Clergy & Laity: Thoughts on the Last Post, Part 1 (The Preacher Pattern)

As I expected, the readers’ comments on the last post in this series have been insightful, helpful, and utterly inconsistent with each other. The inconsistency is entirely understandable, as I feel a bit conflicted myself. And I admit to a certain prejudice, being a practicing lawyer who has to keep up with his time. I hate it.

Hmm …

The pattern for preachers

Let’s start with the Biblical basis for the ministerial system. Well, the famous 1889 Sand Creek Address & Declaration by Daniel Sommer and supporters declared hiring a minister damnable. And thus began the a cappella Churches of Christ as a distinct denomination. Of course, he also declared instrumental music damnable, but the located preacher system was just as prominent in his thinking (in fact, the first published edition of the A&D omitted mention of instrumental music!).

There are several ways of looking at the job. Some see the preacher as a professional elder/pastor, but that’s not the Church of Christ view, and I think we’re right on that one. Some see the preacher as an “evangelist” in the nature of Timothy or Titus.

Paul wrote,

(1Ti 4:12-16 ESV)  12 Let no one despise you for your youth, but set the believers an example in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity.  13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, to teaching.  14 Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophecy when the council of elders laid their hands on you.  15 Practice these things, immerse yourself in them, so that all may see your progress.  16 Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.

(2Ti 4:2-5 ESV)  2 [P]reach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching.  … 5 As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

Of course, Timothy had the power to ordain elders, which is a bit problematic if we call modern-day preachers “evangelists” in the identical sense! And some denominations actually allow the pulpit guy to ordain the elders. But then, presumably the elders ordained Timothy, as they laid hands on him, surely a sign of ordination. So I don’t know how that works.

But, you see, I’m not a patternist when it comes to church organization. I can’t imagine a congregation hiring a 22-year old straight out of preacher school and him ordaining elders — absent miraculous help from the Spirit. Not many men that young have that level of discernment. Just so, it’s astounding that Paul expected Titus and Timothy to ordain elders, absent a special gift from the Spirit.

“Evangelist” is built on “gospel” — a good news-ist. Does that mean the evangelist (or “gospelist”) should be solely engaged in preaching to the lost? Alexander Campbell thought so. He used the word as the equivalent of “missionary.” And in a missionary setting, it often makes sense for the missionary to ordain elders, as the members are often very immature in the faith in a missionary setting.

Anyway, as a non-patternist I’m free to leave that entire mode of thought. As I see it, the church, through its leadership, is free to create such paid positions as fulfills its scriptural purposes. My church has a pulpit minister, an involvement/worship minister, a campus minister, two youth ministers, a children’s minister, an associate campus minister (3 women, 4 men) — as well as 3 secretaries, a janitor, and an accountant (it’s a big church). We no more have to have specific scriptural authority for a preacher than for a secretary. I don’t know why we want to argue over the scriptural authority for a preacher but not for a janitor.

Well, the reason is that, the way we do church, the preacher often has much more power than even the elders. Not in terms of the organizational chart, but in terms of his relationship with the church. Weekly preaching, visiting the sick, performing weddings and funerals, and such make the preacher the church personified in the minds of most members. Therefore, we worry about the wisdom of giving such influence to someone on the payroll. Then again, we complain when the preacher’s vacation plans don’t line up with our daughters’ wedding plans or he doesn’t visit us in the hospital. Oh, well.

In a large church, the eldership may have men with M.Div.’s or extensive Bible knowledge from personal study, but in most churches, the preacher will be the most educated member in terms of scripture. That adds to his influence, tending to supplant the elders’ responsibility to be responsible for sound doctrine. Of course, if you fire the preacher, the elders will still be uninformed in the scriptures — so the solution isn’t less expertise in the pulpit but more expertise (and training) for elders. (Why on earth do we invest so few resources in elder training?)

So I figure the preacher’s job is pretty much a roll-your-own thing. The job is whatever the preacher and elders agree on — and, as a rule, the job description — if you have one — is out of date the second week on the job. The guy hired to preach and teach classes may well wind up preaching, leading small groups, and taking the teens to Six Flags. That’s not so much the nature of preaching as the nature of jobs. They change depending on the needs of the employer.

But the elders and ministers can sort that out as the congregation’s desires change. The preacher may or may not be required to preach all the time or teach two classes a week or oversee the budget. There is no fixed, Bible-mandated job description. I even know of churches that have a paid evangelist (personal worker), but no paid preacher.

So … in terms of whether the preacher should be accountable for his time, the question isn’t answered by searching for a biblical pattern of time keeping or results measuring. It depends on … what I’m going to discuss in the next post of this series.