LOCAL CHURCH AUTONOMY - REALLY? Pt 2

Part 2: Local Church Leadership –

If it’s not Apostolic it’s probably not Christian

I’m a bit nervous about making a statement like this, given all the hype in recent years about apostolic ministry. As usual, the ideas being bandied around have been drawn from the advertising industry and the Harvard Business Review more than from Scripture. We ended up with bossy people presuming humanly contrived status, assuming the right control and making money out of the people “under” them. I thought we rejected that idea during the “shepherding movement” [1].

Another well-known brand of apostolic ideas has come from Dr. C. Peter Wagner, known as the “new apostolic reformation.” Presumptions were along the lines that God was restoring apostles to lead the church, and this would usher in unparalleled effectiveness to a church that had become weak and incestuous through an exclusive pastor-focused model. This movement also fell foul of the status-power-wealth aspects of western culture. I’ll never forget attending a conference in Charlotte, North Carolina where most of the leaders attending were those who represented the collateral damage of this movement as so-called apostles sought to add numbers to their top-down networks.

Another stream that emerged was built on the idea that God was going to give governance to Christian leaders who would rule over the “seven mountains” of human society. The “seven mountains” expression had been legitimately birthed by Loren Cunningham (YWAM)and Bill Bright (Campus Crusade for Christ/Power to Change) in the mid 1970s. They were rightly concerned about the way gospel ministry had seemingly focused on getting people to heaven but had lost its power to transform societies. They offered a plan to see Christian faith influence seven areas of society: religion, family, education, government, media, arts/entertainment, and business. By the late 1990s it had become yet another expression of “top down” change. These apostles would be promoted to positions of influence in the way Joseph was promoted in Egypt and Daniel in Babylon. It would be a political power struggle and influence through control was never mentioned but always assumed. Just tell me on which day of his three-year ministry term did Jesus exercise authority by controlling other humans?

The season of apostolic interest has rightly focused on the five ministries spoken about by Paul in Ephesians 4: He clearly says that Jesus has conferred supernatural grace on the church through the operation of five equipping ministries: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers (Ephesians 4:11,12). Never mind the fact that we have elevated some of these “gifts” to vicarious superhero status rather than that of “equipping saints.” Never mind the fact that we have deemed these ministries as “para church.” Just remind me which Bible passage describes the role of parachurch? At least three of those ministries, apostles, prophets, and evangelists, tend to scare local church pastors. They want them to come to the church so they can do the job FOR the saints, but if they are honest, they are happy when they leave so that the pastoral status-quo can be retained. And then our hero-worshipping culture kicks in and we live our lives vicariously through their successes. Like dogs in the back yard, we pastors mark out our territory. This forces the other leadership functions to set up independent para-church organisations. Those organisations must survive, and they can only do so by telling us how much we need what they offer. The truth is, we do.  The reason is that they are generally a prophetic message to the church about something that the church has neglected.  Then, we invent terms like “modality (local church)” and sodality (para-church ministry)” in order to justify something which took on organisational status by default[2]. This is readily verified by the fact that most para-church organisations came into being because they were rejected by the denominational churches

The challenge to establishing a useful understanding of what it means for a leadership to be apostolic in nature and practice.

Even though I don’t agree with the definitions referred to above I do respect their desire to see apostolicity return to the church. I am totally committed to the idea that ALL Christian leadership should be apostolic. A restoration process needs to be implemented. I agree that local church leadership has presumed and preferred a “pastor-teacher” model at the expense of the apostolic. I feel uncomfortable with the idea that “pastor” or “teacher” should be even considered as non-apostolic. I think all five of the gift ministries identified by Paul in Ephesians 4 are apostolic. We have allowed pastoral leadership to be domesticated and therefore, robbed. The same is true for teachers. We have taken a Greek academy model for teachers and wonder why we “teach” so much with so little result. Overall, we have trained people to be spectators at best and fans at worst. We haven’t trained them to get on the field and win matches. In other words, we haven’t trained them to “do the work of ministry.” (Ephesians 4:12). Take another look. Our focus has been on defining the five ministries(4:11) when we should have been looking for Biblical outcomes to test whether we’ve got it right (4:12-16 and onwards). Here is a sample straight from the text: saints being equipped, the body of Christ being built up, unity of the faith, maturity, the measure of the stature of Christ, speaking truth in love, Jesus operating as the head of the church, parts of the body being strongly connected. I’m sure you will see what I mean. Let these be the metrics for local church leadership.

So, here is my working definition of apostolic: “having what New Testament apostles had from God, doing what New Testament apostles did and producing the supernatural fruit that apostolic ministry produced as recorded in the New Testament.” Forget about the titles long enough to focus on the actual ministry and what it produced. If my definition is acceptable, then it follows that every church needs leadership that reflects the three metrics.

It also follows that the use of the adjective is more important than the noun. We are talking about apostolic (a function) more than focusing on a person(apostle). Perhaps this is a reaction to the penchant of our culture towards human status, power, and control. In reality there is little to be gained by people wanting to assume the title. It is the ministry that matters.

When it comes to seeking Biblical revelation about apostolic ministry, we are well served. The Book of Acts describes the ministry of apostles. In the main we learn about the collective ministry of the Twelve apostles in Jerusalem and of Peter elsewhere. Two thirds of Acts describes Paul’s apostolic leadership. All these examples are worthily enhanced by the thirteen letters that Paul wrote. The other nine books are also the work of attested first-century apostles.

Let me repeat myself. I think all Christian leadership needs to be apostolic in nature and execution. Then, the metrics need to be applied. We need to make sure that church leaders go to the Scriptures to discover for themselves:

a. what the NT apostles received from God

b. what they did as a result of what they received and

c. what God did through their ministry that attested the favour and anointing of heaven.

It will become obvious that all twenty-seven of the New Testament books will provide information for this exercise. The gospels will show us how apostles were appointed and trained. The Acts will show us what they did to exercise “apostolic” leadership in the early church and the Letters (and Revelation) will add to our understanding of their ongoing relationship with believers and churches. If such research seems a little challenging, I suggest that every group of church leaders rise to that challenge and stop taking the short cut methods of choosing a few proof texts to justify a set of personal preferences or reading and applying what someone else has written in a book.  Instead, go get your own revelation and then seek to prayerfully implement it.

Let me repeat again: Church leader groups need to be apostolic. If they are not apostolic, they will fail in their task no matter how clever they are.

Again, I say: The New Testament is replete with examples and descriptions of what genuine apostolic ministry IS. By my count so far, I have identified more than a hundred distinctives. It tells me that the picture of apostolic ministry is simple and complex at the same time. If we get the picture, we might avoid some of the cultural compromises and the more we seek to reproduce what we see, the better the church will be served and the more our communities will be transformed.

[1]              During the late 1960’s a movement developed through the leadership of Don Basham, Bob Mumford, Charles Simpson and Ern Baxter where people would make their lives accountable to a “shepherd.” All of their life decisions were to be made in consultation with their shepherd: where to live, what job to take and who to marry. It was basically a pyramid structure of hierarchical authority. This movement was represented in Australia by the Logos Foundation (Howard Carter)

[2]              These terms were introduced to the theological mainstream by missiologist Ralph D Winter at the All-Asia Missions Consultation in Seoul, Korea, August 1973. In my opinion he was right in his observation but was actually describing an unbiblical default rather than divine purpose.