THE LEADER OR HEAD OF THE BODY
One
thing that I have championed, and still do champion is a strong pastor. But we
should understand that the pastor can't do everything. And that he is really
not the head of the body-- the church. That has to be Jesus Christ and only
Jesus Christ. The pastor must follow the leading of Jesus Christ and that is
supposed to be in the Bible. James H. Rutz writes some interesting things in
his book, "THE OPEN CHURCH,":
"Don't
expect your pastor to wave a magic wand and make all this happen for you. He's
only one guy, you can expect him to do everything.
"Not
saying you should attempt to work around your pastor, much less gang up on, but
just don't expect him to spearhead any revolution for you. In fact if he is new
to his post or doesn't resonate with the idea of the open church, he may even
be feeling insecure about the long-term prospects of keeping his job. I firmly
believe that in the truly open church, a well ensconced pastor need not. Job
because there is such a bottomless need for proactive counseling,
"equipping the saints for the work of the ministry." (p. 41)
It's
been said that we live in a changing age, and we can see that it is evident in
what is happening in the world. I believe that the world is changing to the
worst. For better or for worst, for the past 2000 years, the Western Culture's
change came largely through the influence of Biblical Christianity's values.
"Jesus
Christ is the supreme authority for all Christians. There has never been any
doubt about this fact in historic church. As the incarnate Son, he taught as one
having authority (Mark 1:22). He cast out unclean spirits (Mark 1:27); he forgave sins (Mark 2:10): modified the
provisions of the Law (Matthew 5:21, 27, 33); and he claimed that he would be
man's final judge (John 5:27)--all on the basis of his own divine authority....
"During
this age, the period between the incarnation and the parousia, God grants to
relative authorities a claim upon man's obedience. In the civil realm he has
given power to earthly rulers (Romans 13:1-2). In the functioning of the church
he distributes a measure of authority to leaders (2nd Corinthians 10:13). And
for the teaching of the church he has called and endowed select men called
apostles (Acts 1:8; 21-22).
Christian
theology during this time faces a double task. It must "hold fast the form
of sound words" (2nd Timothy 1:13), and it must witness of Christ
"into the outermost part of the earth" (Acts 1:8). By preserving and
propagating the first century message, it fulfills an apostolic ministry. By
going into all the world in every age, it carries out the Catholic mission. If
it is to be true it must preach the Word; if it is to be relevant it must speak
to the times. Christian theology is thus a blending of the changeless with the
changing.
The
classical "Protestant" approach to authority, while not ignoring the
development of doctrine, tries to anchor theology in the changeless by
emphasizing the apostolic witness of Scripture." pp 139-140 Bruce Shelley,
"BY WHAT AUTHORITY"
I
would prefer calling myself an evangelical rather than a Protestant, although I
believe what been said here. The point being made here, is making the Word
relevant in our changing world, but without changing the "changeless."
Dr.
Francis Schaeffer makes the same point: "if the church will allow freedom
for changing situations, churches will be here until Jesus comes back. But let
us not mistake historical accidents and what is sociologically comfortable out
of our past for God's absolute either in rules of personal address or in the
form that individual churches take an individual situations....
"There
was a time when Priscilla and Aquila had a church in their home. Was that less
a church? Of course not. What, then, does it indicate? It indicates that the
Holy Spirit can lead at different times with freedom. Did he leave your group
to build a building? I can well believe he did. Does it mean that Aquila and
Priscilla were wrong? No,. Does it mean that Aquila and Priscilla were led of
the Holy Spirit to have a church in their own? Yes." p.75 THE CHURCH AT
THE END OF THE 20TH CENTURY
No comments:
Post a Comment