Mike Reed and Pastoral Authority

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Dear Bro. Mike,
	I have put off for several days writing a response to your post because I
honestly wanted some time to think about what you had written.  I am no
stranger to Pentecost, having been an Apostolic for over 21 years now.  And
I am aware that great respect and submission to one's pastor is a
foundation-stone in our religion.  I suppose that this is as it should be.
The Bible does teach us to obey our leaders and to submit ourselves.
	But in the free market place of ideas, does the fact that one is some
congregation's pastor give his remarks or ideas elevated status?  Does the
mere fact that one is called a minister by some group, some where, make one
(or one's ideas) somehow untouchable?  I think not.  Indeed, I believe that
public forums (such as the Internet) give us the opportunity to really look
at the church as a whole and to consider the direction different trends in
Pentecost are carrying us while comfortably remaining impersonal.  We are
admonished by scriptures to know those who labor among us--and every
minister is not among us.  The mere fact that someone is a minister does
not mean he is OUR minister or that he labors among all saints, for we are
also clearly admonished by scripture to try the spirits to see if they be
of God or not.  It is noteworthy that even Paul himself taught that if he
changed his doctrine, people were to "let him be accursed" and that they
were to follow him only as he followed Christ.  Yes, even "mere laity" is
to use the Holy Ghost and to judge (yes, judge) whether a belief or a
teaching is of God or not-the fact that the belief came from a person
involved in ministry notwithstanding.
	Consider the Old Testament.  Just as the true prophets of God were to be
revered, false prophets were to be both recognized and destroyed.  And it
didn't take a prophet to declare that another prophet was false.  In the
New Testament, the Bible makes clear that the elders WHO RULE WELL are to
be counted worthy of double honor.  People who "teach otherwise" and
"consent not to sound words" are to be noted and shunned.  I can find no
example, neither in the Old nor New Testament of some special anointed
class of ministry that is some how immune to scrutiny and above being
disagreed with.
	It is no big secret that there are many ministers among Apostolic churches
whose pomposity, arrogance, and self-exaltation are shocking.  Just as
Jesus escoriated the Pharisees for loving "greetings in the market places"
and "high seats", we find some people in ministry who demand an exalted
place everywhere they go.  They expect special parking privileges, expect
to be seated at the head table at any dinner or banquet, and expect to be
given special deference in all conversations and to be treated as experts
in all matters.  We all know the type.  As I have looked at these people
over the years, sometimes I have wondered when the change occurred.
Weren't they once driven by a hunger to see the word of God make a
difference in people's lives?  Didn't they once have an irrepressible
burden for the lost and an overwhelming love for the saints?  Wasn't there
once "fire shut up in [their] bones"?  When did they become so full of
themselves that their own importance eclipsed their calling?  When did they
start becoming "miffed" whenever they weren't being given the status they
thought they deserved?  When did they stop serving (ministering) TO people
and start thinking they were a special breed that should be served?  When
did they forget that Moses the law-giver (with whom they just LOVE to
equate themselves) was also the meekest man on earth?  The answer is
simple--it started when we as a church began tolerating and even expecting
such things of "ministry"
	I cannot count the number of times I've heard someone refer to King Saul
as a prototype of ministry and remark that David would not "touch God's
anointed".  In the first place, Saul was anointed to be a king--a national
governor--not a local pastor or a religious leader, despite his brief
encounter with a spirit of prophecy.  Saul was a wicked, evil man.  It
seems what some are really saying is even if a pastor is wicked and evil,
no one should say anything, since he is "God's anointed"  
	Well, while David did not touch (I.E. kill) Saul, he did flee from him,
and he did lead a band of dissidents who sided against him.  David even
chided with him for the wicked way he had treated him.  Why do we assume
that not "touching God's anointed" means we may not state our case when we
don't agree or notice when sin is being committed, damage is being done,
and people are being hurt?  I can think of one pastor who was seeing
prostitutes, drinking at taverns (publically), and beating his wife while
still being allowed to pastor a local church.  IS THIS YOUR IDEA OF NOT
TOUCHING GOD'S ANOINTED?  What about the people he was taking to Hell with
him?
	I am not for one minute encouraging irreverance or impudence to one's own
good pastor.  I think we should cherish our pastors, speak kindly to them,
and if we must disagree, do so politely.  But every pastor is not "our"
pastor.  And recognizing and freely discussing doctrines we are troubled
about, teachings we disagree with, or even sin issues involving the church
or the ministry does not constitute an affront against the office of pastor
in general.  Let's face it, it takes all kinds: just as there are loose,
compromising "hirelings" who are leading their flocks to worldliness,
carnality, sin, and Hell, there are also cultic tyrants who regularly
demand a level of mindless obedience that could rightly be considered
intrusive and abusive, by reason of whom the way of truth is evil spoken
of.  If we can't even notice such things, then perhaps we need to
reconsider why we were even given the Holy Ghost in the first place. 
	One parting thought...if your own minister fell, would you follow him
blindly to Hell?  Would you expect God to excuse you from following what
you knew was right because you were "supporting your minister"?  See, the
Bible doesn't teach that.  Think about it.

Troy