Where did the idea for pastor dominated congregations come from?

[ByTheSpirit]

Seriously, I have no idea and would like to be informed on it.

 

[prov1810]

Denominations have bishops, and their authority puts a check on pastoral shenanigans. They have official creeds, which puts a check on theological experimentation. And they have seminaries and other requirements for ordination. But in evangelicalism you are considered qualified to lead a church if you have a charismatic stage presence. God help us.

 

[Biblicist]

Seriously, I have no idea and would like to be informed on it.

It started with Rome with their priests and after the Reformation the priest became the 'pastor' which sadly flowed into the Evangelical and Pentecostal movements.

Even though Pentecost has historically held to the Biblical principle of the "priesthood of all believers" this has all too frequently been relegated to theory.

As much as we like to pride ourselves on our Full Gospel theology where we tend to deride the historical denominations for their 'worldly' ministerial structures, it seems that Pentecost has in most part fallen back into this model which has absolutely no support from the Scriptures.

 

[Optimax]

Jer 3:15
And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding. KJV

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Interesting you use that verse considering the context is about the regathering of the scattered tribes... not the church

 

[Andry]

A lack of understanding of what "church" is supposed to be, not what it has become.

 

[Norah63]

Lets pick a leader, yes he's the best qualified for that part, he can be the pastor.
We will tithe and give him some money and he can teach us, then visit the sick for us, an
all that other stuff, so we don,t have to.
O.k., lets vote on it!
(Tongue in cheek)

 

[ToBeBlessed]

Does anyone else think that it may have something to do with only having one paid position vs. more than one?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

The funniest thing about how the churches Ive been in operate and even ones Ive looked into to join is to be considered for ministry you have to prove worthy of the task. How much have you gathered for the church? How many people have you brought into the church? Etc. Resumes, references, etc its like a corporation...

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Does anyone else think that it may have something to do with only having one paid position vs. more than one?

Well some churches have more than one paid staff member while others still (probably most) dont have any. I dont think the paid positions have anything to do with it.

 

[bushinoki]

I'm going to try this one more time, and see if I can avoid being overcome with anger.

First off, if the only official leadership post in your church is a pastor, with no board of elders, no deacons, no one else that is selected from the congregation as a check to the authority of the senior paster, GET OUT! Paul very clearly wrote on the issue, that there is supposed to be clear cut leadership in a church. There is supposed to be a senior ranking leader who oversees the entire congregation. The word Paul used writing in this context is episkopos, Greek for overseer, translated into English as bishop. There are supposed to be other leaders who support and act as a check on the senior overseer. Writing about them, Paul used the term presbyteros, pretty much elder. They should have the authority to censure or remove a bishop/pastor who is not living a holy life or is abusing his authority.

Where did the concept of a leader governing an entire congregation come from? Paul wrote about it in several of his letters.

 

[Norah63]

It doesn't have to be about the money, but try not having any payment for the pastor an see how many apply. There are pastors that go to about three small churches in our area every Sunday.
Filling the pulpit for an hour, then on to the next.
Everyone in the congregation ought to be able (and more than willing) to give their part in any service.
Filling a few hours with a scripture, a song, a prayer, a word of edification.
Church is not rocket science, its saved folks together in unity of purpose.
Just my thoughts on home church, or building congregations.

 

[bushinoki]

Norah, it doesn't have to be about money, but you definitely hit the nail on the head- you get what you pay for. If you pay for a qualified full-time pastor, you get someone who can devote himself to the needs of his congregation.

The biggest issue I have is that someone like me, who is called to fill such a role, has to spend hundreds of hours in study, on top of the money involved, to obtain a degree so that I have proof that I meet the knowledge requirements of being ordained clergy. Why should I waste my GI Bill if the degree obtained is not going to be my livelihood? Now, I understand that I won't be going right from Bible College into a major senior pastor post, that's not how it works. I either start under someone else, or build my own church. And if I'm wrong on starting a brand new church, I'm in for some time in misery for not following God's will.

The big issue at hand is filling the leadership positions in a congregation with qualified people. And make no mistake, there are clear cut qualifications for people who serve in leadership positions in a church.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

I'm going to try this one more time, and see if I can avoid being overcome with anger.

First off, if the only official leadership post in your church is a pastor, with no board of elders, no deacons, no one else that is selected from the congregation as a check to the authority of the senior paster, GET OUT! Paul very clearly wrote on the issue, that there is supposed to be clear cut leadership in a church. There is supposed to be a senior ranking leader who oversees the entire congregation. The word Paul used writing in this context is episkopos, Greek for overseer, translated into English as bishop. There are supposed to be other leaders who support and act as a check on the senior overseer. Writing about them, Paul used the term presbyteros, pretty much elder. They should have the authority to censure or remove a bishop/pastor who is not living a holy life or is abusing his authority.

Where did the concept of a leader governing an entire congregation come from? Paul wrote about it in several of his letters.

Yes but not just one leader, but several...

What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. ([bless and do not curse]1 Corinthians‬ [bless and do not curse]14‬:[bless and do not curse]26‬ ESV)

And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, ([bless and do not curse]Ephesians‬ [bless and do not curse]4‬:[bless and do not curse]11-13‬ ESV)

hardly sounds like he meant for just one person to run the show... Unless that one person is Jesus

 

[Biblicist]

I'm going to try this one more time, and see if I can avoid being overcome with anger.

First off, if the only official leadership post in your church is a pastor, with no board of elders, no deacons, no one else that is selected from the congregation as a check to the authority of the senior paster, GET OUT! . . .

Could you maybe explain your post a bit more as I seem to be seeing a few different directions in play.

 

[bushinoki]

Biblicist, there is only one direction. There is supposed to be one who is senior ranking above the church, but there is supposed to be further leadership below him who has the collective authority to check the bishop/pastor if he should stray from a holy life or sound doctrine. It's a matter of human nature.

 

[Norah63]

I would go with Onlybygrace,post#14!
yes that's scripture. Not business.
Sorry about anyone wanting schooling for a job.
It's a calling together of the saved.

 

[Biblicist]

Biblicist, there is only one direction. There is supposed to be one who is senior ranking above the church, but there is supposed to be further leadership below him who has the collective authority to check the bishop/pastor if he should stray from a holy life or sound doctrine. It's a matter of human nature.

Thanks for your clarification.

I fully agree that the Scriptures speak of a plurality of elders and more importantly that they are the primary governing body within each local congregation. When it comes to there being someone who is “an equal above the other equals” this is certainly not something that I see in the Scriptures; though there is no problem with having a president or even a rotating presidency who can speak for the elders as we have with James who was the “president” of the First Jerusalem Council.

From a Full Gospel perspective I see the Scriptures providing for a collective body of elders as the local congregational government with the deacons holding formal various ministry and administrative roles. Within 1Cor 12 we are told that the Father has established 8 Congregational Offices which can be held by anyone be they elders, deacons or general members; though an apostle (church planter) would probably be acknowledged by the local congregation as being either an elder or deacon and the same probably goes for that of the teacher.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Seriously, I have no idea and would like to be informed on it.

paul the apostle and messenger of Yahshua, anointed and taught by Yahshua by revelation directly,
talked about this in one or more of his letters to Ephesians and/or other assemblies.

basically, the gist was that many wolves were already ready to tear the flock(s) apart, and only the apostle's presence and watchfulness was what kept them at bay.

he wrote by inspiration and revelation knowledge from Yahshua in Yhvh that the wolves would proceed to move in and begin to tear the flock(s) apart as soon as he departed. (btw, and they did, already that early in the first centuries).

 

[bushinoki]

Norah, the issue at hand is that we do need those with deeper education and training to guard the doctrine. It's very simple, not everyone has the time or ability to devote to learning Hebrew and Greek. And if you rely solely on a translation of a translation, which modern translations are a further translation, you actually do start to lose the original meaning. And take it from a linguist, learning another language is hard. There are many people who aren't capable of learning a closely related language like German or Spanish in a few short years. Greek gets harder than those two, as you do have to learn a whole new alphabet, and Hebrew is even harder than Greek, as it's not in the same general language family. And that's just talking about the two languages to be studied. It's taken me 34 years to learn as much as I have outside of Bible school, and I'm nowhere near a seminarian's level of knowledge. I'm also one of the people with the ability.

Yeshuaslavejeff put it best, that when we don't have the trained leadership around, we quickly see the wolves come into the sheepfold. It should never be about profit, simply about guaranteeing that the people who have to devote their lives to doctrine and the Gospel are compensated, as it's a full time job to run a church of 30 or more. I'm against seeing these "preachers" that make millions off their "crusades" and books, but I'm also against seeing a pastor and his family always on the edge financially because people hold back.

My calling is to one of the most expensive nations on Earth to live in. Are you telling me I have to live in utmost poverty, with constant worries about having decent clothes or enough to eat, because I want to spread the Gospel, and help people in a culture that is spiritually starving to death?