Posts
I have been contemplating some things about local church Government. I made a blog post at an earlier date here. This is an outgrowth of that post.
It occurred to me that we, as Apostolics, should fulfill the ministries of the church as they did them in the book of Acts church. That having been said, our modern churches glorify bishops, pastors, and evangelists. Most of our churches don't use deacons and prophets are both revered and feared. But, what about the Apostle?
Scripturally speaking, aside from them having personally seen Jesus- something only the originals could do (unless he gives us a vision or dream)- they seemed to act as pastor/elders, evangelists, missionaries, bishops, prophets, and teachers in the scriptures. They would go to an "unchurched area", start preaching and teaching, and (if the Gospel gained traction there) they'd raise up a local body (or church, if you will) until God raised up some elders in that group to take over the leadership of the group. Then, the Apostle would move on to start another work, occasionally keeping an eye on their previous works- offering encouragement and correction to the elders and church body where needed.
Another thing they'd do, however, was that they seemed to be the authorities of the whole movement. Look at the disagreement over circumcision in Acts. Who was it that the dispute was taken to? Who was it that seemed to be the final arbitor of doctrinal truth for the whole body of Christ (under the direction of the Lord)? The Apostles!
So, since in our modern day movements, a missionary is probably the closest thing to an Apostle we have, do we have things backwards in our organizations? Instead of the Bishops and pastor/elders leading our organizations, shouldn't it be the missionaries? Why are they relegated to an almost fringe status in our movements, when they had such a HUGE role in the early church?
Thoughts anyone?
Greetings Brother:
ReplyDeleteThere is no evidence that all Apostles acted as missionaries. We have the Apostolic record that Peter was sent to the circumcision and Paul to the uncircumcision (Gal 2:7). This does not of itself make them missionaries in the sense of a ministerial office. They were acting as Apostles in all of their work. The Five-Fold ministry does not list any office of missionary. The word "missionary" is not even found in the Bible. It appears in the general sense that a missionary is one who brings the Gospel to another country. Paul is said to have several missionary journeys. Your question presumes that those of the parent nation or country should have missionaries as head of the Church and not a Pastor. This is an idea but it has not Scriptural merit. The name Pastor comes from the work of a shepherd, a keeper of a flock. And the Pastor office is in the Five-Fold Ministry. There is no other office that has the designation as keeper of the flock. Whatever part the other offices play in perfection of the saints, they cannot replace the Pastor. Missionaries are not Apostles and I do not see any of their work making them Apostles. Apostles can write Scripture and I see no authority for those claiming to be missionaries to write Scripture.
I don't think that the present church(s) necessarily have it backwards, just slightly out of focus. I am not sure if the missionaries should be in charge,since most missionaries are called to be evangelist. If they are called to pastor, then okay. The biggest reason that I think the church is out of focus from the early church, is we place to much focus on the church "building" rather than the church "assembly"?? There were NO "church buildings" in the early church, they met in houses. John M. Chew
ReplyDeleteBr John, I am not advocating buildings either. The "church" are the born again believers, not the edifice they meet in.
ReplyDeleteBr "Son", All I'm saying is that the church world has become far too "pastor focused". The whole five fold ministry led God's people. The pastor's are called "Elders" in most other places in the NT scripture. There is NO "single pastor" in charge system in the Holy Writ. They actually had what I term "Elderships" )2 or more Elders leading the local flock. The closest thing we have today in our modern systems to a biblical "Apostle" is a missionary. Missionaries, like Apostles, go to unchurched areas, set up local bodies of believers, train them, appoint Elders over the local congregations, and help to oversee the whole of Christendom in their areas of assignment.
I'm not saying, necessarily, turn everything over to the missionaries. However, their systems are set up much closer to the book of Acts church. What I am advocating is that our church organizations here in the USA need to adapt how we're organized to a much more biblical model.
If we are going to call ourselves Apostolic Christians, we need to do things the way they did.
Great article.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, not all missionaries are apostles, but in executing the bishopric of apostle, all apostles would be "missionaries".
Yes, the church is completely backwards, and has been for quite some time, since about the 2nd century.
Here's an overview of the function of an apostle, then and now:
Primarily responsible for the accurate translation and application of the law and the prophets, their fulfillment in Christ Jesus, and their being foundational for the preaching and teaching of the Gospel; also for pioneering the promulgation of the Gospel in the areas of the un-churched and unconverted, and for the establishing, maintaining, and enforcing of Kingdom government within the Church via sound doctrine.
Also primarily responsible for securing and declaring the revelatory acts of God for this present dispensation; serves in this capacity with Prophets.
Endowed with position specific abilities designed to facilitate God’s will and purpose.
The government of the Church yet flows primarily through the ministerial grace of apostle, because it is this grace that the Lord set firstly in the Church. The "church" is in the condition that it is, because of the absence of government - order, structure, methodology, systems - ordained of God, for the dissemination of truth, for the preparedness of His people, for the proper service to Him and His Kingdom.
It is not just about apostles, it is about every member of the body being in its' place so that the body can grow and be edified in love.
Apostles are not the only ones that are not in their place. Prophets, teachers, miracles, gifts of healings, governments, helps, diversities tongues, pastors, evangelists, words of wisdom and knowledge, faith, prophecy, discerning of spirits, interpretation of tongues, these all are more-or-less employed according to how any individual "believes" they should be, and as they are willing to allow.
This ought not to be.
But because it is, the Church is grossly fragmented, divided along any and every wind of doctrine, and ultimately is not ready to meet the Lord in peace; if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the sinner and the ungodly appear.
To be righteous is to be in right standing with God; holy and without blame, or blemish.
This is not the Church of Matthew 16, nor the evolving Church of the scriptures.
Whether it is believed or not, every ministerial grace, every gift and manifestation, including both governments and helps, must be fully active and functioning according to their grace, and the measure of faith dealt to each, in order for the Church to be "scarcely" ready to see the Lord.