I suspect there's a missing component in your description of Apostolic leadership: sacramentality. I wasn't there myself, but it seems from people knowledgeable on the subject that while there was "teaching" in the sense that you're describing, relationship and community we defined through their connection to the sacraments (first among them, the Eucharist) and that leaders were primarily responsible for making those available and preparing people to engage with them which St. Paul says to the Corinthians makes people sick (to the point of death) when consumed without proper preparation. (To put a finer point on it, it would appear that the Apostolic model for a church leader building relationship with people's struggles and victories was hearing their confessions and offering absolution - an ability Christ promised the Apostles and they passed on to their successors through the sacrament of ordination.)
So, I wonder if a lot of these church boards are going to have a hard time applying the advice directly from the New Testament because the writers of those texts were offering advice on how to build church communities that were achored organicly in an embedded sacramental life. So, instead they opt for someone who, as you put it, can lead a good Biblical seminar.
Good insights but a very narrow and unsubstantiated conclusion about who is called to fill the role of pastor. I believe it is clear that Jesus calls 5 offices to the church. Ephesians 4. Pastor is one of them. Second, your description of the hireling, though proven by the verse you quoted, lacks a few things.
1. God’s faithfulness to grow us from children in the faith (see John 2) to young men, to fathers - those who are intimate with God.
2. Your agenda seems to be to prove the need for a plurality of elders and deacons to have a biblical church structure, which I don’t disagree with. But the issues aren’t just the hirelings coming in to established congregations and seeing the three scenarios you described possibly play out. The issue is a lack of spiritual intimates with God on elder boards, deacon boards and among those who eventually get hired from searches.
If you know God and His ways and walk in them, and you fill the role of pastor as described in Ephesians 4 you are actually functioning in your calling and gift. This doesn’t preclude having an elder rule church with elders sharing the teaching load in small groups, discipleship classes and in the pulpit. Having a father in the Kingdom as you teaching pastor who is called by Jesus to be there is the issue.
Thanks for a very well written and thoughtful article. Much food for thought. By the way, I like the idea of seeing men raised up by fathers in the kingdom to take their place or to be prepared to go where God sends them. That is biblical discipleship and unbelievably is missing in mega churches and elsewhere in God’s Kingdom.
Steve, thanks for the thoughtful response and for taking the time to read the article. I appreciate the dialogue and want to touch on the important topics you brought up.
You mentioned that my conclusion about exactly who is called to fill the role of a pastor is unsubstantiated. However, the New Testament is very clear on who fills this role. When Paul outlines the qualifications for overseers and deacons in his letters to Timothy and Titus, he points to specific character traits. He looks for men who are sober-minded, self-controlled, able to teach, and managing their own households well. These qualities aren't meant to be a rigid, legalistic checklist of flawless perfection, but rather the ideal profile of a spiritually mature believer.
This is exactly why historical continuity and the faithful transmission of doctrine are so important. When a local congregation holds fast to the apostolic tradition, these qualified men organically rise up in every generation. They aren't hired from the outside; they are cultivated from within the body as older, mature fathers in the faith disciple younger men.
Our main point of contention seems to revolve around Ephesians 4 and whether the text establishes normative offices of governance or functional roles. The historical and grammatical understanding is that Paul is describing functional activities and spiritual gifts given to build up the church rather than an organizational chart for a governing board.
If we look at the pastoral epistles, such as 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, the actual governing offices of the local church are strictly two-fold: overseers (elders) and deacons. The words "pastor" (shepherd) and "teacher" in Ephesians 4 describe the very activities that the elders are commanded to perform. For example, Peter explicitly tells the elders to "shepherd the flock" in 1 Peter 5. Because shepherding is the specific duty of the elders, assigning a standalone governing office for a "pastor" or "minister" that sits outside or above the elders is, I would contend, a departure from the apostolic model.
Men who serve under the oversight of the elders to teach the congregation are functioning as deacons, which simply means servants, or from within the office of the eldership itself. Elevating a "teaching pastor" to a unique office is exactly the root of many of the problems in modern Christianity. "Ministers" need to return to being Scriptural deacons rather than trying to exercise a separate governing authority.
However, we are in complete agreement on the absolute necessity of spiritual maturity and true discipleship. We desperately need spiritual fathers who are intimate with God and lead the flock. Having spiritually immature men serving as elders or deacons is a massive problem, and a lack of intimacy with God among the leadership will absolutely cripple a congregation.
That need for older fathers in the Kingdom to raise up young men is exactly what true biblical discipleship looks like, and, as you noted, it is severely lacking in mega-churches and elsewhere. This is exactly why it's so vital for local congregations to do the hard work of interpreting the text together under faithful elders, rather than outsourcing that duty to a single hired professional.
Business Church. Recommend you check out Jay Dyer’s extremely informative documentaries on the subject.
I'm familiar with Jay's content
Amen to this!
Pastoral ministry is not a career. It is a calling and too many have become hirelings.
I pray churches take this article to heart. The Holy Spirit will raise up someone from within. He always does.
I suspect there's a missing component in your description of Apostolic leadership: sacramentality. I wasn't there myself, but it seems from people knowledgeable on the subject that while there was "teaching" in the sense that you're describing, relationship and community we defined through their connection to the sacraments (first among them, the Eucharist) and that leaders were primarily responsible for making those available and preparing people to engage with them which St. Paul says to the Corinthians makes people sick (to the point of death) when consumed without proper preparation. (To put a finer point on it, it would appear that the Apostolic model for a church leader building relationship with people's struggles and victories was hearing their confessions and offering absolution - an ability Christ promised the Apostles and they passed on to their successors through the sacrament of ordination.)
So, I wonder if a lot of these church boards are going to have a hard time applying the advice directly from the New Testament because the writers of those texts were offering advice on how to build church communities that were achored organicly in an embedded sacramental life. So, instead they opt for someone who, as you put it, can lead a good Biblical seminar.
Amen! Such an important topic. Thanks for explaining what I’ve been preaching and thinking about for me.
Good insights but a very narrow and unsubstantiated conclusion about who is called to fill the role of pastor. I believe it is clear that Jesus calls 5 offices to the church. Ephesians 4. Pastor is one of them. Second, your description of the hireling, though proven by the verse you quoted, lacks a few things.
1. God’s faithfulness to grow us from children in the faith (see John 2) to young men, to fathers - those who are intimate with God.
2. Your agenda seems to be to prove the need for a plurality of elders and deacons to have a biblical church structure, which I don’t disagree with. But the issues aren’t just the hirelings coming in to established congregations and seeing the three scenarios you described possibly play out. The issue is a lack of spiritual intimates with God on elder boards, deacon boards and among those who eventually get hired from searches.
If you know God and His ways and walk in them, and you fill the role of pastor as described in Ephesians 4 you are actually functioning in your calling and gift. This doesn’t preclude having an elder rule church with elders sharing the teaching load in small groups, discipleship classes and in the pulpit. Having a father in the Kingdom as you teaching pastor who is called by Jesus to be there is the issue.
Thanks for a very well written and thoughtful article. Much food for thought. By the way, I like the idea of seeing men raised up by fathers in the kingdom to take their place or to be prepared to go where God sends them. That is biblical discipleship and unbelievably is missing in mega churches and elsewhere in God’s Kingdom.
Steve, thanks for the thoughtful response and for taking the time to read the article. I appreciate the dialogue and want to touch on the important topics you brought up.
You mentioned that my conclusion about exactly who is called to fill the role of a pastor is unsubstantiated. However, the New Testament is very clear on who fills this role. When Paul outlines the qualifications for overseers and deacons in his letters to Timothy and Titus, he points to specific character traits. He looks for men who are sober-minded, self-controlled, able to teach, and managing their own households well. These qualities aren't meant to be a rigid, legalistic checklist of flawless perfection, but rather the ideal profile of a spiritually mature believer.
This is exactly why historical continuity and the faithful transmission of doctrine are so important. When a local congregation holds fast to the apostolic tradition, these qualified men organically rise up in every generation. They aren't hired from the outside; they are cultivated from within the body as older, mature fathers in the faith disciple younger men.
Our main point of contention seems to revolve around Ephesians 4 and whether the text establishes normative offices of governance or functional roles. The historical and grammatical understanding is that Paul is describing functional activities and spiritual gifts given to build up the church rather than an organizational chart for a governing board.
If we look at the pastoral epistles, such as 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1, the actual governing offices of the local church are strictly two-fold: overseers (elders) and deacons. The words "pastor" (shepherd) and "teacher" in Ephesians 4 describe the very activities that the elders are commanded to perform. For example, Peter explicitly tells the elders to "shepherd the flock" in 1 Peter 5. Because shepherding is the specific duty of the elders, assigning a standalone governing office for a "pastor" or "minister" that sits outside or above the elders is, I would contend, a departure from the apostolic model.
Men who serve under the oversight of the elders to teach the congregation are functioning as deacons, which simply means servants, or from within the office of the eldership itself. Elevating a "teaching pastor" to a unique office is exactly the root of many of the problems in modern Christianity. "Ministers" need to return to being Scriptural deacons rather than trying to exercise a separate governing authority.
However, we are in complete agreement on the absolute necessity of spiritual maturity and true discipleship. We desperately need spiritual fathers who are intimate with God and lead the flock. Having spiritually immature men serving as elders or deacons is a massive problem, and a lack of intimacy with God among the leadership will absolutely cripple a congregation.
That need for older fathers in the Kingdom to raise up young men is exactly what true biblical discipleship looks like, and, as you noted, it is severely lacking in mega-churches and elsewhere. This is exactly why it's so vital for local congregations to do the hard work of interpreting the text together under faithful elders, rather than outsourcing that duty to a single hired professional.
Thanks again for sharing your perspective!