|
In
recent years many churches have appointed their preacher to serve
as one of their overseers (bishops, elders, shepherds). We assume
these men are scripturally qualified (the first consideration) and
know Paul wrote of elders who "labor in the word and
doctrine" (1 Tim. 5:17), so we are not questioning the right
of this arrangement. Preachers seem to be staying longer at one
church, owning their homes, and becoming more a part of the
community, and all of this contributes to the practice. But
brethren have a way of using one case — where long
association, permanently located, and well qualified make for a
good example — to justify another case where practically
a newcomer, untried, and having little experience with that church
or community, is accepted because he is "the preacher." That
situation is ripe for problems that could tear the church apart.
If
the man continues to be supported by the church we could have a
"conflict of interests" when elders meet to discuss a
"raise" or perhaps a change of preachers. Their active
"public image" tends to push them up on a pedestal
anyhow, and in conditions not uncommon these days the new preacher
may become the "leading elder." If he takes business
meeting differences to the pulpit — look out!
| |
Often
the preacher is considered because in smaller churches there are
fewer qualified men from whom we may choose. In fact, with our
highly mobile society, the preacher may be one of the more
constant members. He may be appointed because the alternative is
one — or no elders at all. I can relate to such situations, and
feel deep sympathy and concern for these brethren. Where the man
appointed is a long-time resident, well qualified, and approved by
the congregation without "preacher pressure," this has
much to commend it.
But
you detect a note of caution, an "if" or "but"
or "however" in the way I write?? You are right! I know
it can be scriptural, I know it can be expedient, I know it has
worked in many places. I also know it can be scriptural without
being expedient or profitable 1 or. 6:12), and it bothers me to
see churches rushing into this arrangement on little more
justification than "that's the way they did it over in
Podunk."
One
person writes, "Can a man hold the office of Evangelist and
Elder at the same time?" I believe neither are
"offices" in the official or hierarchal sense — it is
the office of one to preach and the other to oversee in the
sense of duty, work, or function.
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|