Authority
It seems that the last post left some questions as to what I meant by authority. Let me clarify a little. What I am looking for is your thoughts on leadership and governance in church. Most who responded were Baptists, even Pope Cole, however even with Baptists circles there is disagreement about this subject.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Please let me know your thoughts.
7 Comments:
Thanks Ben. I think we all anxiously await it.
I would guess one of the issues in Baptist circles centers around whether there should be Elders in addition or in place of Deacons. A sleeping Deacon by any other name is still asleep.
The Baptist congregational form of government has always granted the church in conference the authority for making, approving, or disapproving, decisions. It has worked pretty well until megachurches came along, making the house and grounds committee perhaps a little overwhelmed in a $50 million facility. For some the introduction of Elders has an uncomfortable Reformed feeling to it. But for others it is a recognition that the old form of government which micromanaged every decision can no longer work. And for others it is a way for the Pastor to control a small group of men instead of a large and unmanageable one. I know that sounds a bit cynical, but having been a deacon now for more than 30 years, it is a legitimate observation.
Regardless of how you feel, the absence of what Circenses thought in the last blog that mattered most, the authority of Christ is just as relevant in that tiny church meeting once a month still as it is in or ought to be in Joel O'steen's religious colliseum.
The Calvinists are coming, yes the Calvinists are coming but I hope I know it before I read in our bulletin that Deacon Smith is now Elder Smith. A sleeping Elder by any other name is still asleep.
As I read the Scriptures, the leaders in the church are the elders/pastors/bishops. They are the spiritually mature ones who council, guide, teach and disciple the young Christians in the church. Generally, the male elders/pastor/bishops disciple the younger males and the female elders/pastors/bishops disciple the younger females, but male elders can disciple younger females and female elders can disciple younger males if need be. In some cases the younger males and females may disciple the elder males and females but this is by definition a rarity.
Circenses,
uh. I would find it most helpful if you would provide scriptural references for your taxonomy of discipling. Perhaps you might provide a chart similar to that used as a map in malls with a "you are here" starting point for those in need of discipling. In attempt at doing so following reading your post I discovered why we have so much problem with younger females in the Southern Baptist Church. There is no one who is qualified to disciple them since we have no bishops, no elders (except in rare instances) and no female pastors by order of the SBC in 2000.
Is it too late to offer a resolution to correct this in June?
Here are the most clear designations of elders/pastors/bishops but there are many more.
Male Elders - 1 Tim 5:1; Titus 2:2
Female Elders – 1 Tim 5:2; Titus 2:3
The elders in the church are the spiritually “mature” ones who disciple the spiritually “young”.
That the SBC does not ordain or recognize women as elders/pastors/bishops is sad but ultimately unnecessary. Ordination is the church’s recognition of what the Holy Spirit is already doing. Whether or not the church recognizes that a woman is an elder by the Holy Spirit (Ac 20:28) does not extinguish the fact that she is one. The church cannot stop the Holy Spirit from acting in the manner in which He does and cannot stop the Holy Spirit from making female pastors/elders; the church can only not recognize what the Holy Spirit has done, i.e., not ordain.
Nevertheless, even with the church not recognizing women as pastors/elders, women still perform that function discipling both younger women and men and children of both sexes. Which is the odd thing: the SBC does not mind women to perform such a function (even expecting them to do so) but just as long as they are not designated as “elders/pastors”.
The 2000 BFM cannot prevent women from being elders/pastors any more than it can make anyone (whether male or female) be elders/pastors. That’s the Holy Spirit’s job.
Create a resolution? No need. They are already there. In the current climate submitting a resolution would cause more problems than it would solve. And, again, it is ultimately unnecessary.
I know some Southern Baptists want everyone to recognize women elder/pastors as such, but I really don’t care. As long as they are there and doing there ministry I am quite content to be patient and allow the Holy Spirit to change the hearts and minds of the SBC and to allow the old stalwarts to die out. If the Holy Spirit wants the SBC to ordain women than it will happen.
Circenses,
This is a refreshing post for it is how I believe. Many would call you an egalitarian (spoken with a sneer). I believe fully that the earthly leadership (senior pastor) of the local body is to be male but to not allow women who are gifted and called to serve is legalism at its worse. Thank you for your insight.
Circenses
It might surprise you to know that there is probably much with which I agree with in your comments. At the beginning of every day, I think all seminary and Christian Education students should be required to rise and quote five times "God is not a knothead." Had that been the rule over the years there are entire denominations, if one wishes to extend that much legitmacy to some, that would never have come into existence. Although I do not wish to tangle with the author of this blog, the pursuit of a hard and fast rule on this subject seems to have taken on more importance than it deserves.
My observation is that young preachers who take on the blue hairs in an effort at male dominance had better have a file of fresh resumes. Both SBC big offerings are named after women, and after all who were the first believers in a risen Lord, the Jerusaslem WMU.
Post a Comment
<< Home