Reflections on Controversy, Leadership, and Church Unity

The recent events in the Anglican Communion and the possibility (and in my opinion the probability) of a split has caused me to reflect on the nature of church leadership during times of controversy.

While I am not currently doing so, in the past I have served as a part of church leadership. There I have experienced first-hand the temptations of such offices. The biggest temptation occurs when you are absolutely convinced you are right. Now, I am not talking about error here. Let's assume for a moment that the leader is right. The problem occurs when you assume that being right is sufficient for church leadership. Herein lies the seeds of schism, because Scripture goes further than that. Scripture requires the bishop or elder to be a pastor (Ezekiel 34). That means that he represents all the people, not just those who agree with him. It is on this basis that the leader will be judged by the Great Shepard.

Let's first consider the case where the people are looser than the leader. Note the Apostle Paul's words in 1 Cor. 12:

19If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20As it is, there are many parts, but one body.

21The eye cannot say to the hand, "I don't need you!" And the head cannot say to the feet, "I don't need you!" 22On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, 24while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.

27Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. [emphasis mine]

For those who believe that homosexual practices block someone from church leadership, Paul instructs them to treat the "dishonorable" with special honor. If we must block people from certain parts of service then we must show that the part of service that is allowed is indeed honorable. Because if only leadership is where it's at then people will interpret the blocking as they don't have value. Furthermore, such a view of service is unbiblical (Eph. 4:11-13) :

It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

It is the people, and not the leadership who do the works of service.

Now, how about the case where the people are more strict than the leader? Romans 14:13-16 says:

13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil.

While you may as a leader have to rule against the consciences of the people (v. 16), great effort should be made to accomodate them (v. 13).

In neither case should pushing through an agenda be without consideration of the "losers". When I was in leadership, those on my side of a controversy got impatient. One person got publically quoted as saying, "I guess we will just have to win." The other side picked up on it and it caused a world of hurt.

In the view of the world, my advice above is foolishness. We need to have a strong political front and must not give quarter because we are right. But, this is not the way of Scripture. The way of the world betrays a lack of faith in God's provision. Being pastoral may for a time delay the advancing of the "truth". But, it was the Greeks that had an abstract view of the "truth". For Christians, the truth was personified in the person of Jesus Christ. Jesus cared about people and subordinated agendas for them -- no matter how "true" those agendas were.

Comments

[Steve B.]

Wow... good stuff...

Thanks, Rich.