DO YOU NEED A MINISTER? (Or "full time worker"?)

by Donald Norbie 

     Today when one thinks of a church he immediately pictures a minister or a priest as the leader. People will ask, "Who is your minister?" or "...pastor?" And many are attracted to a church by the personality of the minister. If a church has problems the minister is blamed and a replacement is scouted.
     A minister is a clergyman. The term clergy today, according to Webster, means "men ordained for religious service, as ministers, priests, rabbis, etc." A minister is "authorized to carry out the spiritual functions of a church, usually Protestant, conduct worship, administer sacraments, preach, etc.
     For most people church and clergy go together like husband and wife. You cannot have the one without the other. Who will conduct the services, baptize and administer the Lord's Supper if there is no minister?
     The question arises: Has this always been true?
     At various times in church history some brave souls have dared to defy the established religious systems and to attempt a return to more simple, New Testament worship.
     The established clergy have not looked in a kindly way upon such efforts. 

The Origin of the Clergy System

     How did the present clergy system originate? One searches the New Testament in vain for its establishment. Where then are its roots?
     The earliest record of a call for one man to be the "bishop" in a church is the voice of Ignatius. He was martyred about 117 A.D. Shortly before his death he wrote several letters. In the Epistle to the Smyrnaeans he exhorts, "See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles" (Ante-Nicene Fathers, I p. 89). He also states, "It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to make an agape."
     For some years many churches still practiced leadership by a plurality of elders but the movement toward one man as the leader grew rapidly. For those coming out of a heathen culture this was familiar practice. In their temples it was customary for a priest to be in charge and to have certain cultic privileges and responsibilities. Churches increasingly began to have one man, a bishop, over a church with a college of elders under him. It appealed to ambitious church leaders and seemed to be a way to maintain order and pure doctrine.
     The progress of this custom is known to church historians. The bishops of large cities began to assert authority over smaller cities in the area. In time the Bishop of Rome began to claim his primacy as the supposed successor of Peter. He "advanced his claim to be primate of the entire Church and visible representative of Christ, who is the invisible supreme head of the Christian world", (History of the Christian Church by Philip Schaff, Vol. III, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1968, p.300) Pope Leo I called himself the "vicar of Christ" and even "God upon earth". All churches were to acknowledge his authority.
     The increasing authority of the papacy involved not only the church but civil governments. The Pope often had the power to make and to break kings. Strong popes were a most powerful force in world politics.
     The elaborate hierarchy of the Roman Church developed. The Pope, cardinals, bishops, priests, deacons-a powerful structure emerged where each knew his own rank and authority. The fearful abuses and corruption of the system are chronicled in church history.
     The Reformation came in like a mighty wind clearing the skies. The Bible was translated and printed. A popular slogan was "only Scripture." The doctrine of justification by grace through faith was discovered and proclaimed. There was a great turning to the Lord.
     Some reformers, such as certain anabaptists, wanted a complete clearing of the decks and a return to the simple church structure of the New Testament. But many found it difficult to make a clean break with the past. Martin Luther clung to much of Rome: the office of minister, clergy vestments, infant baptism, confirmation, liturgy and mystical view of the communion. John Calvin went further than Luther but he too kept infant baptism, confirmation, the idea of a minister (teaching elder) and the concept of a state church.
     The Reformation churches then largely perpetuated the clergy concept. Although giving lip service to the priesthood of all believers, in practice a minister did all the preaching and officiated at baptisms and communion services. This practice is largely prevalent today in Christendom. One seminary graduate said that in all his studies he had never even heard of any other option. The only way to function as a church is with a minister and a board of elders or deacons under his authority. 

The Synagogue
     Edersheim has described the synagogue as the cradle of the church. Many churches in the first century began in synagogues as the Gospel was preached there (Acts 13:13-42). The synagogue movement had begun during the captivity in Babylon. It spread rapidly to all areas of the world where Jewish settlements were established. Here lews gathered to read the Scriptures and to hear God's Word expounded. The Gospel found its first hearing in such congregations (Acts 13:5).
     As Christian congregations formed they began to function in a manner similar to the synagogue. The Spirit of God led the founding apostles in this direction. What were some synagogue characteristics?
     First of all, synagogues were autonomous, functioning under their own leadership, often separated by many miles from Jerusalem with its Sanhedrin.
     There was no priesthood in the synagogue. The priesthood functioned only in the Temple at jerusalem. No sacrifices were offered; the emphasis was on learning the Torah, God's Word.
     There was an equality among all the men. Various men could feel free to read and to expound the Scripture if they showed ability in this area, Jesus, the humble carpenter, felt at ease in addressing the congregation (Lk. 4:15, 16). It was His right as a Jewish male. There was no clergy concept in the synagogue.
     "Neither the leader of the devotions... nor yet the preacher, required ordination.... The only points required in the preacher were the necessary qualifications, both mental and moral" (Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 17557, p. 445).
     Leadership was by a plurality of elders. This was true nationally (Mt. 27:1) and also true of the synagogue. Lightfoot states, "Over every Jewish synagogue, whether at home or abroad, a council of 'elders' presided" (J.B. Lightfoot, St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians. London: Macmillan & Co, 1869). Leadership by elders was deeply ingrained in Jewish thinking from the time of Moses.
     No elders were ordained to preach nor were any salaried. Each was to earn his own living. Certain religious teachers or rabbis might itinerate and teach, but the local elders were not supported by the synagogue.
     The women in the synagogue did not take leadership. They were silent except for singing and joining in the congregational "amen". Male leadership was stressed. 

The New Testament Pattern
     First of all it should be emphasized that there was uniform teaching as to congregational policy and function. Even as the Jew traveling and visiting synagogues felt very much at home, so the Christian as he went from church to church felt no jarring differences. The Apostle Paul claimed there was uniform church practice in pleading for conformity to his instruction (I Cor. 4:17; 7:17; 11:16; 14:33).
     What was the nature of these churches?
     Like the synagogue they were autonomous but open to the teaching and instruction of apostles and preachers who came their way. Synagogues were linked by a national heritage, churches by a spiritual unity (I Cor. 12:12,13).
     Like the synagogue, churches were led by a plurality of elders (Phil. 1:1; Acts 14.23). These elders gave leadership and guidance but did not monopolize the teaching. The Spirit of God was free to raise up men with His message (I Cor. 14:26). The gifts of all were encouraged.
     Like the synagogue, elders in churches were expected to work for a living. Paul encouraged the elders at Ephesus to work by laboring with his own hands (Acts 20:34,35). No local elder was ever pointed out to do the teaching and the congregation urged to support him. Men who went out in full-time missionary and preaching work were supported by the gifts of churches and individuals (Phil. 4:15,15). This was done in faith, without solicitation.
     Like the synagogue, churches were commanded to encourage male leadership (II Cor. 14:34,35; 1 Tim. 2:12). The believing woman was lifted to be a co-heir of salvation (I Peter 3:7) but she was still cautioned to remember her role in the assembly. 

A Critical Passage: I Timothy 5:17
     A widespread custom today in churches is to have a pastor who is paid a regular salary. He devotes his full time to preaching and pastoring. He may be given various titles: Reverend, Pastor, Pastor-teacher, Teaching Elder or Full-Time Worker or Resident Worker.
     Many churches feel no need of Scriptural support for this practice. Those who do often advance I Timothy 5:17, "Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine." This verse, they feel, gives ample justification for salaried pastors.
     The critical word in the verse is "honor" (Greek, time). What does the word mean? Arndt and Gingrich in their Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament list several meanings (p. 825).
     The basic thought of time is value or price. Acts 19:19 tells of the magical books that were burned and gives their value (time) as 50,000 pieces of silver.
     Flowing from this comes the thought of honour or respect. One is expressing his appreciation of the value or worth of a person or office. The slave was to show respect (time) to his master (I Tim. 6:1).
     Regarding government authorities, the Christian is told to give such persons honor or respect (time) (Rom. 13:7). In Hebrews 5:4 the office of a priest is described as an honor (time).
     In only one place can the word time possibly have the force of honorarium -- as Arndt G Gingrich, "so perhaps I Timothy 5:17" (p. 825). The word is used over forty times in the New Testament. All of the other uses carry the force of value, honor or respect. Time is never used of wages. The word misthos word for wages or pay, thirty-eight times in the New Testament.
     So much for the word meaning. What about the verse as a whole? All elders are apparently to be given honor. Elders that give excellent leadership and teach are to be given double honor. If this means money, all elders are to be paid and some are to be paid more. Let us see if this fits the historic picture.
     The synagogue background of the church is unquestioned. Under the leadership of the Apostles many synagogue practices were followed in the churches. Leadership by elders was one of these areas. In the synagogues all elders worked; none were supported by the congregation. Various men could address the assembly. There was no clergy class.
     As we read the unfolding history of the early church we find elders being appointed in every church (Acts 14:23). But never did Peter or Paul appoint one man to be the "Pastor-teacher," supported by the congregation. To the contrary, Paul urged elders to earn their own living and pointed to his own example of working when necessary (Acts 20:33-35). And Peter warned elders against serving for money (I Peter 5:2,3).
     Practically speaking, one can say it would have been impossible for churches to pay all of their elders, with some receiving more. The churches were generally small house churches and the members were often poor. A small group today cannot afford to pay one preacher, much less a group of elders!
     Lenski, a Lutheran scholar, writes wisely: "It is generally assumed that the elders were paid for their services in the apostolic churches. We are convinced that the assumption is not tenable. The probability is that none of them were paid. The elders of the synagogue were not paid or salaried" (R.C.H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus and to Philemon. Columbus, Ohio: Wartburg Press, 1946, p. 683).
     But what about the following verse (I Tim. 5:18) that speaks of the ox receiving food and the laborer receiving wages? Paul here adduces the example of the ox being rewarded for his labor with a mouthful of grain. The laborer receives a handful of money for his recompense. Each is rewarded, but differently. The elder too should be rewarded, but not with grain or money. He should know the love and respect of the flock. Christians should "esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake" (I Thess. 5:13).
     Those who went out as missionaries (apostles) from the churches lived by faith, working if necessary but more often supported by God's people (2 Cor. 11:8). Their concern covered a broader area than a single local church. Paul spoke of "anxiety for all the churches" (2 Cor. 11:28). Although they might live in one city for some time their interest and ministry had a wider spread.
     Local elders, however, labor in a single flock, earning their living and shepherding God's people, "the flock in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers" (Acts 20:28). In retirement years they can give more time to this necessary ministry. Godly shepherds are much needed today.
     This way of functioning frees full time workers to help weak churches, to have special series of evangelistic and teaching meetings and to engage in a pioneer ministry of beginning new churches. This accounts for the rapid spread of God's work in those exciting days of the early church. God's people need a renewal of that vision today. 

Conclusion
     Many will say, "But is not God greatly using ministers and conventional church organizations? Is not the Gospel being preached and are not souls being saved? Are not some ministers very gifted and knowledgeable in the Word? Do you condemn them all?"
     Yes, it is true that much Gospel and missionary work is done by men and women who establish conventional churches under the leadership of ministers. Many of these men are gifted and sincere. It is also true that many of them know only this way of functioning and have never considered any other option. God will evaluate each of His servants, considering his knowledge and obedience (Lk. 12:47, 48).
     But it is also true that the Apostles instructed churches to function in certain ways and established elders in every church, but never one man as the minister. Their teaching and the example of the early churches was quite consistent. A pattern is discernible.
     Yes, it is true God blesses His Word and people are saved regardless of the church structure. Some are saved if they hear God's Word in the Church of Rome. God in His sovereignty and grace blesses the Word irrespective of the obedience of the messenger. God blessed Israel under the monarchy although this was not His directive will (1 Sam. 8:4-7).
     But it is also true that God prizes obedience - "to obey is better than sacrifice" (1 Sam. 15:22). The more obedient a church is, the more sure it can be of God's approval. To disobey is to question God's wisdom and love.
     The simple structure of the New Testament churches can function today in primitive societies as well as in more cultured, sophisticated countries. The proof of this can be seen in living New Testament churches around the world. In some countries such churches are the strongest evangelical force.
     In Old Testament days Moses exhorted Israel to a path of obedience. He said that God had commanded these things "for our good always" (Deut. 6:24). The God of Moses is also our God today. Do we believe that His commandments for the Church are "for our good always?" The world around us is lawless. Will the churches break from this mold and be characterized by obedience?

originally published by Everyday Publications