday School, altar preparation, and so forth. The pastor is the one who steps in if things are going very badly, but mostly it's the lay people who are doing a lot of what's going on in the worship and work of the congregation.

The roles of the priest and the lay people in Sunday worship are described in the Book of Common Prayer, The Online Book of Common Prayer . "The Holy Eucharist Rite Two" is what we do most Sundays, and "Morning Prayer Rite Two" (under "The Daily Office") is what we do on Sundays when the priest is away. If you read the services, you'll see specific roles for "celebrant" and "people". In both kinds of Sunday service, lay people read the Scriptures, and all of us join vocally in the prayers and in the singing. On a normal Sunday, the priest preaches (which is a small portion of our service, maybe 10 minutes) and consecrates the elements at Communion. When the priest is away, a lay person will lead Morning Prayer and preach.



If this is truly your belief, then you might find a good home in the Society of Friends (Quakers). They also do not distinguish between clergy and laity. I have worshipped with them, and I have found the Friends to be a deeply wise and spiritual community.

I was looking over the attachment of your By-Laws that you sent. It is soo contrary to scripture and God's order I don't know where to begin. It has all sorts of rudiments of the world dominant leaders overall, even the need for such a "Law" to be added to the church is not right.

It speaks often of "The Bishop" having power over all to do this or that and it talks about who has a right to a seat for a vote etc.

Ot says right near the beginning "There shall be a convention of the Church in the Diocese of New Jersey consisting of the Bishop, other bishops serving the diocese...: *Page1 Article II Section 1)

"The president of the Convention shall be the Bishop of the Diocese.{ (Page 2 Article V Section 1)

Notice how it speaks of "the Bishop" and then other bishops. This one man called "The Bishop" (with a capital B) is like a Pope type character and he is not a biblical function or role. This one man is in supreme authority over all Jesus said we are not to be like the Gentile rulers where those who are great among them are over them or upon them in authority (Matthew 20:25-27). This is exactly how such a group is set up.

"25 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. 26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; 27 And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:"

And they call the Bishop the president. These are exactly what we are warned against and rudiments of the world the traditions of men that make the word of God of no effect. i

I attached a letter I wrote to another large assembly about their so called "By-Laws_ if you are interested to read it here you will see similar responses that i would write to your assembly.

 

[LoveofTruth]

I think much is going to depend on the personality of the pastor and of the congregation.

And what I am saying according to sound scripture, is that it should not be this way. No man should rob believers of their goods, or gifts from God, or and do so through some philosophy of worship or the traditions of men. They should also not base things on the rudiments of the world follow them in these things. Often times it is the vanity and self of the person Lording over others that is the issue. Sadly many of these men will have to face God one day having done so.

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." (Colossians 2:8 KJV)

These things are soo serious and sober that i can't stress the importance. Yet, i know many will just brush them off and do whatever they want to do, regardless of how many scriptures I give.

sadly......

 

[LoveofTruth]

the history of how the one man called "the Pastor" or Priest came about is a long one and I can trace some of the beginnings of this to a man named Ignatius around AD. 107, who said certain things about the bishop that set the wrong course of today.

 

[LoveofTruth]

I think much is going to depend on the personality of the pastor and of the congregation. I have seen what you describe, that even in a nominally democratic congregation, a pastor with a strong personality can dominate the conversation in meetings. I've also seen pastors with a gift for leading genuine discussions in which multiple voices are heard, respected, and listened to.



The by-laws of our parish, I have discovered today, are not on our church's website. I need to go talk to someone about that. Our website needs updating in a number of ways.

The Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Diocese of New Jersey are here: https://dioceseofnj.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/2023-Constitution-and-Canons.pdf . Canon 51 (p. 46) is probably what you're looking for, as it outlines the responsibilities of the rector/vicar, wardens, and vestry in a congregation. (In our church, "rector" and "vicar" are terms for pastors, and "warden" and "vestry member" are terms for lay leaders.) On paper, Canon 51 does make it sound like the pastor is a one-person ruler, but this sentence carries more weight than you might think: "The Rector or Vicar may from time to time appoint fit and proper persons to perform under his or her supervision, such duties relative to the service and the decoration of the church buildings as may be properly done by laity." In practice, in the congregations I've been in, it's not just "from time to time"; a great many "fit and proper persons" are in charge of Scripture reading, music, Sunday School, altar preparation, and so forth. The pastor is the one who steps in if things are going very badly, but mostly it's the lay people who are doing a lot of what's going on in the worship and work of the congregation.

The roles of the priest and the lay people in Sunday worship are described in the Book of Common Prayer, The Online Book of Common Prayer . "The Holy Eucharist Rite Two" is what we do most Sundays, and "Morning Prayer Rite Two" (under "The Daily Office") is what we do on Sundays when the priest is away. If you read the services, you'll see specific roles for "celebrant" and "people". In both kinds of Sunday service, lay people read the Scriptures, and all of us join vocally in the prayers and in the singing. On a normal Sunday, the priest preaches (which is a small portion of our service, maybe 10 minutes) and consecrates the elements at Communion. When the priest is away, a lay person will lead Morning Prayer and preach.



If this is truly your belief, then you might find a good home in the Society of Friends (Quakers). They also do not distinguish between clergy and laity. I have worshipped with them, and I have found the Friends to be a deeply wise and spiritual community.

Here is an article written by a man I met in person years back. He has written many books on this subject. It is interesting to see the history of the modern Pastor and how it came about contrary to the churches way from the beginning.

 

[LoveofTruth]

To all:

here is an interesting article about the origins of the modern pastor role and how it went off tract from Gods original intention.

 

[LoveofTruth]

It sounds as if the pastor here was spiritually abusive.

Here's the thing, though; informal house churches can be just as spiritually abusive. And when they are, it can be harder to deal with, as there are seldom the kind of accountability structures and disciplinary processes available. One very healthy thing about more institutional churches is that we (usually) have those things in place and functioning relatively well.

hello again,

you might find this article I attached very interesting. The research shows where the modern concepts of the Modern Pastor came from.

 

[Bobber]

I was visiting a meeting a while back on their mid week assembly where they study the bible (what they call a "Bible study")

Not sure what you mean by this.

and they used the building they were using for years (unbiblically called a church).

I get what you're saying. Church is really the fellowship of believers but still in current culture for reference a physical structure is called a church. If someone were getting married and it was asked is it going to be a church wedding....If you know it is we can just say YES. I'd think you'd probably do as well.

One time I was there and it was this time of year that some unbiblically call "Christmas",

Oh...so you're going down this road too? So you're into the thing if one has Christmas then they're off the Bible? I don't think God minds us having fun on certain days like this but let's continue the Pastor theme here.

they wanted to give gifts to each other but the so called "pastor" came down that day and said they couldn't do this this together among themselves in that building and that they they had to come to the large superstructure and do it with his approval,....

Yeah sure. An out of line leader of a chruch doing something silly. I agree it's wrong but let's not portray that's typical of Pastors. I'd suggest that would be unfair.

so he came over to me with my bible opened and I showed him that in Acts 15 the verse that showed the entire body making decisions,

As for me I agree with the substance of your arguments but not how you applied it. I'd say it should have been a given to you to know that he wouldn't have been receptive to how you were sharing this. In front of members of his church. Forgive me but I'd say we need to show more diplomacy then that. Even if you would have set up a private meeting with him but publicly? No surprise he wasn't receptive. Chances are he might not have been so any way you would have done it but one way I'd say would be better than the other.

He also was not happy that they were having so many bible studies together he wanted them to go door to door and try to bring people to the new large six million dollar structure (unbiblically called a church).

You're imposing motives upon his statements. I think we can give such a one the benefit of the doubt that he wanting to get more people saved. I just think we need to be careful about assuming we know motives. I'd suggest that would not be fair.

. A few of them actually got upset at me for my stance with scripture and that I made an issue.

Well actually it's not that I would have go upset but rather thinking if you're wanting to change a man's religious paradigm, or way of thinking you should do it in private. I mean these type of topics take a thorough look at scriptures and a musing over them and mediating on them in ones quite hours......send him a document as ask him if he'd consider reading it.

I eventually left that place after clearing myself with what the Lord had sent me to share with them.

So you're appealing here now to God told me so. Let me say I know God tells me things too but rarely do I say these words......you want to know why? It creates the scenario OK so how can one question 'God? I locks you away from considering too that you might have just thought it was God's leading. All I have to say is look at how many claimed God told them Trump was going to be the next U.S. President after his first term? So I won't say never, God told me I DO SOMETHIMES too....but never be too quick to say God told you. I don't even want my reading audience to be put in a place where they feel they can't question the validity of my teaching. Caring about them I want the scriptures to be brought out and looked upon as the standard for truth.....Not me saying God told me.

But from scripture in the apostolic order we see them gathering in homes everywhere. Where no one man was to Lord over them and all can participate as they are in Christ and His order and leading of the Spirit. A home is a family type of environment and they are deliberately smaller gatherings than the 500 to 15,000 people gatherings we see so often today.

As I've said I do agree with much of the substance of your arguments. Maybe just not your style of how you might always present things. I do think though it can be fine to have a massive meeting of believers for say a Billy Graham crusado where many gathering of believers work together for a certain event.

This smaller gathering allows for the function of mutual edification and a meal to happen. I see the great wisdom in this from God. Even when the 120 met they were in a upper room of a larger house.

Sure. But just don't make it a legalism thing where you say never, ever should large groups of believers get together for a certain reason. Years ago I organized and brought about all youth groups from churches in the city to come together at certain times.....so many things you can do in a large massive numbers. It allowed all Christian teenage, young adults to expand their horizons

and get to meet other Christians youth like themselves......we'd rent whole roller skating rinks.....have only Christian music playing.....talent days.....all groups come together and share their gifts....had a Christian newspaper of youths.....I dare say many met their future spouses at some of the events......but you see you never could achieve that if you don't entertain the notion of doing things in a massive way at times.

 

[PloverWing]

I have a two part response here. The first part is a specific response to some of the issues in our diocesan by-laws. The second part is a more general response to the posted document "The Pastor.pdf".

PART ONE: REGARDING THE BY-LAWS:

It speaks often of "The Bishop" having power over all to do this or that and it talks about who has a right to a seat for a vote etc.

Ot says right near the beginning "There shall be a convention of the Church in the Diocese of New Jersey consisting of the Bishop, other bishops serving the diocese...: *Page1 Article II Section 1)

"The president of the Convention shall be the Bishop of the Diocese.{ (Page 2 Article V Section 1)

This section is describing the annual meeting of representatives from across the region of Southern New Jersey. New Jersey is a big place -- it's not just 10 people meeting in a living room -- so the meeting needs some orderly structure. The part about who has a right to participate in the voting is part of this orderliness. It wouldn't be appropriate for random people to just walk in off the street and decide things for our church. So there's a procedure that ensures that people who vote on church policy are actually the chosen representatives of their congregations.

Similarly with the statement that "the president of the Convention shall be the Bishop of the Diocese". In a meeting this big, someone needs to keep the meeting organized. In our Convention last weekend, our bishop presided, in that sense. She kept us moving through the agenda items, called on other people (like the treasurer and the historian) to present items, called for votes when appropriate, and called for a vote to adjourn when we were done. That's the sense in which she serves as the president of the Convention.

PART TWO: REGARDING OVERALL CHURCH ORGANIZATION

ere is an article written by a man I met in person years back. He has written many books on this subject. It is interesting to see the history of the modern Pastor and how it came about contrary to the churches way from the beginning.

Remember that this is the Traditional Theology forum. The participants here value church Tradition. When you say (as the linked article does) that a practice goes all the way back to the time of Ignatius or of Cyprian, for us, that is evidence IN FAVOR of continuing the practice.

Again, if you say that a practice is part of church Tradition, for us who value Tradition, that is evidence IN FAVOR of the practice, NOT EVIDENCE AGAINST the practice.

Now: I agree with some of the points in the paper, and disagree with others.

I agree that the church organizational structure developed over time and could have developed otherwise.

I agree that, because human beings are sinners, church leadership can become oppressive, in the ways that you have warned about. Your quote about the Gentiles lording it over each other is one that I think about often.

I agree that some worship services seem to be a collection of people passively listening to one person talk. (Personally, I don't enjoy that style of worship service, but some people seem to flourish in that setting, so I'm cautious in judgment.)

I will, however, note that the current worldwide Christian church is now much larger than just 10 people in a living room, and some organizational structure is helpful. We can talk about which organizational structures work best in which cultural settings, but if you're proposing a total lack of organizational structure, I think that may not scale up well to a body of over a billion Christians.

And I will note something else: A great many of us here in Traditional Theology are in liturgical churches, and the picture of silent listeners in pews doesn't describe our liturgical worship at all. When Viola says

Permit me to get personal. The pastoral office has stolen your right to function as a member of Christ‟s Body! It has shut your mouth and strapped you to a pew. It has distorted the reality of the Body, making the Pastor a giant mouth and transforming you into a tiny ear. It has rendered you a mute spectator who is proficient at taking sermon notes and passing an offering plate!

it makes me suspect that Viola has never participated in a liturgical worship service.

We got to experience a bit of the "mute spectator" approach during the COVID lockdown months, when our priest led a service in an empty church with us listening via Zoom. It was absolutely not the same experience as being in the same room with each other, saying the prayers aloud together, responding aloud to what the priest says, kneeling together physically at the altar rail to receive Communion alongside my brothers and sisters in Christ. Really, liturgy is not a spectator experience.

 

[Margaret3110]

Yes and they are some large castle like structures with expensive pipe organs and the cost of these buildings is huge in some places.

I was visiting a meeting a while back on their mid week assembly where they study the bible (what they call a "Bible study")and they used the building they were using for years (unbiblically called a church). But they were excited that they had recently moved into a large 6 million dollar super structure right beside them (unbiblically called the church).

One time I was there and it was this time of year that some unbiblically call "Christmas", they wanted to give gifts to each other but the so called "pastor" came down that day and said they couldn't do this this together among themselves in that building and that they they had to come to the large superstructure and do it with his approval, (something about fraud laws etc of man). They argued that they had given gifts before among them in the study, but he pressed them and told them to just obey him and he was upset at them. I was sitting there and I had the bible opened in the book of Acts (thats the book they were trying to study). I asked him if i could show something to him (he never met me at that time I had been visiting their mid week meeting for about a few months trying to work with them, we almost had some willing to have a home meeting but then...) so he came over to me with my bible opened and I showed him that in Acts 15 the verse that showed the entire body making decisions, not just one man called "the Pastor", where it said something like, "it seemed good to the apostles and elders with the whole church", to make certain decisions. I also reminded him of Matthew 18 where Jesus said the whole church was allowed and commanded to make decisions, (not just a one man who controls or dominates over them.) To the shock of myself and all there he pointed at the bible and said "we don't do that, I am the head of this church." He then told them to obey him or they were in rebellion (something like that).

I also found out that after 30 years of his reign over them he had no elders in that gathering. He also was not happy that they were having so many bible studies together he wanted them to go door to door and try to bring people to the new large six million dollar structure (unbiblically called a church). I looked at all there after he left and asked them did the hear what he said and did? they said yes, but just looked strait ahead into space with blank expressions on their faces and no one of them did anything or left that place or even made an issue at all or was concerned enough to go say something to him or others. . A few of them actually got upset at me for my stance with scripture and that I made an issue. Some people deserve what they get they love to have it so. I eventually left that place after clearing myself with what the Lord had sent me to share with them.

But from scripture in the apostolic order we see them gathering in homes everywhere. Where no one man was to Lord over them and all can participate as they are in Christ and His order and leading of the Spirit. A home is a family type of environment and they are deliberately smaller gatherings than the 500 to 15,000 people gatherings we see so often today. This smaller gathering allows for the function of mutual edification and a meal to happen. I see the great wisdom in this from God. Even when the 120 met they were in a upper room of a larger house.

I don't know what church you went to, but mine isn't like that at all ...

 

[Paidiske]

hello again,

you might find this article I attached very interesting. The research shows where the modern concepts of the Modern Pastor came from.

I have no intention of reading it. I am familiar with church history, including the development of various church offices.

Here's the thing, as far as this thread goes. If you find informal home gatherings more edifying, great. By all means direct your church participation that way. May God bless you in it. What I don't understand is the need to come in here and start a thread telling everyone else - mature, intelligent, thoughtful, prayerful Christians - why what they've found helpful in developing that maturity, thoughtfulness and prayerfulness, is wrong. Why not say, "If you find it edifying, great. May God bless you in it"? If you don't understand why we find something helpful, why not ask about our experience and seek to understand? (Because let me tell you, what you're claiming about more institutional churches, while it has some validity to its criticism, largely doesn't match my experience at all).

And if you want to appeal to what God's told you, personally, to do, it might be relevant for you to notice that other people have found God leading them in quite different ways; into institutional churches, even into the models of ministry you're so freely denigrating.

It's disrespectful, at best, to try to interact with people this way.

 

[LoveofTruth]

I have no intention of reading it. I am familiar with church history, including the development of various church offices.

Here's the thing, as far as this thread goes. If you find informal home gatherings more edifying, great. By all means direct your church participation that way. May God bless you in it. What I don't understand is the need to come in here and start a thread telling everyone else - mature, intelligent, thoughtful, prayerful Christians - why what they've found helpful in developing that maturity, thoughtfulness and prayerfulness, is wrong. Why not say, "If you find it edifying, great. May God bless you in it"? If you don't understand why we find something helpful, why not ask about our experience and seek to understand? (Because let me tell you, what you're claiming about more institutional churches, while it has some validity to its criticism, largely doesn't match my experience at all).

And if you want to appeal to what God's told you, personally, to do, it might be relevant for you to notice that other people have found God leading them in quite different ways; into institutional churches, even into the models of ministry you're so freely denigrating.

It's disrespectful, at best, to try to interact with people this way.

Hello and God bless,

I have so many examples of every kind of gathering I have visited and the example I gave about the man who didn’t want to do it God’s way and had no elders for thirty years and said he was the head of the church. Is a specific situation. But, I have seen similar in different ways in many many many assemblies, from modern type evangelical assemblies to old Orthafox type ones. There are too many stories to type in here. But they all have a common theme. They all show how the body of Christ is not allowing Christ to come in to them and sup with them as a body in mutual edification as they are “commanded” to allow in scripture.

In the church of Laodicea we see Jesus standing outside and warning them.He wanted to come in to them and sup with them. To participate with them. I believe the ones he sends today to the churches have a similar message as I have. That is “let Christ back into the gatherings and edify one another don’t trust in yourself thinking you are rich and increase with goods and have need of nothing and be aware of the problems among you and anoint your eyes and walk in the light in white garments, seek true riches.

I speak things to other believers as we should according to Gods leading and scripture. Part of the ministry is to reprove, rebuke and exhort with long suffering and doctrine. Jesus sends people to do such a work and he always has. I simply seek to help my brothers and sisters. I see a great danger in not allowing Christ to work effectually in the body to the edifying of itself in love , especially as they gather together. I see so many assemblies from Orthodox to modern assemblies not allowing this. Truly I am concerned that Christ is outside knocking at many places I have gone.

When Gid sent men like Paul, Timothy, Titus, Silvanus and others to the churches, they had a somewhat itinerant ministry. This ministry is still functioning today.

I also believe with my brother Paul that we should all seek to speak the same things and that there be no division among us and that unity is God’s will. So when I see things that hinder the unity of the body I seek (by the grace of God ) to help.

1 Corinthians 1: 10. Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.”

Sone are content to go against this verse, and maintain all sorts of different views and no unity or doctrine etc . I am not content to do this. I seek to help this unity in all things. But yes, it is not an easy task, only by the grace of God can this be done. But if we start by not seeking to have this then we already creat disunity.

Another thought, if you are in your gathering and let’s say two or three brothers have a different view of doctrine and begin to not act the way you or others do in your assembly, do you just tell them that’s good for you and we do things another way and leave them doing that in the assembly? Isn’t there correction or exhortation with scripture? And even many getting involved.

Now what if a brother was visiting another assembly and saw them teaching and doing things that were contrary to God’s truth ? Should they just ignore it and walk away? What if God leads them to speak and address it?

I think you know what I am saying here.

Also, you did say you have no intention of reading the pdf I attached. That’s unfortunate, it is unlike any history you may have been taught. It takes true history but looks at it through the scriptural body ministry lense.

But if you won’t even read it, that is not allowing edification between others who seek only your good.

I assume you also are a “pastor” . I have talked with many many “pastors” over the years. Seldom do they change in these areas, sadly. But I have met sone who did.

 

[Paidiske]

“let Christ back into the gatherings..."

I see a great danger in not allowing Christ to work effectually in the body

The assumption here is that you are speaking to people for whom Christ is not present and working effectually. It's that assumption I'm taking issue with.

Another thought, if you are in your gathering and let’s say two or three brothers have a different view of doctrine and begin to not act the way you or others do in your assembly, do you just tell them that’s good for you and we do things another way and leave them doing that in the assembly?

It depends what you're referring to, but yes, in general diversity of views is tolerated and even seen as a gift. Open disruption of worship would be a different thing.

I think you know what I am saying here.

Seems to me that you're saying you know better than everyone else what they should think, how they should speak, and how they should act. I'm sure you'll forgive me if I don't find the claim convincing.

That’s unfortunate, it is unlike any history you may have been taught.

How can you possibly know what I may have been taught, read, or learned? Why would you assume that you do?

I assume you also are a “pastor” .

I am an Anglican priest. I see God at work in and through the church in which I serve, and other churches as well. I am confident that God's grace is greater than any of our institutional shortcomings.

 

[LoveofTruth]

The assumption here is that you are speaking to people for whom Christ is not present and working effectually. It's that assumption I'm taking issue with.

It depends what you're referring to, but yes, in general diversity of views is tolerated and even seen as a gift. Open disruption of worship would be a different thing.

Seems to me that you're saying you know better than everyone else what they should think, how they should speak, and how they should act. I'm sure you'll forgive me if I don't find the claim convincing.

How can you possibly know what I may have been taught, read, or learned? Why would you assume that you do?

I am an Anglican priest. I see God at work in and through the church in which I serve, and other churches as well. I am confident that God's grace is greater than any of our institutional shortcomings.

I don’t assume things unless I see the order of God according to scripture and His commands not being done or hindering other believers from edifying one another EVERY time they gather. I do assume to sone degree that those who nane the name of Christ do believe in the holy scriptures and what we are taught.

So far I have not heard one correction to the clear scriptures I gave and God’s commands for all the saints from scripture.

If we just get upset because a scripture happens to show that what we have been doing for so long may not be right and we need to change, then I suppose sone cannot use scripture at all because I as many other believers can testify have been corrected and changed by what God has shown in scripture.

I sumply seek to have myself and my brothers and sisters come together and be able to edify one another and the one person I have found that hinders this is the pastor role that doesn’t allow body ministry.

It’s not true to try and make me look like I think I know all things and am sone great corrector of everyone. That’s not true, I speak of the things I have learned from God and from scripture. I waitvragerly for any scriptural correction. Many times I just hear personal things about me or a pastor being upset because this will totally change their life to walk in the commands of God that I show from scripture.

 

[PloverWing]

@LoveofTruth , may I ask you about the range of Christian congregations you've experienced? When you say "Orthodox", do you genuinely mean Eastern Orthodox, or do you just mean that they sing hymns from a hymnal instead of having a praise band?

My impression is that you've only seen nondenominational congregations, with a single pastor in charge, and with no denominational oversight. But I don't know you, so I invite correction. What kinds of congregations, and what styles of worship, have you experienced?

 

[Paidiske]

So far I have not heard one correction to the clear scriptures I gave and God’s commands for all the saints from scripture.

You are claiming that, for example, more institutional churches don't allow the whole church to minister to one another. Since that is, in my experience, completely false, it's not a matter of correcting the Scripture so much as it is of correcting your misunderstanding of different churches.

It’s not true to try and make me look like I think I know all things and am sone great corrector of everyone.

So, what was the purpose of this thread, again?