I’m wanting to put some thought toward a description of how I see the apostolic gift or office functioning. In thinking about the shepherding movement and the role of the apostle that’s now coming into vogue, I keep hitting on a bunch of negatives… a few themes in a leading order are as follows:
Discipleship
Everybody needs to believe in discipleship, in spiritual growth and maturity. My CLB was a post-discipleship-movement group, so there were a number of people nervous about the word “discipleship,” and a few others here and there who generally meant more by the word than was in the common usage. For the most part, it seems to be commonly assumed that discipleship consists of teaching and mentoring, or giving advice to the less spiritually mature.
Personal Pastor
In order to facilitate discipleship and mentoring relationships, it seems in some circles that everyone should have a personal pastor, or simply, to be pastored by someone. It is recognized that any good-sized church (by which “large” is intended), will not be able to have a senior pastor who has direct relationships with everyone in the congregation, and other mechanisms or ministries are put in place to provide spiritual care to others. This commonly include a pastoral staff and a network of small group leaders.
Accountability
Back in my CLB, there was a good share of talk about accountability. Everyone should be accountable to their small group leader, who is in turn accountable to another, who is accountable to the church elders, who are accountable to the senior pastor, who is accountable to other pastors or to the apostle of record, who is accountable to a closed group of like-minded people. It sounds a bit like a pyramid scheme when you explain it like this… but what is never explained is why the people at the top of the pyramid can have peer accountability while everyone else is accountable up the line rather than to peers. Accountability up the line never works out as mutual accountability… it always leaves one person in the relationship with the power and the other person as the accountable one.
Spiritual Authority
The explanation of this accountability pyramid lies somewhere in the discussion of “apostolic authority.” The church was built “on the foundation of the apostles and prophets,” which evidently puts them at the top of the pyramid. As the logic seems to go, one needs to be accountable to someone who is “over” them spiritually as an adviser, an “elder in the Lord,” one with delegated authority from someplace above them. Although much of charismatic evangelicalism will decry the papal system and be outspoken about the priesthood of all believers, some semblance of spiritual hierarchy is retained. It is suggested that some are given responsibility over others for their general spiritual welfare, and this responsibility is attendant with some form of authority with which to fulfill the responsibility. The phrase “spiritual authority” will crop up at times in these explanations.
“Covering”
Those who are “inside” the pyramid of spiritual authority have what is called a “spiritual covering.” They are in alignment with their leaders above them and with God through the authority passed through the apostolic leadership down to the individual believer. Those who are “outside” the pyramid of spiritual authority are in some way deemed to be without a covering, and though specific implications are rarely stated, it is often inferred that they are not under God’s protection from the Evil One, as God’s protection seems to rest in a person’s remaining under a spiritual covering and being accountable to those above. Being “outside” implies that a person is in rebellion (which, one may be reminded, “is as the sin of witchcraft”).
Spirit of Control
I recall from the more fringe-inspired of my charismatic days when the elders of my CLB and others would talk about a “control spirit” or “the Spirit of Jezebel” that was threatening to infiltrate the church, seeking to wrest the “government” of the church away from the church elders and usurp their authority. Odd that the people who talked about it the most were the ones whose control was being threatened. Disagree with what the church elders wanted, and you could be labeled as having “control issues.” Elders never had control issues of course, because they were entitled to have the power. Or something like that… this particular part was never really explained. It was everyone else who was rebellious.
The thing is, there are two places where this progression of terms seems to fit right into place… that of the apostolic ministry as many conceive of it, and the discredited shepherding movement. My own CLB was into the shepherding movement before I arrived, so it had already fallen out of favour when I got there. The function of the apostle and the apostolic adjective was becoming an increasingly common occurrence by the time I left, and I’ve noticed that a lot of the language is the same. So the first thing I need to say about any form of apostolic ministry is that it won’t look or sound like discipleship motifs past nor will it have the taint of authoritarian control.
Bro. M.,
Many a sad smile crept across my face as I read your definitions and descriptions. I was particularly stabbed when I read: “Being “outside” implies that a person is in rebellion (which, one may be reminded, “is as the sin of witchcraft”).” Whoa, been there, done that one…. :^(
But, AlexD…while I understand your point, I do believe that there is more to spreading the gospel than what some call “hit and run” evangelism. Certainly, Jesus is able to keep his own and the Holy Spirit is able to guide and direct. But children are meant to be born into a loving family where they can learn and grow from both observation as well as direct instruction. To say that Jesus can do what is needful is not to say that this is what Jesus intends.
I say this as a former pastor of assimilation at a fairly large church…and I was left to care for those who had to raise themselves, as it were. It is one thing for Christ/the Holy Spirit to step in where there are no resources and be all for such new believers. It is quite another thing for new believers to be left to fend an environment with so much confusion about what to believe and what to do…and no one to show them what it looks like to be a Christ-follower.
This is not said to inspire guilt! Heaven’s no! It is said to speak to the kind of correction that I believe Bro. Maynard’s post in calling for us to ponder. One that understands the balance required to respond to exceptional opportunities God provides–like the one at your cousin’s wedding so long ago–without forgetting that there is also a more natural, organic manner of Kingdom reproduction that should be the norm.
Bro. M.,
Many a sad smile crept across my face as I read your definitions and descriptions. I was particularly stabbed when I read: “Being “outside†implies that a person is in rebellion (which, one may be reminded, “is as the sin of witchcraftâ€).” Whoa, been there, done that one…. :^(
But, AlexD…while I understand your point, I do believe that there is more to spreading the gospel than what some call “hit and run” evangelism. Certainly, Jesus is able to keep his own and the Holy Spirit is able to guide and direct. But children are meant to be born into a loving family where they can learn and grow from both observation as well as direct instruction. To say that Jesus can do what is needful is not to say that this is what Jesus intends.
I say this as a former pastor of assimilation at a fairly large church…and I was left to care for those who had to raise themselves, as it were. It is one thing for Christ/the Holy Spirit to step in where there are no resources and be all for such new believers. It is quite another thing for new believers to be left to fend an environment with so much confusion about what to believe and what to do…and no one to show them what it looks like to be a Christ-follower.
This is not said to inspire guilt! Heaven’s no! It is said to speak to the kind of correction that I believe Bro. Maynard’s post in calling for us to ponder. One that understands the balance required to respond to exceptional opportunities God provides–like the one at your cousin’s wedding so long ago–without forgetting that there is also a more natural, organic manner of Kingdom reproduction that should be the norm.
Peggy,
I realize this misunderstanding my comment could make. My examples were of the days when I did “hit and run” evangelism as you called it. I agree. This is not the best approach. I was only making the point that even with that, they are still being left in the care of the only One who knows them and can truly minister to them. Even in the “hit and run” approach, God will bring people into their lives to help steer them into knowing and trusting Him. My example of my nephew was just an illustration of a case where I really wanted to continue in sharing Christ, but he would not respond. Nonetheless, God had him in His care and he is now at that point where I can be an influence in his life. But, frankly, I do not want my life to be the influence in his life now. I want him to know Jesus for himself.
I am now of the opinion that sharing Christ with others is best accomplished by Spirit built relationships. These are relationships that God has brought together, and have an ongoing element because of a natural friendship built by the Holy Spirit through us.
We think too little of Jesus’s abilities and involvement. If we think it is our responsibility to be the shepherd for the flock, we are transgressing into His territory. Granted God uses people in His stead for a season of time, but ultimately, the only pastor every Christian truly has is the Lord himself.
By the way, Christ does not step in when no one else will do, He alone is the only one that will do. At every new birth, Jesus is in their hearts 24/7. No human can comprehend a person as much as Jesus does. He takes care of all His flock. Everyone else is only a hireling (John 10:12).
I hope I have not strayed too far from the topic that Brother Maynard has begun. I would not deny the use of all people by the Lord for the care of his children, but the question is, where is the line drawn from my doing what Jesus wants for others, and what I want to do for others. If it is my help with His leading, then I am doing more harm than good. If I am doing what He directs, then His life will flow through the aid.
Oops. The last line should read “If it is my help without His leading…
AlexD,
I hear where you’re coming from, and I appreciate your acknowledgment of Jesus as Lord and Chief Shepherd…but I do believe there is a place for his disciples to “feed his sheep” as Jesus instructed Peter. We do have an important role in encouraging and strengthening the body of Christ. But I do believe that many do encroach on Jesus’ role rather than fulfill their own!