THOUGHTS ON RECLAIMING THE CENTRAL ROLE OF THE WORD OF GOD, ABOVE WORKS AND WINESKINS
Luke 6:40 A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone when he is fully trained will be like his teacher.
Methinks this verse alone could have raised up the priesthood a long time ago! The problem comes when the word “teacher” here is replaced by “leader”. A leader’s first goal is to lead; a preacher’s first goal is to see Christ formed in his hearers. People may argue that a leader also seeks to make disciples, but it is in the subtleties that culture is formed. The fact is that fruitfulness is elevated astronomically above followership in the New Testament (outside of following Jesus directly, a mandate for every believer).
Paul’s entire labors were to “present everyone perfect in Christ” by “proclaiming Him”. His charge to Timothy was to “watch his life and doctrine closely”, and to “preach the Word, in season and out of season”. The reason he remained alive (although it was better by far for him to depart) was to “continue with all of you for your progress and joy in the faith”. Regarding followership, he commended people to “follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ”.
I ask myself, what happens when a people matures and grows, as Christ is formed in them through the ministry of the Word? They become fruitful, self-governed by the inner lamp, full of initiative and zeal. That requires a “perpetually flexing wineskin” for the wine that will run not unlike the “rivers of living waters” that Jesus said would flow from every believer who believed upon Him. And is that wineskin of man’s determining, or was the right hermeneutic for Matt 9:17 one of the wineskin of each person’s heart and attitude? Nowhere does the Bible link church “model” with the word “wineskin”, as I can see.
“Teach”, “teacher” and “teaching” is mentioned 247 times in the New Testament. “Lead” and “leading” is mentioned 43 times. Leader is never mentioned in the singular, only in the plural 12 times. Of this, 3 of these times is in the positive sense of church leaders in plurality.
So I fear that the over-emphasis on leadership in modern psychi (church and secular worlds), is at best an uninterrupted extension of Old Testament thinking. The fact of the matter is that the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ radically changed the covenants, and permanently too. A mixed covenantal hermeneutic has also burdened preachers and teachers all over the world with the unavoidable flotsam that comes with leadership offices, namely administration, strategy, group dynamics and organizational noise. This becomes a double whammy, in the sense that the preaching bar is lowered, people are less fed, Christ is not fully formed in them, thus they rely all the more on the “leaders” to create the momentum, keep the movement going. And on the downside, the priesthood remains activated in fits and starts, or the hungry who are feeding themselves in private become ghosts in the machine (or maybe even labeled troublesome). I must confess, I have been party to this, as leadership is one of the grace gifts bestowed on me in my mother’s womb.
None of what I write is a vote for chaos. I believe in the gift of leadership, as one of 21 mentioned in 1 Cor 12 – Rom 12 – Eph 4. I believe in “elders who rule well” (proistemi – care for, maintain, manage), remembering of course that this verse in 1 Tim 5 goes on to add “especially those who labor in the word and doctrine”. But my point is this - ALL gifts are to serve the body as she is built up into the fulness of the head. All gifts are a manifestation of Christ’s virtue. Regarding the role of preaching and teaching, unity of the Spirit comes through revelation of the Cross (requiring men to preach the good news); and further this can only mature into unity of purpose through preaching and teaching gifts (the “commissional” mandate to “make disciples” was primarily a preaching mandate; the “5 fold gifts” are preaching gifts).
As a crude generalization, a leader has an eye for those who are following, and the few who are emerging as “potentials” - but a preacher has an eye for those who are hearing, and becoming more like Jesus. The leader generally creates followers whose ambition is to become leaders (and who can blame them?). In many cases, leaders are forced to manufacture ministries to find place and position for ”emerging leaders”. In the case of the preacher, he has no such headache, for it is Christ who commissions men and women right where they are. These disciples joy is in fellowship with Christ and “doing His will”, not in recognition and reward from the church system.
Again, culture forms in what we carry in our hearts, not merely what we acknowledge.
An interesting question – what was the major emphasis in Jesus’ final command to 11 men (not to all of us mind you)? Was it “go into all the world”?; or was it “make disciples”? Interestingly, the major “commands” given by Paul to his churches and the saints was to “remain in the place you were when you were called”; “work hard”; “live a quiet life”; be fruitful; know this love that surpasses knowledge. What did Jesus commend the 7 churches for? Deeds, perseverance, suffering, faithfulness, poverty, unrenounced faith, city witness, love, believing in weakness, and (in every case) overcoming. What did He rebuke? Loveless acts, empty reputation, immorality, unfaithfulness, lukewarmness, self-sufficiency, the Nicolatian spirit. Nowhere was the “great commission” centre stage.
Again, the “apostolic” (which I certainly do see in the Acts church), was God-ordained men full of Word and Spirit being “compelled” in the call of God to go elsewhere and preach, with their labor undergirded by signs, wonders, salvations, church births and the ubiquitous suffering. This was the tiny minority of men and women; whereas the vast majority were called to priest in the times and places foreordained by God. So too, the litmus tests of “apostolic gifts” is their fruit in their local church.
I believe with all my heart that Jesus Christ is the Teacher, Shepherd, Apostle. While I believe in leadership, every gift has failed if the priesthood does not arise as a mighty army, in their locality. Jesus is our Joshua, our Moses, our great Prophet too. The spirit of true prophecy is “the testimony of Jesus”, and I believe it would not be heresy to say this is the test of the spirit of every gift – does he or she lead people into a greater revelation, relationship and responsiveness to Jesus? Is the salt salty, the yeast active and the light in each of us bright? If so, we have a powerful church – messy to some, uncontrollable by human strategy or repeatable mechanisms and the like. The words “initiative”, “spontaneity” will be more I our vocabularies, and the church will arise, a mighty army.