Alan Knox writes:
"In each case, we see that elders/leaders are not over or separated from the church and given positions of authority. Instead, they are those among the church who are doing the things that all believers should be doing. And, in doing what all believers should be doing, they become good examples for others to follow."
"In each case, we see that elders/leaders are not over or separated from the church and given positions of authority. Instead, they are those among the church who are doing the things that all believers should be doing. And, in doing what all believers should be doing, they become good examples for others to follow."
My purpose in this blog post is to persuade you that we have been culturally conditioned to believe that there is only one kind of authority (top-down) and that the Bible teaches this 'only kind' of authority.
I suggest that it is our lack of being taught and therefore lack of understanding that there is more than one kind of authority--and that Christian authority is NOT the type we have been taught.
If we can refrain from projecting the "worship assembly" as the most important, compartmentalized example, for a moment, then I would like to examine 1 Peter 5:1ff without this projection which may cause us to dismiss what I have highlighted in bold.
Notice that there is no church hierarchy/oligarchy in the following passage:
"So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory."
"Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble." Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on Him, because He cares for you. Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world."--1 Peter 5:1-9.
If we can refrain from forcing a military definition on the word "charge," notice that "shepherding" in the passage is defined by Peter. The last description is "not domineering" but "being examples." It baffles me how we can still read "charge" in a domineering fashion when Peter specifically says, "not domineering." Especially note, that the "younger" are told "likewise" be subject to the elders.
Why tell the younger to "likewise" "be subject," which is an attitude of respect, not inferiority of position, unless the elders were told first to display this attitude of respect toward the younger?
Also, if the elders' "being examples" and "being subject" which Peter commands means 'to rule over other Christians,' and not simply be humble examples which Peter specifically states, then can I follow their example and begin ruling them and others, too, with my expedient laws?
Attitude is certainly one of Peter's concerns, but it is the means to an end. The end is not "I'm older than you, so deal with it until you get older," and therefore, creates a static, dysfunctional system of roles that absolutizes age regardless of function on the basis of the non-realities of "should," "ought to," and "supposed to." Everyone deserves respect, but listening to someone simply because they are older can be very naive and unwise.
The end Peter seeks is equal humble behavior among all the "brotherhood," in the face of suffering in which elders' experience instills confidence (v. 9). It is not "more" subjection by those who are younger toward those who are older, and "less" subjection by those who are older toward the younger, thereby eliminating the need for example. This arbitrary separation on one class of Christians from the rest is unnecessary.
"Shepherding" is "taking care of" or "feeding" following the use of one's "oversight"--not being an overlord and using delegation and mandatory public building attendance as a means to avoid it. When one uses "oversight," he "notices" that others are hungry, has a need, and serves them. "Feeding" or shepherding, is serving others, not ruling them and "delegated preaching" as some insist as the only way to interpret "feed" is no where in the context.
"Being examples" and "not domineering" are specific commands that include more than one's attitude. These two commands concern behaving in certain ways, or a way of life. They do not justify compartmentalizing the proper attitude while you rule.
The attitude is "be subject." Why? Because people who are "being subject"--and this is commanded to all ages and genders, Eph. 5:21--will not be "domineering." If they mean the same thing, then why say it twice? They don't mean the same thing, and Peter is maintaining integrity in his teaching (Titus 2:7) by showing how the inside attitude of "being subject" leads to the outside behavior of "not domineering."
"Being examples," as Peter puts it, of this persuasive type of authority is the responsibility of all Christians and that older Christians are to model to a greater extent than younger Christians; therefore, younger Christians are told, "likewise" be subject to the elders who are also being subject to you first by example. Now this is the proper use of "respect your elders" that is so popular in our culture.
If older Christians have "more" authority from God, then it is to be less and less domineering. In fact, the word Peter uses for "not domineering" (exercise authority, lord it over) is exactly what Jesus forbids in Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:26; and Matthew 20:25-26.
The "Constantinian Shift," or "Cataract," as Lee Camp calls it in Mere Discipleship, which is the mixing of Church and State, contaminates the shepherding behavior among the church of Christ with the domineering control of the State. We have compartmentalized this "state department" mentality in the church into "expedient" matters to justify it instead of resisting it.
Notice the historical progression of attitudes from these brief quotes:
"If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world."--Jesus Christ, ca. A.D. 30.
"He willed to save man by persuasion, not by compulsion, for compulsion is not God's way of working." --Letter to Diognetus, ca. 2nd Century A.D.
"If there is anyone of the Saxon people lurking among them unbaptized, and if he scorns to come to baptism and wishes to absent himself and stay a pagan, let him die."--Charlemagne, ca. 785 A.D., while Christian king of the Franks.
Where is our allegiance?
With the first century church of Christ or the later State-Church System contaminated by the stream of time?
Why tell the younger to "likewise" "be subject," which is an attitude of respect, not inferiority of position, unless the elders were told first to display this attitude of respect toward the younger?
Also, if the elders' "being examples" and "being subject" which Peter commands means 'to rule over other Christians,' and not simply be humble examples which Peter specifically states, then can I follow their example and begin ruling them and others, too, with my expedient laws?
Attitude is certainly one of Peter's concerns, but it is the means to an end. The end is not "I'm older than you, so deal with it until you get older," and therefore, creates a static, dysfunctional system of roles that absolutizes age regardless of function on the basis of the non-realities of "should," "ought to," and "supposed to." Everyone deserves respect, but listening to someone simply because they are older can be very naive and unwise.
The end Peter seeks is equal humble behavior among all the "brotherhood," in the face of suffering in which elders' experience instills confidence (v. 9). It is not "more" subjection by those who are younger toward those who are older, and "less" subjection by those who are older toward the younger, thereby eliminating the need for example. This arbitrary separation on one class of Christians from the rest is unnecessary.
"Shepherding" is "taking care of" or "feeding" following the use of one's "oversight"--not being an overlord and using delegation and mandatory public building attendance as a means to avoid it. When one uses "oversight," he "notices" that others are hungry, has a need, and serves them. "Feeding" or shepherding, is serving others, not ruling them and "delegated preaching" as some insist as the only way to interpret "feed" is no where in the context.
"Being examples" and "not domineering" are specific commands that include more than one's attitude. These two commands concern behaving in certain ways, or a way of life. They do not justify compartmentalizing the proper attitude while you rule.
The attitude is "be subject." Why? Because people who are "being subject"--and this is commanded to all ages and genders, Eph. 5:21--will not be "domineering." If they mean the same thing, then why say it twice? They don't mean the same thing, and Peter is maintaining integrity in his teaching (Titus 2:7) by showing how the inside attitude of "being subject" leads to the outside behavior of "not domineering."
"Being examples," as Peter puts it, of this persuasive type of authority is the responsibility of all Christians and that older Christians are to model to a greater extent than younger Christians; therefore, younger Christians are told, "likewise" be subject to the elders who are also being subject to you first by example. Now this is the proper use of "respect your elders" that is so popular in our culture.
If older Christians have "more" authority from God, then it is to be less and less domineering. In fact, the word Peter uses for "not domineering" (exercise authority, lord it over) is exactly what Jesus forbids in Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:26; and Matthew 20:25-26.
The "Constantinian Shift," or "Cataract," as Lee Camp calls it in Mere Discipleship, which is the mixing of Church and State, contaminates the shepherding behavior among the church of Christ with the domineering control of the State. We have compartmentalized this "state department" mentality in the church into "expedient" matters to justify it instead of resisting it.
Notice the historical progression of attitudes from these brief quotes:
"If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world."--Jesus Christ, ca. A.D. 30.
"He willed to save man by persuasion, not by compulsion, for compulsion is not God's way of working." --Letter to Diognetus, ca. 2nd Century A.D.
"If there is anyone of the Saxon people lurking among them unbaptized, and if he scorns to come to baptism and wishes to absent himself and stay a pagan, let him die."--Charlemagne, ca. 785 A.D., while Christian king of the Franks.
Where is our allegiance?
With the first century church of Christ or the later State-Church System contaminated by the stream of time?
A thought that came to mind while going over this was the issue of conformity. The only Person we are to totally "conform to" is Christ: Romans 8:29 states: "For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters." As Christians, and individual parts of Christ's "body," we all have differing gifts, or abilities, from which to learn from. The assumption of conformity (to some man, group of men) exposes the problem with hierarchies/oligarchies that exalt men, or one man--the gospel preacher--as the example everyone should conform to. This is a sad myth that needs to be expelled from the church.
ReplyDelete