Archives

Is Scripture Alone Sufficient?

September 1, 2002 by Charles

As Christians, we are people of the Book. Without being embarrassed or having our egos shattered, we own up to the fact that we believe the Bible is the Word of God, “our only infallible rule of faith and practice.” One of the phrases of the Protestant Reformation, Sola Scriptura-by Scripture alone-, has become a clarion call for evangelical and reformed Christians. The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, containing the historic sixty-six books of the canon, form the basis of our belief in the Triune God. (We wrote about this in the last three issues of EfM.)

Another phrase that is a part of our heritage is “the sufficiency of Scripture.” This is significant because if our faith and practice are not based on the authority of God’s Word, we are left either with rationalism, sensory-experientialism, or solipsism, or we can believe whatever we want to believe.

The Westminster Confession of Faith makes one of the clearest statements on Scripture that one could find. It declares the Scripture’s authority, clarity, sufficiency and necessity for faith and practice. The WCF echoes the testimony of Scripture itself that the authors of the Bible were writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. While He did not dictate every word, He worked in and through them so that while they wrote from their particular circumstance and moment in history with their own styles, they wrote the truth that God wanted us to know.

The WCF also states that the Scriptures, though inspired in their original languages, are to be translated into the “vulgar” or common language of the people, indicating that all people should be free to read the Word of God. Therefore, the Scripture is written in such a manner that it clearly communicates the grand metanarrative of redemption.

The WCF’s statement on Scripture reflects the thoughts of John Calvin. “If true religion is to shine on us we must grasp the necessity of beginning with teaching from above and that it is impossible for anyone to gain an atom of sound doctrine without being a disciple of Scripture.” As we reflect on the statements of Calvin and the WCF, we remember what the Reformation was all about. Though the first wave centered on salvation and the second on the sovereignty of God, both waves attempted to call the church back to the authority of the Bible. At that time, authority had been posited in the Roman Catholic Church and only the church could interpret the Scripture. Until it was translated into the languages of the people, only the priest could read the Word. People believed what the church told them, though the church did not always tell them what the Scripture actually taught, especially about salvation.We could say that the church and its tradition had become the authority upon which faith and understanding were to rest. Tradition was elevated to the place of authority in the life of the church.

Here is what we need to understand! As reformed and evangelical Christians, we also have our own tradition, which is important as long as it is kept in its place and does not usurp or misinterpret Scripture’s authority. Luther, Calvin, and company came to believe that the church was committing both errors, hence they “protested.”Having said that, we must also say that there is a right and wrong way to use the two phrases. Concerning Sola Scriptura, by Scripture alone, the WCF makes two important points. 1. “The only infallible interpreter of Scripture is Scripture,” not man individually or collectively. It is God’s Spirit working through his Word that determines the meaning of Scripture; hence Sola Scriptura and the Holy Spirit. 2. The WCF also underscores the words of 2 Peter 1:20 that “no Scripture is of private interpretation or comes from someone’s own interpretation.“ While the Holy Spirit is the Word’s final Interpreter, He usually works in the context of the church and the church’s tradition, past and present.

One thing that fed New England’s quick turn to liberalism in the early 1800s was the New Light Movement, which taught that only the Bible was needed. Its proponents maintained that we do not need creeds or confessions; nor do we need the church in order to understand the Bible. From that position, many people began interpreting the Scriptures personally and privately. According to historian Mark Noll, liberalism, along with many cults, developed during that time.

It is in the context of the church, its creeds and confessions, even its traditions, that we come to understand the truth of God’s Word. Therefore, we must not take “Sola Scriptura” to the extreme of the New Lighters and others who developed their own cults using the Bible. We study Scripture in the context of God’s covenant community, which holds us accountable to proper interpretation.

The second phrase that we must not misunderstand is “the sufficiency of Scripture.” Some take this essential truth of our faith to the extreme and say that all we need is the Bible. True, Scripture is sufficient in all that God intends it to be. It is our only infallible rule of faith and life. But the Scripture does not teach us everything that we need to know. God teaches us about Himself and many other things through what we call His general revelation and particularly through common grace. (See the review of He Shines In All That’s Fair in this issue.)

For example, John Frame suggests three types of questions that must be discussed in making ethical decisions. “1. What is your problem? What kind of situation have you gotten into? 2. What does God’s Word say about it? 3. Are you the sort of person who in this situation is capable of doing what Scripture tells you to do? Hence three foci: the situation, the Word, the person,” (Medical Ethics, page 4).The Scripture is not sufficient to teach us all that we need to know regarding things like science, mathematics, economics, human behavior, etc. What the Bible teaches in those areas is true. Yet, as the WCF indicates, for example, there are some things that can be gleaned from our circumstances that can help us in our worship and government of the church, as long as they are consistent with Scripture.

Why is it necessary to say this? Some people, believing they are promoting the sufficiency of Scripture, attempt to proof-text everything from the Bible, though it cannot and should not be done. Some within the Christian community often misuse, misinterpret, and abuse Scripture by attempting to provide a proof-text for everything while wanting to discard anything for which one cannot be found. I remember the frustrations that I felt when we were putting together the PCA’s Book of Church Order. As committee chairmen, we were to provide proof-texts to the BOCO similar to the footnotes in the WCF. We could not footnote from Scripture every detail of the BOCO and such was unnecessary. I was glad when the Assembly finally dismissed our committee.

The Scripture alone must be our authority and rule for faith and practice. We must not add to nor subtract from it. Yet, we must not use it in a manner that God never intended. To do so brings the same false conclusions as does deliberate tampering with the Word. The Scripture gives us the framework for understanding life, its circumstances, and God’s revealed will. However, it does not bypass the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives, individually or collectively, in processing that truth.

So, in case you’re asked, do not hesitate to affirm your belief in the sufficiency and authority of Scripture. Just be careful not to make the Scripture into more than God intended it to be by forcing it to say things that it does not really say. But by all means use it as your grid for understanding truth whether from general or special revelation.

A Better Way to Handle Abuse

September 1, 2002 by Editor

By Ken Sande. Sexual abuse in the church does not have to end in broken lives, agonizing lawsuits, and divided congregations. When people follow God’s instructions, these terrible incidents can result in healing, justice, and healthier churches.When victims of abuse first come forward, I have found that most of them are seeking four reasonable responses. First, they are looking for understanding, compassion, and emotional support. Second, they want the church to admit that the abuse occurred and to acknowledge that it was wrong. Third, they want people to take steps to protect others from similar harm. And fourth, they expect compensation for the expense of needed counseling.

As national headlines reveal, many churches have unwisely ignored these legitimate needs. Instead they have blindly followed their lawyers’ and insurance adjusters’ textbook strategy to avoid legal liability. They try to cover up the offense and deny responsibility. All too often they distance themselves from the victims and their families, leaving them feeling betrayed and abandoned.

Many frustrated victims eventually run into a lawyer who tells them they could win a million-dollar damages award. Soon everyone is locked in an adversarial process that reopens wounds and generates even more pain and anger. Whatever the verdict, both sides lose, since money alone can never heal the wounds of abuse.There is a better way.
God has designed a powerful peacemaking strategy for dealing with offenses between people, including sexual abuse. When churches follow it, the cycle of abuse is broken and restoration can begin.

COMPASSION

If there is one place that victims of abuse should find understanding, compassion, and support, it is the church, which God commands to respond to suffering with tenderness and selfless love. “Be kind and compassionate to one another.” “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit.” “Each of you should look not only to your own interests but also to the interests of others” (Ephesians 4:31; Philippians 2:3-4). Instead of pulling away from victims, churches should draw closer to them, listening to their stories, mourning with and praying for them, and bearing their burdens. Responding with love and compassion is one of the best ways to show that the church abhors abuse and is committed to serving the victim.

CONFESSION

Attorneys instinctively instruct their clients to “make no admissions.” Hundreds of churches have followed this shortsighted counsel in recent years, prolonging the agony of abuse victims, infuriating juries, and triggering multimillion-dollar punitive damages awards. In contrast, everyone benefits when people trust God’s promise, “He who conceals his sins does not prosper, but whoever confesses and renounces them finds mercy (Proverbs 28:13). A church should acknowledge its contribution to an abusive situation and encourage the abuser to confess his sin, take responsibility for his actions, and seek needed counseling. These steps can prevent a court battle and speed healing for victim and offender alike. (Since an impulsive admission could allow an insurer to cancel coverage, church leaders should consult with their insurer, lawyer, and a Christian conciliator to plan their words carefully.)

COMPENSATION FOR COUNSELING

The Bible places a strong emphasis on requiring a wrongdoer to repair any damage he has caused to another person. “Pay the injured man for the loss of his time and see that he is completely healed” (Exodus 21:19). Therefore, churches should be earnest to do whatever they can to bring wholeness to victims of abuse. As soon as abuse is revealed, the church should immediately come to the aid of the victim and his family, holding forth the redeeming power of the Gospel and offering to provide or cover the cost of needed counseling.

CHANGE

When abuse takes place, statements of regret are not enough. Genuine repentance is demonstrated by making changes to protect others from similar harm. “Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.” “Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked” (Luke 3:8; Psalm 82:4). This requires removing the abuser from his position and implementing screening and supervision procedures to prevent other abusive people from being in counseling or child-care positions. Such actions not only protect others from harm but also relieve abuse victims, who are deeply concerned that others not be treated as they were.

CONCILIATION

It may be difficult for a church to implement these steps if a victim’s family is already threatening legal action or an insurer refuses to support personal contacts. These situations can still be resolved without a legal battle, however, by submitting the matter to biblical mediation or arbitration. “If you have disputes, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church” (1 Corinthians 6:4). Christian conciliation by outside neutrals can provide a constructive forum to deal with both the spiritual and legal issues related to abuse. This legally enforceable process provides appropriate confidentiality and promotes confession and restitution, which help to bring about justice and reconciliation.

These five steps are not theoretical. I have seen many churches follow this process, usually with great success. In one case, a pastor discovered that a man had abused several children in the church, including the pastor’s daughter. In spite of his own personal anguish, the pastor prayed to respond to the situation in a way that would reflect the love of Jesus. After consulting with a Christian conciliator and the church’s insurer, the pastor and his elders ministered to everyone who had been hurt by this dreadful sin.They persuaded the abuser to confess his sin to the families of the children and to turn himself in to the police. He willingly accepted his prison sentence, and was even grateful that his destructive behavior had finally been stopped.

The leaders spent many hours with the families themselves, grieving and praying with them, and making sure they received needed support and counseling. In addition, the leaders improved their screening and supervision policies to guard against similar incidents in the future.They also reached out to the abuser’s wife and children, who were so ashamed that they planned to leave the church. But the leaders understood what being a shepherd is all about. They ministered to this broken family, reassured them of God’s love, and kept them in the fold.

Instead of being dragged through an excruciating lawsuit, the victims and their families, the abuser and his family, and the entire congregation experienced the redeeming power of God. This remarkable process culminated months later during a Christmas Eve service. As the church prepared to sing “Silent Night,” two young girls came forward to light the candles. One of them had been abused. The other was the daughter of the abuser. As they finished their task and smiled at each other, the congregation saw tangible evidence of God’s love and grace.Abuse in the church does not have to end with catastrophe. When a church follows its Lord, even this great tragedy can result in healing and restoration.

Keep the Church on Target

September 1, 2002 by Charles

Welcome to the September/October issue of Equip for Ministry. We hope that you will find it helpful and encouraging. There are a number of conferences and training events listed for your information and the solicitation of your prayers. You will also find numerous beneficial resources through our advertising and articles.

We continue to hear comments such as: “What CE&P has to offer is the best kept secret in the PCA.” The word “secret” always puzzles and confuses us because through staff and regional trainers, we are constantly in local churches, training and consulting. Plus, we try to keep churches aware of our resources through our seminars, brochures, website, etc.

Our Christian Education and Publications mission statement is to help you “know the Lord, know the Word, know the world, and know yourselves.“ Christians are constantly bombarded with things of the world that seek to hurt us, knock us off course, or trip us up in our Christian lives. We do not live in a vacuum, we either confront the world or it confronts us. Although, thinking biblically and strategically should be our strong suit, trends reveal that we generally think much the same as non-Christians. One of the sad results of that is it is not always easy to distinguish Christians and non-Christians.

Several participants at our recent PCA General Assembly thanked us for challenging them through the pages of Equip for Ministry to read and think biblically. I have always appreciated when someone says, “You have certainly made me think.” Of course thinking is not an end in itself but a means to knowing and serving the Lord better. If we encourage readers to that end, then we have succeeded in our mission.

In the early part of the 20^th century, the church retreated from the world, isolated itself from challenging the ideas and issues of that time, and as a result became irrelevant to the world. Instead of challenging the world and penetrating it with the Gospel of truth, the church withdrew its influence and walled itself off from the world. However, God raised up great men of reformed and evangelical faith such as J. Gresham Machen, Carl F. H. Henry, Billy Graham, John Stott to sound the call of the Gospel in the marketplace. Since the 1940s a few more Christians have emerged from hiding to do the same, but in miniscule numbers.

Christians must be disciplined to think holistically about life. They must become kingdom-oriented people who not only can come alongside one another for encouragement and stimulation, but can also confront the world and its ideologies. We must not attempt to preach and teach the Gospel in a vacuum. People must understand how the Gospel penetrates all areas of life. We cannot hide our lights under a basket.

The lead article in this issue, “A Better Way to Handle Abuse”, was written by Ken Sande, the director of Peacemaker Ministries. He has helped a number of our PCA churches and institutions deal with conflict from a biblical perspective. We have sold Peacemaker materials in our bookstore for a number of years and worked with Ken in our conferences. Although the article recently appeared on PCANews.com, we chose to print it because local church leaders need to deal with this topic in the context of their ministry. We addressed the issue at our 2002 Children’s Ministry Conference, but it needs to be considered more broadly. Read the lead article and encourage others in your church to do the same.

“In Case You’re Asked” continues to address basic questions relating to authority, truth, and the Word of God. The topic of the “sufficiency of Scripture” has much significance to us, but it can also lend itself to some abuse, if we are not careful. The four main book reviews in this issue are carefully chosen to build on that theme. They should be high on your priority list of books to read.

We continue to be challenged by which books to review in Equip for Ministry. We receive many fine books well deserving of reviews, but because of limited space, we have to make choices. We pray about which books we believe to be strategic for you in your life and ministry. We do offer broader selection of books through our CE&P bookstore, which is accessible by phone and the Internet (1-800-283-1357 and www.cepbookstore.com).

Reading is simply one of those things that we must do if we are to grow spiritually and learn more clearly how to think God’s thoughts after him. In one of the books reviewed, Engaging God’s World, Cornelius Plantinga reminds us that we do not automatically think like a Christian nor do we automatically know what to think about. We must learn and encourage others to do the same. I coined a phrase several years ago, “If we only think what we have thought, then what we think is what we have thought.” We must be growing in our thought and Christian life. Thinking biblically and living out those thoughts are God’s avenues for challenging the world’s ways.

Our prayer for this issue, as with all others, is that you will take the time to read the content and then find means of living more fully and wholly for the Lord. Our mission and calling are to serve the Lord’s purpose to this generation. We will be grateful for any opportunity to challenge and assist you in this calling.

The Openness of God

July 1, 2002 by Charles

God is sovereign and controls all things that come to pass. That is a basic belief of the Christian faith. Or is it? God knows all things, we say. But, does he really? In Titus 1 Paul writes, “For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers, and deceivers especially those of the circumcision party. They must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach.” This is one text which reminds us of the necessity to teach sound doctrine. Paul writes about the consequences of false teachings. They have a negative impact on relationships, upsetting whole families and, by implication, broader social units.

Paul’s words are important to us because in our pluralistic postmodern context, we are encouraged to believe that we can create our own reality. But if we have a wrong view of God, our view of ourselves will be flawed since we are his image and likeness. From those two faulty views grow all kinds of weeds and thorns that will choke and destroy other relationships. When we are wrong about God, every other major truth is affected-Scripture, the Trinity, Christ, the atonement, eschatology, God’s requirements for us, and reality itself.

In the March/April issue of Equip for Ministry we reviewed John Frame’s No Other God, A Response to Open Theism. We encouraged you to read and study that book because it deals with a topic that sadly is becoming more popular, especially among those who call themselves evangelicals. Though the church has dealt with this issue in the past, it still exists. It has several different names: “open theism,” “free will theism,” or “open view of God.” Like Frame, I do not accuse those who teach this of being intentionally heretical, but their teachings are wrong and distort God. They are capably articulate, but even granting them the benefit of the doubt that they are trying to be biblical, we still must conclude that they are in error.

They maintain that those who have a traditional view of God are not considering all of Scripture, and that when we do read the passages on which they build their case, we are turning cartwheels to make everything work according to our traditional system. Their teaching strikes at the heart of who God is and who we are. It challenges his sovereignty, his foreknowledge, and man’s “free will.” From there it challenges the sufficiency of Christ’s death and what it accomplishes. Can we really believe that God did not know whether Jesus would sin or not, that the Protestant Reformation would take place, or the September 11 disaster would happen?

Open theism begins subtly with the idea that God has humanlike characteristics that are not emphasized in traditional teaching. As the proponents develop their “movement in theology,” they have simply bought into a paradigm or model of God that differs from our Calvinistic and view of God. They claim that God does not know beforehand what is going to happen because to know would require his control to see that those things actually happened and that would infringe upon man’s free will. As Clark Pinnock, an advocate of open theism states, he is a “self-limited God.” He does not know all things, only the past and the present. He does not control all things to his predetermined end because so much depends on what man does. He doesn’t know beforehand who will or will not be saved. He can predict the future, only in part, because the future is not yet known. He is changeable and will alter his plan according to what man does; hence man has the ability to change God’s mind, determine the course of history, and play on God’s “humanlike” emotions.

I believe these teachers are reacting to an extremely deterministic view of God that makes man less than responsible for his actions, because God has predetermined all things. As you read Openness of God or The Case for Freewill Theism, you cannot miss their caricature of the sovereignty of God. According to their representation of the traditional view of God, it does not matter what man does or does not do. God is set in his ways and man’s actions make no difference. God does not even have serious interaction with man. Human decisions make no difference in their paradigm. Richard Rice, an open view of God advocate, frequently refers to God’s actions in relation to man as dynamic not static. That is, God is open to persuasion and change, even altering his plans, depending on man’s actions. He is not a stern, inflexible, all powerful God. Rice writes, “What he actually decides to do depends directly on the actions of human beings.”

What this really means is that God, like man, reacts to circumstances and those circumstances determine God’s course of action. Sound familiar? It is not a new teaching. It has been around for a long time under different names. For example: libertarianism, which teaches that man has total free will to choose and decide what he is or is not going to do. He has the freedom and often the power to make those choices, hence the designation “free will theism.” Another name for the open view of God is Socinianism, a sixteenth and seventeenth century heresy that challenged the traditional view of God, the Trinity, and the atoning work of Christ on the cross.

Frame quotes Robert Strimple, of Westminster Theological Seminary (Escondido), “But Socinianism also held to a heretical doctrine of God. The Socinian doctrine can be stated very briefly, and it must be contrasted with both Calvinism and Arminianism. Calvinism (or Augustinianism) teaches that the sovereign God has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, and therefore He foreknows whatsoever comes to pass….The Socinians insisted that it was a contradiction of human freedom to believe in the sovereign foreordination of God. So they went ‘all the way'(logically) and denied not only that God has foreordained the free decisions of free agents but also that God foreknows what those decisions will be. That is precisely the teaching of the ‘free will theism’ of Pinnock, Rice, and other like-minded ‘new model evangelicals.’ They want their doctrine of God to sound very ‘new’ very modern, by dressing it up with references… but it is just the old Socinian heresy rejected by the church centuries ago,” (No Other Gods, page 33, 34). This is a good example of the importance of knowing church history. This teaching has been dealt with in the past and the conclusion can be helpful today.

In case you’re asked, being Christians of a biblically reformed Calvinistic persuasion, we respond, yes, we believe that God is the sovereign Lord who determines all things whatsoever that come to pass or he would be less than God. Yes, we believe that man has been given certain responsibilities and his actions can make a difference in how God’s plan plays out; yet, man cannot thwart the plan of God. Yes, we are certain that God does reveal himself as having certain humanlike characteristics, such as emotions, thoughts, and feelings. Christ, the second Person of the Trinity, has particularly experienced in his incarnation, all of our emotions, temptations, and limitations. Hence the writer of Hebrews states, “we do not have a high priest [Jesus] who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need,” (4:15, 16).

Because we are not God with unlimited abilities, we cannot always understand everything from a logical, rational perspective. But that is not a problem because we know that God’s ways are not our ways. We are aware that he is above logic, reason, and all parts of his created order, while being present within it. When we realize that God is the supernatural sovereign God, we are not bothered by not knowing everything that God knows. In fact, it is really refreshing not to have to believe that we have to know all things.

Does God know everything that will happen? According to the open theists, not before it takes place. Does God ever change his mind? Absolutely, they say. They even quote Scriptures to prove it. If man’s actions and behavior were totally foreknowable by God, then man would be less than free because God would have to see to it that those actions actually happen. But we believe that God is sovereign and controls everything in this creation, including man and his actions. Yet, we also believe that man is responsible for his actions before God. God does know all things, even the number of hairs on our head. He knew that Jesus would live a sinless life and not fail in his mission of going to the cross to die for our sins.

While we realize that these teachers claim to emphasize the part of God with which we can relate, the human side, we totally disagree with the extreme positions they take to get to that point. And, while we emphasize the sovereignty of God, we also realize that he is our personal God with whom we can interact with the deepest intimacy and love.

Piggybacking

July 1, 2002 by Editor

By Susan Spradlin. Good behavior of the children in the classroom makes such a difference. Would you believe me if I told you that someone else has already laid most of the groundwork for the management of your classroom and the discipline of your children in your Sunday school class? This same someone has already trained your children in classroom management procedures! Who is this person? The schoolteacher.You can “piggyback” by letting her training benefit your ministry. Piggyback by taking the child’s familiarity of the school classroom into the Sunday school to provide a more effective learning environment.

Where do you start?

Talk with the Christian Education person who oversees your Sunday school and let him or her know what you’d like to do and why. Understand that, probably, the schoolteacher will not be a member of your church and will have a relationship with God different from yours, but still functions as the primary educator of the child. You will be looking to integrate some of his methods with your own Christian worldview in the Sunday school classroom.

Your next step is to spend time in prayer.

Finding out who the students’ teachers are and making your initial contact will be next on your list. Invite a parent to introduce you to the teacher. The parent might explain that she thinks it would be beneficial for her child’s Sunday school teacher to know about the classroom-learning environment. After all, that’s where most of the learning is taking place. The parent could even accompany you to the classroom. Don’t forget other people who might know the child’s teacher such as other schoolteachers who go to your church.Remember, that you and the teacher have a lot in common-the most important thing being that you both love and care about the student you are teaching!

Make an appointment to visit the classroom. Let the teacher know who you are, share your common interest in the child, and explain that you are interested in finding out classroom management and procedure techniques, and exploring what could be duplicated in your Sunday school class

Helpful Tips:

Teachers are legally bound by right to privacy laws regarding the students so be careful to not infringe upon these laws in your questions or discussions. If your visit with the teacher takes place without the child’s parent present, let the teacher know up front that it is not your intention to discuss any student’s behavior or academic standing.

Teachers experience massive time constraints and demands. Let the teacher know that this won’t be a long, drawn-out visit

The Shepherding Ministry of Elders

July 1, 2002 by Editor

By Donald J. MacNair. For the church to be healthy, it needs healthy leadership. In my experience, leadership is one of only a few keys to being a church that God blesses. But what counts as “good leadership”? Is there a kind of leading that conforms to the Bible’s vision of a healthy church (as over against a kind of leading that does not)?

Emphatically, yes: there is a kind of leading that both conforms to Scripture and increases church health. The Bible gives two complementary directives that together imply a rather definite leadership structure. The first of these two biblical directives is that the church is a group of believers, each of whom should be exercising his or her gifts for the spiritual good of the group. [Paul] exhorts the Roman congregation: “We have different gifts, according to the grace given us…” God wants us to treat other members’ gifts with integrity.

Many leaders don’t treat members’ gifts with integrity. In many churches with “strong leadership,” the church’s elders are perceived as a board of directors, as leaders who tell the people what to do. Such an attitude indicates to me that this church has failed to implement the Bible’s commitment to the integrity of members’ gifts.

Often a church exhibits a double imbalance. On the one hand, it views its elders as a board of directors, telling everybody what to do. On the other hand, incongruously, it believes that the congregation has a right to vote on everything-something near and dear to the hearts of Americans!

The Bible’s other directive is this: regard a church’s leaders as accountable to God for its members. “Obey your leaders and submit to their authority.” (Heb. 13:17). The elders oversee the church’s life and ministry in order to give an account to God of the people He has entrusted to their care. Does that mean that the elders are supposed to tell everybody else what to do and how to do it? I believe that Scripture in no way supports that interpretation.

But how can church leaders exercise accountability and at the same time treat members’ gifts with integrity? [They must] realize the difference between accountability and responsibility. To be responsible for something means that it is included in your job description. To be accountable means that God looks to you to see to it that it gets done, whether by you or by someone else. To state it positively, the elders must find a way to delegate to ordinary members the responsibility for key decisions in the life and ministry of the church, while at the same time maintaining accountability for the affairs of the church.

If the congregation perceives the elders as dictators, it will perceive itself as those who are dictated to. If it perceives the leadership as nonexistent, it will perceive itself as on its own, probably bereft of focus and unity. If it perceives the elders as shepherds along the lines of the biblical model, members will see themselves as sheep (in the best sense!): cared for, nurtured, following not by coercion but free to serve creatively in an orderly context. As elders strive to develop a shepherding relationship with members, that church’s infrastructure develops into one that both allows divine directives (use of members’ gifts, elders’ orderly accounting) to be implemented, and allows God to work through it.

Whatever else an elder says or does, whatever jobs he carries out, whatever words he utters, programs he administers, visits he pays, or decisions he makes, the orientation of his life and the heart of his ministry before God consist in shepherding the people whom God has entrusted to his care. I became convinced that when sacrificial love and care motivate elders to enable the saints to grow in Christ, not only do those elders become in fuller measure the leaders God meant them to be, but also the congregation grows and serves in the way God meant them to. Caring, loving, equipping-these three words express the essence of Christ’s lesson about shepherding. A good shepherd is one whose care for the sheep drives him to equip them for doing what sheep do best, even at the cost of his own life.

In the church, members should follow the lead of elders, not because the elders tell them what to do, but because the elders have cared for them. What the members should feel is not compulsion, but care. As they experience the depth of his commitment to them, they know him and trust him completely.

It is important to see that all these wonderful benefits do not do for the sheep what the sheep are meant to do for themselves. Rather, they furnish an optimal environment in which the sheep can grow and flourish. Shepherds provide the safe environment. Secure sheep are sheep that produce wool, lambs, and meat. In other words, elders nurture church life, but cannot produce it. Their goal is the spiritual growth and ministry of their members, and this they can encourage and enhance, but cannot program.

Building this mind-set requires the same activities as maintaining it. This means that all elders, at every stage of shepherd maturity, must be doing the same things. Simply stated they are:

Mediate, individually and as a session, on this model of Christ’s.

Pray, individually and as a session, for the Holy Spirit to actualize the shepherd model in all aspects of your life and ministry.

Develop a strategy to hold one another accountable to think and minister like shepherds.

Devise and implement plans that actualize this kind of mind-set and ministry. For example, devote regular meetings to these activities.

Devise a way to assess your efforts. Your session must devise a practical way to listen regularly to the sheep for their testimony as to your shepherding them.

I have made my case that the shepherd model shapes the elder’s ministry from the roots of his being to the things he says and does, and that the session should fashion an optimal environment for the congregation’s spiritual growth and ministry.

I utilize the acrostic G-O-E-S to help elders identify and group their responsibilities as guardian, overseer, example, and shepherd. Guarding the sheep. Positively, the elders ensure that members are growing in Christ. Negatively, the elders discourage members from pursuing sinful practices. This coincides with church discipline.

Being an elder consists almost by definition of overseeing. Some elders confuse power with authority. Being determined not to exercise “raw power,” they avoid authoritative leadership, or at least fail to lead with any confidence. Others, determined to account properly to God for their charges, muscle them into obedience. The confusion between authority and power parallels the failure to distinguish between accountability and responsibility, which we discussed above.

Possibly the most effective ministry an elder can give to his church is his own [example of] Christlikeness. Plus, a Christlike elder is one who shepherds according to Christ’s model.Shepherding also refers to the concrete activity of looking after individual church members, monitoring their spiritual progress, and encouraging them on a person-to-person basis to grow in love and obedience to Christ.Perhaps you feel overwhelmed by the task, especially by the prospect of shaping your whole life to fit the shepherd model, on top of everything else you have to do! Of course, by now we can see that the shepherd’s heart in principle is not an add-on, but rather the fountainhead.

In this fallen world, not every man who now serves as an elder meets these qualifications (I Timothy 3:2-7; Titus 1:5-9). Over the years, I have seen biblically qualified elders, I have seen men in office who fail to meet these qualifications, and recognize this fact, I have seen men in office who fail to recognize their lack of qualification, and I have seen men in office who don’t qualify, who don’t recognize it, who don’t know what it means, and who don’t care!It is also important to develop procedures to insure that those who are chosen to be elders do meet the biblical qualifications. I recommend the following plan to this end, which I have practiced in my own pastoral ministries and which I recommend as a consultant:

Have members nominate men to be elders.

For a period of several months, train these candidates, give them field experience, and pray together as a church for God’s leading in the upcoming election.

Conclude the training period with a gracious but careful evaluation by the session (which is the complete group of elders currently installed to serve) of each candidate’s qualifications and maturity. Offer for the congregation’s approval only those candidates whom the session evaluates positively.

The congregation, with no power to make additional nominations, elects elders from among these trained and qualified candidates.

This system effectively provides leadership that conforms to God’s own qualifications.

I have no chapter on the pastor and more than one on elders! Paul exhorts Timothy: “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching” (I Timothy 5:17). His words indicate that God intends there to be a plurality of elders, those officially entrusted with the spiritual oversight of the church, among whom are numbered elders whose work is preaching and teaching.

Thus on the one hand, we need to avoid the error of conceiving of elders as insignificant; on the other hand, we need to avoid the error of conceiving of the pastor as distinct from, and superior to, the elders. But everything I say about elders in these chapters applies without distinction to the pastor, who is an elder among elders. The pastor does not minister alone: he shepherds as part of a team, and he shepherds among a Spirit-gifted flock.

Questions for Discussion:

Gauge your own church’s shepherding outlook:

Do members perceive that they are being shepherded?

Do elders believe that they are shepherding?

What evidence can you supply to support your assessments in question 1?

What factors currently prevent your church from developing a richer shepherding ministry?

What steps can you take to follow God’s call to shepherding ministry?