We are a ministry rooted in the reformed faith that offers resources on grief, autism, alcoholism, terminal illness and life crises, as well as hope and help for daily life.

Dear Pastor Betters,
I wonder if you could help me.

I have left a church that taught that you have to die to your own spiritual vision and solely pursue the fulfillment of the corporate vision, as discerned by the senior elder. They taught that Christ is the ‘Head of the Church’, who appoints apostles, prophets, teachers, etc., and that apostles, in turn, establish churches and appoint elders over them. They taught that the responsibility of the elder was to seek Christ's vision/mission for the church they led. The word 'submission' was defined as 'sub' meaning 'being a supporter of' and 'mission' meaning 'the senior elder's mission (as revealed by Christ)'. Put together, submission was defined as 'being a supporter of the senior elder's mission'. A church within their network was stated as having spent 5 years just learning to die to self, before Christ was ready to reveal His vision to them. It was not made clear what exactly they were doing in the meantime, but it seemed that no plans were made and no initiatives were kicked off, during these 5 years.

The church I've moved to teaches absolute opposite. They encourage every member to seek God in order to discern what His vision is for them. They believe that only as every member fulfils their God inspired vision, will the church grow and Kingdom of God advance powerfully. The leadership sees their responsibility in terms of facilitating, delegating and empowering.

Now I'm confused! Is one church right and the other wrong or are both right and somehow compatible with one another?

Pastor Betters responds:

Let’s deal with this question in a very practical way. In the first church you mention, there seems to be a belief that the office held by the New Testament Apostles continues specifically in the role of the senior elder. Let me state this categorically - the office of the Apostles ended when the last of the Apostles died off. Their main function in the birthing process of the early church was the same as that of the Prophetic office in the Old Testament - to establish the doctrinal and authoritative parameters of scripture through the teaching of Jesus, the preaching of the Gospel, and the framing of the New Testament scriptures. Just as the Holy Spirit inspired the prophets to write the books of the Old Testament so also the Holy Spirit inspired the Apostles to write the canon (27 books) of the New Testament. When the canon closed the office of the Apostle was no longer needed and as such the offices of Apostle and Prophet ended.

Also, keep this in mind. The scriptures make it clear that one of the requirements for holding the office of an Apostle was that they had to have seen first hand the resurrected Christ. That would in and of itself eliminate the possibility of anyone today claiming the Apostolic office.

However, there is a sense in which the preaching of the scriptures from the pulpit is a function of both the Apostolic office and the Prophetic office. No man today can claim to be a prophet or an apostle in the sense of holding those offices. But, just as the Prophets and the Apostles taught and preached the Word of God so today any preacher who handles the scripture and does so accurately and humbly does indeed fill the function (not office) of an Apostle or Prophet. But he cannot claim the infallibility of the office itself. That is one of the great divides between Roman Catholicism and historic Protestantism. Any man who claims to hold the infallible office of an Apostle is erring, as do our friends in Roman Catholicism.

Now to your question concerning the first church - I am convinced that the vision of any Bible based church is to be cast by the senior pastor. It is his spiritual task to labor before God and discern what God’s will and purpose for that local church is. Every church is called to preach the Gospel and to disciple men in all places and at all times. But the gift mix in every local church is different and that should be taken into account when framing the vision.

But the senior pastor does not do this in a vacuum. He must then submit his vision to the governing body of the church for their ascent and modification so that in the multitude of counselors there may be found God’s wisdom. This governing body must also seek the input of the rest of the leadership of the church, not so much for their approval, but more for their wisdom. Otherwise, how can the body own the vision? In local churches where this accountability of the senior pastor is not to be found, that local church is in violation of the proper scriptural role of church government.

It is totally absurd for the senior pastor to insist on a blind submission from his people as their scriptural duty without setting before them the example of how it is done. The senior pastor, elder board (we call it the Session in Reformed traditions), and the congregation must share in this struggle to arrive at God’s purpose and call for that local church. If the leadership team and the senior pastor consistently and over time cannot get on the same page then the marriage is wrong and the senior pastor should find another church to serve.

This then means that the vision of the church is discerned in the sum total of its individual parts, pastor, elders, and leaders. To insist that the individual members of the church yield what God may be telling them to the “corporate” vision is sheer popery at it worst and a clear violation of the gift mandates spelled out for us in 1 Corinthians 12-14. However, if the vision is secured in this scriptural manner outlined above, then each member has to determine whether or not they are called to become a part of the fulfillment of that vision. If not, then it is time for them to find another church where their gifts, talents, and abilities can be better utilized. Stated succinctly, the corporate vision of the church is determined as the senior pastor, elders, and leadership team each labors before God for collective wisdom. To exclude any part of the body from this process is gross demagoguery.

Thus, I would side with your current church. Every member is a minister, filled by the same Holy Spirit, equipped to carry his or her weight in the context of the unique ministry to which that church has been called. To stifle those gifts by casting them at the feet of one who falsely claims to hold the same office as did Peter, Paul, and James is what divides churches and so often disgraces the Body of Christ. I hope this helps.

In His Grip,
Dr. Chuck Betters

You may submit a question to Pastor Betters by clicking here.

There is no guarantee that your question will be used, and by submitting a question, you agree that, if your question chosen, we may post it on our site. Your name will not be used without your express written consent.