The Biblical Pattern For Local Church Leadership

biblical pattern for leading running operating local churches

Introduction

 
Should you as a church pastor be involved in the unbiblical “clergy/laity system”? Should ANY Christian be involved in the clergy system? That is what we are going to take a brief look at here.
 
Regarding this matter, there is an excellent article on this subject written by Carl Ketcherside, called “The Clergy System“. I encourage you to take a look at that. As I lived out in my 35 years “in the Lord”, I have seen just how much the typical clergy/laity church system adversely affects discipleship and the growth of local church members. In the conventional, popular clergy/laity system, no one but the pastor (except perhaps on rare occasions) is allowed to pick songs to sing or read an inspirational poem (that they picked out), not allowed to share scriptures or Christian writings, or to get into subjects that they want to and need to learn about or that they feel led to share with others when gathered together as a church family.  It is always a pastor-centered, pastor-prepared, pastor-approved and pastor-conducted weekly meeting.
 
Having learned about – and then having experienced – more biblically-patterned church meetings in the past, I have struggled to participate in every “conventional” local church I’ve ever attended. But what concerns me the most about those in the clergy “system” – is that they seem to want to have an inordinate amount of control over others in the church, as if the Holy Spirit is not a good enough leader of a group of true believers. And in some churches, I am sure that there are some pastors who don’t want others to have any control over them, in any way whatsoever.
 
The most dangerous aspect of the clergy system is that it severely inhibits the correction and instruction of its leaders, and I don’t just mean moral correction, but theological correction (and instruction).  Being in the “big boys” club of official clergy, may allow a pastor to meet with and rub elbows with other clergy in his local area, but it also helps perpetuate this unbiblical system.
 
In order for me to use my spiritual gifts and make disciples, I have had to resort to internet ministries primarily, which is also sub-optimal, but unlike conventional churches, I am at least able to make disciples, teach, get feedback and get discipleship from others about my views and find answers to specific spiritual questions that I have, that the “clergy” never seem to talk about, on subjects like ecclesiology, bible versions, hermeneutics, and alternative views on eschatology.
 
Sadly, many Christians know nothing else but this clergy system.  By the grace of God, I was exposed to alternatives early on, such as interactive home groups where I could actually take turns with others leading a bible study while yet a new believer.  I also was able early on to lead an interactive bible study at my place of work and participate in a house church, all of which allowed me to actively participate and disciple myself as I discipled others and as they discipled me.
 
I find it absolutely mind boggling that so few conventional pastors ever figure out that their system is unbiblical and counterproductive… they never seem to realize that the role of a church leader is primarily to be a facilitator, to do everything they can to encourage the rest of the less mature members of the local flock to exercise their gifts, make disciples, evangelize, teach others, lead others, minister to others… not to be pew potatoes – an audience paying for a religious performance.
 
How can a pastor ever find out where anyone in the flock is at spiritually (what their spiritual gifts are and what their weaknesses are and what doctrine they know or don’t know or need to have corrected), unless the flock is all actively engaged in all aspects of the meetings, to the same degree that the pastor/elders/leaders are.
 

Father/Children Analogy

 
This pulpit-centered clergy/laity system is like a father doing all the chores around the home and never letting his children do the chores themselves and never letting them talk, ask questions, make comments, make suggestions, express their likes, dislikes, concerns, joys, sorrows, regrets, etc. It’s like the father doing all the homework assignments, never letting the children do them for themselves… while the children just sit in chairs, watching dad do all the work, all the homework, do all the talking, make all the decisions… never being able to tell dad that they have a problem that he has never addressed, never being able to tell dad that they could do the work if dad would let them, never being able to suggest alternative ways of doing things, never being able to tell dad that maybe he forgot to do something or that he made a mistake, in his desire to do everything himself, his way, without interruption.
 

Trade School Analogy

 
Another way of looking at the deficiencies of the clergy/laity system would be to go to a trade school to learn a trade, but then never being allowed to touch any tools or to ask any questions or to build anything. All you get to do is listen to the instructor tell you how to build a cabinet or how to rebuild an engine or how to weld a piece of equipment or how to fix broken pipes or how to splice wires or how to make a pizza for that matter! The point being, that it is just as important to be actively involved in one’s own Christian discipleship process as it is in learning a trade.
 

What the clergy system produces

 
What this type of highly sub-optimal clergy-centered system results in, though it may be unknowingly, is to stifle discipleship and make the rest of the body of Christ feel like spectators at a show or worse yet: as second-class citizens… at least those who want to be part of a truly biblical vibrant church family where everyone acts like true brothers and sisters, rather than where one man acts like a very busy talkative dad and everyone else is expected to act like silent inactive children, except when they are permitted to perform certain limited actions on command.
 

Conclusion

 
So is the true biblical New Testament based local church supposed to be an interactive meeting between equals – brothers and sisters in Christ – or is it supposed to be a non-interactive meeting where “dad” does everything and the “children” shut up, sit down and just listen – unless instructed by “dad” to utter some specific words that “dad” put in his meeting outline? — RM Kane
 





Church Meetings Should Not Be A One-Man Show!

biblical format for church meetings

Introduction

 
Ignorance is NOT bliss, especially in the body of Christ and especially in leadership and especially regarding ecclesiology (how to do church). Yet ignorance is the norm in the “Body of Christ” regarding how local church meetings should function in order for ALL of the members of the local body to really grow and have the most opportunities to contribute. In this article, I do not wish to focus on churches full of spiritually dead sinners but those local churches whose members are true twice-born children of their heavenly Father – true MEMBERS of the Body of Christ, corporately and locally.
 

It’s The Wrong System

 
The Body Of Christ, by and large, is STUCK in a highly dysfunctional system. Perhaps the biggest problem in the typical local church is the Clergy System even if the doctrinal statement of the church is right on target with major Christian doctrines. Some people would call this system the Pulpit-Pope system of operating a local church, where one man DOES just about everything and CONTROLS just about everything: all the talking… all the teaching… all the introducing… all the song selection… all the announcements… all the public praying and so on. This is the result of Bible schools and seminaries putting out graduates who think they are immediately qualified to lead a local church just because they have some bible courses and a degree to their name. What few of these graduates realize, is that the schools are cranking out men who will perpetuate “the system”, the CLERGY system, but who won’t be adequately equipped to help the very people they are supposed to go out and serve: other believers in the local church.
 

Main Function Of The Local Church

 
To make disciples, which is supposed to be the main function of the local church, one must understand some fundamental issues that affect the disciple-making process. It involves CREATING AN ENVIRONMENT in the local church that facilitates the disciple-making process by making it easy and natural for ALL members of the local church to use their gifts on a regular basis. BUT, if all members are NOT even in the proper environment for total participation, then most members won’t even know what their OWN gifts are., never mind be able to fully participate in weekly gatherings of believers.
 

What Is The Correct Biblical Pattern For Church Meetings?

 
Instead of patterning local churches after the highly dysfunctional public school system – which cranks out mindless unthinking zombies who can only regurgitate dogma they were mindlessly taught to memorize – the local church should be patterned more like a family reunion, where everyone is free to talk, contribute, help others, use their spiritual gifts, and dare I say – FREE TO GET TO KNOW ONE ANOTHER. Having a “pulpit pope” simply spoon-feed everyone every week is about as sub-optimal as a church environment can get. Christians need challenges in their lives. They need relationship building – which you cannot do by sitting closed-mouth in a pew. They need jobs and opportunities to serve in order to GROW. And leaders NEED TO GROW ALSO. And what better way for leaders to grow than to:

  1. Let go of “the reigns” and oversee younger Christians leading a bible study.
  2. Lead by example when it comes to evangelism.
  3. Have totally open teaching sessions where the hearers can immediately ask questions or add clarification or make corrections (oh YES!).

Shepherding Without Input, Without Interaction?

 
How in the world can church leaders be true shepherds of a flock when the shepherds do all the talking every week? How can a shepherd have any idea of who in their congregations is genuinely saved, who is able (or not) to accurately share the gospel, who is or is not in agreement with important Bible doctrines, who has needs, who has struggles, etc.? What are those needs and struggles and who in the local church is best suited to assist those people? Can you imagine going to visit your family doctor and never having an opportunity to tell the doctor what your symptoms and ailments are? Or not being able to ask for clarification on a treatment prescribed? Where your doctor just does all the talking and just talks about his favorite medical books?
 

Besides Discipleship The Church Has Another Important Function

 
One of the main responsibilities of EVERYONE in a local church is summed up by Galatians 6:2
 
Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
 
The Brethren churches, while not exactly on target with some important Bible doctrines, do have a meeting structure that allows all men in the congregation to take turns teaching. However, this is still not interactive enough to provide the safety net (checks and balances) of having full interaction of all church members in weekly church meetings. Everyone should have the freedom to teach, share a song, share a concern and make an announcement throughout a meeting. Leaders – and others – can supervise to keep things under control but who says their job is to be the one-man-show?
 

Conclusion

 
The local weekly church meeting was never supposed to be a one-man show and until more Christians understand this, especially those in leadership roles, the local church will just become more anemic and ineffective, I fear. God-ordained shepherds don’t PREACH AT people, they talk to them and LISTEN to them. They LET the sheep get some exercise, by exercising their gifts and talents. But the norm in today’s church is for the shepherd to give food and water to his sheep but then tie all 4 of their legs together so they get no exercise and they are stuck with the “food de-jour” (the food of the day). They cannot ask for more food or different food. They are stuck with whatever the “pulpit pope” decides to dish out. And they are supposed to feel fulfilled having made no contribution to the local church except in the money basket and to speak or sing on command.
 
As others have said about this sad state of affairs and as I strongly affirm: The Protestant Reformation may have accomplished great things regarding the restoration of sound doctrine. However, those Reformers neglected to REFORM the local church. So, what we have today is not much more than a slightly modified Roman Catholic ecclesiastical system, which is a most pitiful system indeed. And the sheep and shepherds are so used to the system and so comfortable in it that to try to get them to migrate to something far richer and far better and far healthier, can be like trying to get a drug addict to want a wholesome glass of orange juice instead of a needle full of heroin. – RM Kane
 

Related articles:





Going To Church?

by Michael Jeshurun

What Does Going To Church Mean

Here is an excerpt from a letter to a Sister who wrote to me telling me that the voice of God was convicting her to ‘GET OUT’ of a compromised Church which she was attending…
 


 
Dear Sister, the nominal Christian is raised from his childhood with the idea that come Sunday he needs to ‘go to Church’!
 
And this, without even understanding what ‘the church’ actually means!
 
The ‘Church’ is not a building with a steeple on the top, nor is it a group of religious folks who attest to a creed, and have learnt to sing a few hymns and spiritual songs!
 
The Greek word used in the Bible for the Church is ‘Ecclesia’ which just simply means ‘called out ones’! Individuals sovereignly chosen and ‘called out’ by the God the Father, supernaturally made alive by the Holy Spirit and have been made partakers of the mystical body of Christ!
 
So you cannot in any real sense ‘go to Church’ because if you are truly saved, you are part of the Church!
 
Oh but doesn’t the Scripture say, “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. [Heb 10:25]
 
It sure does!
 
But notice, it is the assembling of “OURSELVES”!
 
Who are those who constitute the “ourselves” which the Apostle speaks of? Well, it is those to whom the epistle is written to in the first place –
 
“Holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling” [Heb 3:1]
 
Hebrews 10:25 is not admonishing the Christian to go every Sunday and sit amongst a bunch of religious goats who have a ‘form of godliness but deny the power thereof’! The Apostle’s counsel concerning such is “from such TURN AWAY”! [2Tim 3:5]
 
Dear Sister, please understand that I am not against God’s children having a desire to find a true Church to fellowship with. But such Churches are VERY FEW in the world today and usually meet in very small numbers either in their homes or a rented shed. If God leads you to such a Church then you can praise God for it! If not, better to sit at home and worship God than to ‘attend’ a Church which has a form of religion without the power thereof. Even at this moment I personally know God’s precious children both in the USA and England who are without an official Church where they can attend!
 
And the reason is not far to seek, Sister! You see, we are living in a day when God’s sheep are an ‘endangered species’! Which means, there aren’t many of them left! You have more chances of running into a ‘Tasmanian Wolf’ in Australia than running into a true child of God in a large shopping mall or train station!
 
In Psalm 83:3 the Psalmist refers to the Lord’s people as “Thy hidden ones”. And I believe that that is a good description of God’s people in the day that we are now living in. First of all I guess you will agree that a Church is not a BUILDING. It is a collection of believers. How many believers does it take to constitute a Church? JUST TWO! The Lord said “where TWO or three are gathered together in My Name there am I in the midst of them”! I guess the Lord had a reason for limiting the number to two or three, because being the omniscient One He knew that the day would come (has come!) when in most parts of the world only two of three would come together in His Name.
 
Yes, if we can find other believers who love the truth and holiness and are against all that is erroneous like Free-Willism, Roman Catholicism, Christmas, and the Prosperity Gospel etc, then it will be our joy to join with such believers and break bread.
 
But I speak from 27 years of personal experience that such Churches are one in a thousand and they usually meet in homes. The Master called His sheep ‘little-flock’ (Lk 12:32) because compared to the multitudes that throng the nominal churches, they are VERY SMALL in number. If a true child of God is yet a member of one of these HUGE ‘churches’, it will not be long before the Spirit opens his eyes to the fact that he is sitting amongst goats.
 
In our day the Lord’s true sheep who love the truth are so few in number that for a preacher to be a FULLTIME SALARIED MINISTER he has to necessarily be an amuser of goats and an entertainer of religious hypocrites. Trust me, Sister; I do not say this lightly. I know what I am saying. If a preacher has gathered enough members to support him fulltime and build him a church building then 99% of those who are part of his ‘Church’ have to NECESSARILY be religious goats! I am sorry but this fact I have seen through my own bitter experience!
 
Incidentally, one does not have to ‘go to church’, or ‘go’ anywhere for that matter! If the Lord leads us to a group of true believers then great! We MUST make every effort to fellowship with them at every given opportunity and do our part to edify them.
 
But remember this – if whichever group we have decided to be a part of is growing to a number where we have to purchase or rent a building for our gathering, then chances are that the ‘pastor’ or ‘elders’ there are not preaching the WHOLE truth!
 
“Anything which is endured today in the religious world CANNOT be sound doctrine; anything which is approved of, well-attended, popular, is not sound ‘doctrine’. When God raises up His servant, equips him and sends him forth to preach, that servant will necessarily preach the WORD, and DENOUNCE all that is opposed to the world: hence his message is BOUND to be UNPOPULAR, in fact HATED by all who are not regenerated”. [A.W. Pink]
 
My dear Sister, I preach separation from false churches as IMPERATIVE! Ever since I left the Apostate Churches and started out independently, the Lord has gradually shown me little by little that the existing Christendom of our day is IRREMEDIABLY APOSTATE. We are living in a day when ‘Christians’ have no regard for sound doctrine or a hunger for true holiness. Even most who prate about their orthodoxy in sound doctrine do not demand holiness from the flock entrusted to them. Most preachers in our day desire to have a ‘ministry’ to show the world what they have accomplished for Christ.
 
But I know from EXPERIENCE that any preacher who faithfully preaches the WHOLE counsel of God, which means not just preaching the truth but exposing the lie (and the liars who masquerade in Jesus’ name), I believe such a preacher WILL be left WITHOUT A ‘MINISTRY’, for he will soon begin to see that the elect of God who sincerely seek to follow the Lamb by denying self, sin, and the world are only a mere HANDFUL. The Lord said “when the Son of man cometh shall He find faith upon the earth?” [Luk 18:8] Except for a few small groups of faithful disciples who gather in houses all over the world, THE WHOLE OF CHRISTENDOM WILL BE THOROUGHLY APOSTATE– which is why He says, “Come out of her, My people, lest you share in her sins and lest you receive of her plagues”. [Rev 18:4]
 
But even if you cannot find an assembly of true believers to fellowship with, there is no need to ‘go anywhere’ on Sunday! Just stay at home and spend the time reading God’s Word and in prayer!
 
“Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. Let us go forth therefore unto Him without (outside) the camp (of nominal Christianity), bearing his reproach. For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come”. [Hebrews 13:12-14]
 
“Those who are “poor in spirit” have nothing in common with the self-satisfied Laodiceans. And how “distressed” in soul are they over the worldliness that has come in like a flood, over the crowds of unregenerate members, over the utter absence of any scriptural discipline? And what is to be the attitude and actions of God’s grieved children toward those having nothing more than a form of godliness? This – “FROM SUCH TURN AWAY” (2 Timothy 3:5). Identify yourself with Christ on the outside; walk ALONE WITH HIM”! [A.W. Pink]
 
So basically that is my take on present day Christendom. The truly elect know what I am preaching is the truth. But even among the elect, methinks that there are those who do not want to make a complete break with the established religion. For they love the praise of men more than the praise of God! But they have their reward and I am not the one to judge them.
 
Love
Michael Jeshurun
 
SOURCE: https://michaeljeshurun.wordpress.com/2015/10/20/some-thoughts-on-going-to-church/





The Royal Priesthood

(The Proper Role Of All Believers In The Local Church)

W. Carl Ketcherside

 
church ecclesiology royal priesthood of believers carl ketcherside

The ideal of God for a kingdom composed entirely of priests is achieved in the relationship created by the new covenant. That which could not be accomplished at Mount Sinai has been accomplished at Mount Sion, where we received a kingdom which cannot be moved or shaken. Every child of God is a priest, everyone is now a minister.
 
In the Revelation letter John informs us of Jesus “who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father.” (Rev.1.5,6) This one statement tells us of the motivation (love), the action (freed us), and the means (his blood), by which Jesus achieved his goal of founding a unique kingdom.
 
Because of the priestly nature of the kingdom, celestial voices are raised in this hymn of praise:
 
“Worthy art thou to take the scroll and to open its seals,
For thou wast slain and by thy blood didst redeem men for God
From every tribe and tongue and people and nation
And hast made them a kingdom and priests to our God.” (Rev.5.9,10)

 
Let us examine the language of the Spirit. The terms “high priest” and “chief priest” are found 123 times in the new covenant scriptures. Of these occurrences, 113 directly or indirectly refer to the high priests or chief priest of Judaism.
 
The ten exceptions are all located in the epistle to the Hebrews and are direct references to our Lord Jesus Christ. They present him as the great high priest who was foreshadowed by the high priests under the law of Moses. Accordingly, there is not a hint in these occurrences of any priest in the kingdom of God, except our Lord himself.
 
The Greek word for priest is hiereus. The term “priest” is found 33 times in the new covenant scriptures. It refers to the Levitical priests 18 times. Of the fifteen remaining occurrences, 8 refer to Christ, 3 to Melchizedek, 1 to the pagan priest of Jupiter, and the other 3 to the entire membership of the community of saints, who are described as “a kingdom, even priests.”
 
The word “priest” is never once applied to a special ministry or caste in the congregation of our Lord. No gospel preacher, pastor, elder, or deacon, was ever referred to as a priest in any distinctive sense; no such individual was a priest by right of office.
 
The word “priesthood” is found but six times in the new covenant scriptures. Four of these appearances are in one chapter (Hebrews 7). In every instance the four refer either to the Levitical priesthood or to that of our Lord. The other two instances are also found in one chapter. They designate the entire body of believers as “a holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2.5), and “a royal priesthood.”(1 Peter 2.9)
 
Nothing is clearer than the fact that in the primitive Christian community there was no priesthood other than that of the Lord Jesus Christ and every one of his followers, who were to “offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable unto God.” The special priesthood which is so prevalent in our day has no scriptural precedent under the rule of Jesus. It has been created by men and has arisen without divine warrent. It usurps the privileges and prerogatives which belong to all alike. It makes a pretentious claim to authority but it asserts a divine right without a word of divine writ to sustain it. God’s magnificent plan for the ages culminates in every saint recognized as a real priest. Any attempt to promote a special priesthood clothed with special powers to minister in things pertaining unto God thwarts the divine purpose. It exists as an affront to the Great King and his humble and loyal subjects.
 
In spite of this we are faced with the fact that in our day the idea of a special priesthood to minister for and in behalf of other saints is so prevalent that a majority of believers have no concept of the people of God functioning in any other manner. Few indeed realize that they were ever intended to be priests, and their idea of priesthood has been so conditioned by the subservient role to which they are reconciled that they find it ludicrous to consider themselves as priests in any sense.
 
The danger of this lies in the fact that the kingdom of heaven is designed to be a kingdom of priests. It derives its nature from a citizenry composed of priests. If we create a wholly different order in which the citizens disclaim any relationship as priests, there is a question as to whether it can be regarded as the kingdom of heaven or not. To what extent can we alter the fundamental constituency of the kingdom of heaven and still regard ourselves as composing it? Perhaps nothing is more important for our generation than a recapture of the royal priesthood.
 
This brings us to the place where we may well investigate another word – clergy. It is from the Greek kleeros which means “a lot, an inheritance.” In the original it occurs thirteen times in the Scriptures. It is rendered “heritage”-1 time, “lot”-3 times, “lots”-5 times, and “part”-2 times. The word is never used to mark off a segment or portion of God’s people from the rest in the new covenant scriptures. All who have been redeemed and have entered into Christ constitute the heritage (clergy) of God. He has not selected a special group to serve as his lot or inheritance.
 
This was not true under the legalistic regime created by the old covenant. Then God had a special inheritance, a clergy to act as his special functionaries. “At that time the Lord set apart the tribe of Levi, to carry the ark of the covenant of the Lord, to stand before the Lord to minister to him, and to bless in his name to this day. Therefore Levi has no portion or inheritance with his brothers; the Lord is his inheritance, as the Lord your God said to him.” (Deut.10.8,9)
 
Observe that here a special group was set apart, or ordained to minister unto God and to pronounce a blessing or benediction upon the remainder of the congregation in God’s name. Under Judaism there was a distinction between the clergy and the laity. There were certain rituals reserved exclusively for the priests, or clergy, to perform. The people were not permitted to enter the sacred areas or to engage in the clerical functions.
 
Inasmuch as the Levitical priests constituted a special clergy to minister unto God, they were to be supported in their clerical duties by those in whose behalf they ministered. “The Levitical priests, that is all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings by fire to the Lord, and his rightful dues. They shall have no inheritance among their brethren; the Lord is their inheritance as he promised them.” (Deut.18.1,2)
 
Nothing is clearer than the fact that under ‘the ministration of death” which was written and engraved in stones, God created a clergy with certain sacerdotal (priestly) functions. Those who composed it wore distinctive robes and stood between the people and God. But all such distinctions were rendered invalid by the cross of Christ.
 
We are not under law, but under grace. “The law came by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” We are under a better covenant based upon better promises. Under the reign of grace God no longer has a special tribe ordained as clergymen. Through grace every child of God is sanctified and anointed, set apart and ordained to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable unto him. We are all God’s portion or inheritance in the world.
 
Every Christian is a clergyman in the only scriptural usage of the term. To create a special clergy is to lapse back into Judaism. It is easier to live under law than under grace. Law creates its special interpreters and judges, and the community can rest in their judgment and be relieved of personal responsibility. When problems arise men can “go up to the priest,” and his clerical interpretation becomes the authorized guide. Yet it was from this very system Jesus died to deliver us. He made us free from all priestly and hierarchical domination.
 
It is impossible to create a special clergy without, by the same act, creating a laity. The word Laos from which we get ‘laity” is found at least 141 times in the new covenant scriptures, where it is translated “people.”
 
In every instance when applied to the community of Christ it refers to the whole body of believers. It never refers to a group as distinguished from a priestly or ministerial class. This was not true under the legalistic covenant. There was always a careful line of distinction drawn between the priests (clergy) and the people (laity).
 
“And he (the high priest) shall make atonement for the priests (clergy) and for all the people (laity) of the assembly.”(Lev.16.33) “These preparations having thus been made, the priests (clergy) go continually into the outer tent, performing their ritual duties; but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood which he offers for himself and for the errors of the people (laity).”(Heb.9.6,7)
 
The great difference under the new covenant is illustrated in one important verse. It affirms the priesthood of all believers and uses the term laos to designate the same group. “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people (laity), that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.”(1 Peter 2.9)
 
This is a significant passage because it identifies the royal priesthood with God’s laity. Every priest of God is one of his laity, every member of God’s laity is a priest. Every child of God is his lot or inheritance through the blood of Jesus, therefore, all of God’s children constitute his clergy. Since they also constitute his laity, there can be no distinction between clergy and laity in the kingdom of Christ.
 
It is worth noting that Peter declares that Christians are God’s laity (people), “that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness.” God’s laity are not those to whom messages of God are brought. They are themselves the bringers of a message. The laity are not those who listen to a clergy declare the wonderful works of God; they are the clergy who do the declaring.
 
It is sad indeed to contemplate how far we have fallen away from God’s ideal of the priestly citizenry. It is not uncommon to hear Christians excuse themselves for their ignorance or apathy with the words, “After all, I am just a layman.” This is equivalent to saying “I am just one of God’s people.” The tragedy is that those who thus speak proceed to act is if they are not God’s people.
 
The [conventional] clergy are expected to engage in religious activities, to walk circumspectly, to employ proper language, to visit the sick and study the Bible. This is regarded as the field of clerical function. This is what the clergy is paid to do. Those who are “just laymen” live on a different plane. Their function is to go listen to the clergyman and pay his salary for performing a priestly role. But all of this is as far from God’s program for the Christian life as the blood of Christ is from the blood of bulls and goats.
 
Just as any attempt to create a special clergy must result in a laity, so any attempt to create a distinctive laity must result in a special clergy. Sometimes men seek to avoid the implications of their philosophy by employing other terms to designate what they create. They frequently borrow scriptural terminology in the vain hope that a thing may be sanctified by placing a good name over it.
 
But we may designate the clergy system by whatever terms we will, borrowing the language of apostate ecclesiasticism, or “stealing the livery of heaven” in which to clothe it, yet the fact is that so long as the idea of a special ministerial caste exists, and the remainder of the saints are regarded as “the laity,” then we are nearer to Rome than to Jerusalem. And we are standing at a mount that can be touched rather than before Mount Sion.(CF: Heb.12.18-24)
 
Let us be very plain so there can be no ground for misunderstanding. We may call our clergyman “our minister,” “pastor,” or just plain “preacher,” but if he occupies a place of prominence in the assembly of saints as the front man for the congregation, if he is the exclusive minister, by virtue of his office, “to declare the wonderful works of God,” when the whole community comes together in one place, and if other saints are excluded from the opportunity by his very presence, we have a special clergyman. A preacher can be a clergyman as easily as a clergyman can be a preacher.
church ecclesiology royal priesthood of Christian believers
It is going to be very difficult to recover the abandoned ideal of the universal priesthood of believers. This is true for several reasons. The greatest deterrent is the bitter opposition to it by many who profess to be followers of Jesus. We have converted men to systems, structures and organizations. They have no real sense of vital relationship to Jesus as the head of a living organism. They are often lazy, indifferent and unconcerned. And many who never thought of fighting the devil will fight the thought of returning to the responsible role of priesthood. Too, we have been betrayed into measuring spiritual growth by numerical statistics. We have two criteria by which to judge our success–attendance and contributions. This may well be called ‘the scholar-dollar” fallacy. It operates on the assumption that the greater the number in Sunday School and the greater the bank account the closer to heaven we are. Actually there may be little relationship between the number of dollars in the bank and the number of names in the Book of Life.
 
To abandon the clergy-oriented modern institution for the Spirit-filled community of saints in the first century is the last thing most people will consider. It is probable that the primitive community was more adapted to meaningful meetings in small homes, third floor walk-up tenements (as at Troas), or in catacombs and caves. Here those who were fighting for survival of a cause could come and bind up their wounds, share their experiences and exhort one another to shoulder the cross again. Their problem was not the institutional community image but how to survive individually until the morrow.
 
We must be realistic enough to recognize that we live in a modern world. There are many conditions in twentieth century America which were undreamed of in first century Palestine or Asia Minor. Religion has been institutionalized for many centuries. Millions who want to follow Jesus do not think of themselves as runners, pugilists [prize-fighters] or soldiers in a spiritual sense. References to such activities are regarded as portraying a quaint symbolism of a bygone era.
 
We are resigned to being spectators rather than participants. The action is to be carried out by trained professionals. We are the drama critics who sit in favored locations and observe the presentation without ever becoming really involved. We are like natives watching a battle from the hills whose special interests favor one side in the conflict, but who never move down into the fray.
 
It is evident that a priestly role involves service to God. A priest under the old covenant did not act by proxy. He was not a mere onlooker but an active sharer in the responsibilities pertaining to the temple. But this was only a step in the divine program which was to culminate in a universal priesthood of all believers.
 
Our tragedy is that we have been betrayed into going back to before the cross and reinstating the concept of priesthood which was a part of Judaism. We have again created a professional priesthood to minister in our behalf. We think of the pulpit as “a holy place” in “the sanctuary” where only those with special ordination or anointing may officiate.
 
In many cases those who enter the pulpit wear robes to distinguish them from the rest of the saints. They regard the speaker’s stand as a “sacred desk” and pronouncements made from it may be uttered in a special “religious voice” adopted for the occasion.
 
The minister may develop a sense of importance as to his position and speak about “my elders,” “my church,” “my laymen.” If he ever regards the body of believers as constituting a priesthood he regards himself as a sort of local high priest whose task is to correlate and be responsible for a ritual or liturgy by which men approach God through his leading or direction. This has tended to institutionalize the church and to eliminate the family feeling so essential to the maintenance of brotherly love under the fatherhood of God.
 
From time to time there have been movements sparked in the history of the Christian community to get rid of the clergy. John Milton led such an attempt in his day and directed a vitriolic attack. Unfortunately most of these ventures were as negative as they were antagonistic. They were anti-clerical and were directed toward the goal of reducing the clerics to what is called lay-status.
 
It would seem that a reverse approach would be more in keeping with God’s purpose. Those who think of themselves as as “the laity” should be taught to regard themselves as “priests of the most high God,” and should be equipped for the fulfillment of the priestly function required by the new covenant.
 
We must come to recognize that God’s only sanctuary is the human heart consecrated and dedicated to the high calling of Christian service. In the economy of Christ, priest and sacrifice become one. Jesus offered himself, and it is written, “we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”(Heb.10.10) As a part of the priesthood inaugurated through this universal sacrifice we also must “present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, as a spiritual service.” (Romans 12.1)
 
Unfortunately, we have been betrayed into erecting temples and tabernacles in which we dedicate sanctuaries, and we tend to think of what we do in such special places as service to God. But all of this is pre-Christian and Judaistic in origin. It actually nullifies the power of the cross, while pampering our pride and salving the conscience. Temples require priests, vestments, liturgies, orders of service, and a great many other things wholly unknown to the new covenant. We have actually forsaken “the order of Melchizedek” for that of Aaron and Levi, and have reverted to “the law of a carnal commandment” in preference to “the power of an endless life.”(Hebrews 7.16)
 
This does not mean that members of the royal priesthood should not assemble together. Indeed, the very epistle which says the most about priesthood specifically says we should not forsake the assembling of ourselves together. But the same passage tells us that the purpose of our convening should be to incite one another to love and to good works, and to encourage one another. (Hebrews 10.24,25) We do not meet to conduct a service to God, or to offer a ritualistic sacrifice. We are the sacrifice.
 
This means that wherever a child of God is, there God is in his sanctuary. If one works at a lathe in the shop, at a desk in the office, at a table in the laboratory, or at a counter in the store, he is God’s priest in that place, and whatever he says or does must reflect the glory of God.
 
It is very difficult for one who works on an assembly line to see how the affixing of three nuts to their respective bolts can have any regal or priestly significance, but this is because we are not trained to see how God uses things to open up doors of ministry. Jesus took advantage of a well curb when he was tired to talk to one woman who was a social outcast, and through her, ministered to a whole city. So priests of God can use coffee-breaks and lunch hours in our own day of industrialization.
 
One of the major differences between Judaism and the Christian community is that under the former the important thing was the place where the sacrifice was offered, while under the latter, place has lost significance. The true worshipper no longer thinks in terms of a particular site or city as “the place where men ought to worship” but in terms or spirit and reality.
 
Under the Levitical priesthood men had to go where the high priest was in order to sacrifice, but our high priest left heaven to come where men were, and by so doing he lifted worship from the drudgery of time and place and made it universal as to both. God can only be confined by what he has made, and never by anything which men have made. “God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelt not in temples made with hands, neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed anything.”
 
It is a tremendous challenge which confronts us. We must undo the crystallizing trend of centuries, and turn back the tide of ecclesiasticism which has engulfed and overwhelmed the ideal of God. We must instill in the hearts of men a recognition of the placelessness of worship and universality of the priesthood of the chosen generation comprising the citizenry of the holy nation. In short, we must restore to earth the dream of the prophets and the vision of the apostles. We must uncover the Word and discover the Way.
 

SOURCE: http://housechurch.org/soundwords/sw_royalprhood.html

 

Other Articles Related To The Clergy/Laity System:





The Real Church

(as compared to fake or counterfeit churches)

3 dollar bill and counterfeit church

The Real Church…

  • Hungers and thirsts for holiness, real fellowship, discipleship, evangelism, commitment and a deeper understanding of their God.
  • Needs no chiors… for they are all “the choir”.
  • Needs no ushers… They meet in each other’s homes.
  • Needs no thimbles of juice or tiny cubes of bread… for they eat hearty meals together.
  • Needs no building programs… Their homes are good enough meeting places for them to worship their God in.
  • Needs no paid professional religious leaders or staff… Their churches are patterned after families, not corporations.
  • Needs no special programs or program leaders… God has graciously gifted each true saint as it pleased Him.
  • Needs no gimmicks or sales techniques to attract people… All true believers have a Spirit in them that craves fellowship with other children of God.
  • Needs no formalized “worship services”… By the leading of the Holy Spirit, they are quite capable of interacting amongst themselves without needing some one-man showman or rock band or professional choir entertaining them for an hour or two.

“God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”
[John 4:24]

 

SEE ALSO: articles on Doing Church