Wednesday, July 03, 2013

Repost: Home Cookin'

A few years ago I penned this short piece on the importance of home grown elders, in other words the raising up of men within the local body to be trained and serve as elders rather than parachuting them in from the outside (or treating them like Mail Order Bride Pastors), That blog post was inspired by something Dave Black wrote and he has done it again in his entry on June 28th...

It's a wonderful thing to put down roots. We love where we live in Southside Virginia and feel part of the community. One of the things I marvel at, however, is the constant turnover of pastors in our area. Typically a pastor will remain in a church for only a handful of years before moving on. Very few put down any roots in the community.  

Contrast this with the New Testament pattern. In the early church we find local men leading local churches. They came from within the local church and were committed to that church. Thus the link between the church and the ministry was maintained. However, in our modern system, where the "ministry" is considered a profession, men seek for themselves, or are sent by authority, to occupy this or that post without any regard to the link which is thus broken. The result is that pastors often look upon churches simply as places that offer them opportunities to exercise their ministry gifts or else as steps up the ladder of employment. Seminarians often have to leave their local churches for seminary training and then rarely return to their own congregations for ministry.

That is right on the money. I get that people move and that is just a reality of life but it is also true that many pastors/elders who make a profession out of ministry move for reasons of money or perhaps prestige. That sometimes is the right thing to do for your family but it is rarely the right thing to do in ministry. It takes time to get to know people and you can't learn much about someone based on a few sample sermons, a resume and a couple of interviews. I am firmly of the belief that for an elder to be Biblically recognized he must be someone known to the church and that calling (or worse hiring) a man to be an elder based on extra-biblical qualifications and then hoping he turns out to have the qualities to be exhibited by an elder is a recipe for disaster, a recipe that has been demonstrated over and over again. Anyway, without further ado here is a reposting of my thoughts on home cookin' and elders!


I was looking over Dave Black’s page and I read through an interesting post called Returning Biblical Education to the Local Church. He brings up something I have mulled over for some time: the inherent problem with hiring men from outside of the local body to lead that local body. That is not the primary thrust of his post but it really got me thinking afresh and asking the question: Why do we seek men who are strangers to come to our local body and lead us? Would we not be better served with men who led us because they came from us? Is a professional, prepackaged minister a better and more importantly a more Biblical man to be an elder? Dave obviously doesn’t think so and neither do I…

“Clergy” becomes a whole way of living, an ecclesiastical subculture. The church, however, predates the seminary and will outlast it. The book of Acts reminds us that the earliest church leaders were homegrown nobodies. They were not parachuted in from the outside with all of the proper credentials. They were already full participants in their congregations – they had homes, they had jobs, and they had solid reputations. If at all possible, I think we too would do well to train people for leadership in our local churches, equipping them for evangelism and other ministries, thus complementing the work of our seminaries and Bible colleges. The early church knew that leadership is best learned by on-the-job training, not by sending our most promising leaders off to sit behind a desk.

I think this phenomena of professional ministers is a product in large part of two factors. First, we are a country that by and large draws its identity from Europe and with her state sponsored churches, professional clergy is part of the fabric of the society. Second, and more importantly, we are Americans. We live in a prepackaged, processed, microwave age. Sure home cooked meals from scratch taste better and are better for you, but it is such a hassle! I can spend an hour or two cooking up a nice meal for my family (and even that requires pre-cut meat, canned veggies, boxed side dishes) or I can get some pizzas. In my family we get pizzas or something similar pretty often and in families where both spouses work it is even more common. We want it quick, easy and disposable.

The church seems to think the same way. Training and raising a man up within the local body who can grow in knowledge and maturity until he is ready to lead as an elder takes a long time and is hard work. It may not always work out, he may move, he may lack the aptitude for it, he may turn out to not be a very good elder. It is a whole lot easier and faster to find someone who already is “qualified”, i.e. has a seminary degree, who we can interview and “call” to ministry. Of course he will probably have to move and so to entice him we need to pay him. If he were already a part of the congregation, he would have a job and a home and ties to the community. He would know and be known by the local body because he is a part of that body. They would know him and his wife and his kids, and that would make it possible to know if he meets the qualifications for an elder listed in the Bible instead of meeting the resume credentials that are often the entry level for being considered to be a pastor. It makes more sense and it is more faithful to the Bible to raise leaders up internally but that just takes too long. So instead, church after church hires strangers to come in to lead and love people they have likely never met. It only adds to the separation between the clergy and the laity to have a paid professional come on the scene. Hard to believe with that great set-up that so many men leave the ministry, that churches have such high turnover in pastors and the men who stay are often frustrated and burned-out. When you view the pastor as a paid professional, someone hired and brought in from the outside, why not get rid of them? Paid, professional clergy are employees and as such they are disposable. A church can always find someone else to pay to lead them. On the flip side, when ministry is your job you can understand why men leave church A with 100 members for church B with 250 members. If you are from within the congregation and not getting paid, why would you leave? It is not a job, it is truly a calling.

Just because we live in a quick, easy and disposable society doesn’t mean that is how the church should operate. It is certainly harder, more time consuming and more sacrificial to raise up leaders in the church but I believe (and I think the Bible supports) the idea that a primary responsibility of the local body is in the training and support of men from within that body to lead that body. Seminary may be a part of that training, but it is only one part of an integrated development of leaders, not an end in and of itself. Hiring pastors like an old western gunslinger to come in and clean up the town before moving on is an injustice to the local body, to those men and their families. We need to take the time to look around the cupboards, find the ingredients and whip up some home grown elders.


dle said...


And yet there is a mentality in the house church movement that rejects any idea of permanence, especially when it comes to the people who comprise that house Body.

Constant turnover hurts the Church, though. No matter whether it's in leaders or in "laity." It makes it hard to establish anything and turns Christianity into a nomadic, impermanent faith.

Rather than endorse such impermanence, should we not be addressing it? Many house church leaders advicate moving your family to be wherever the house church winds blow. But with so many house churches failing within a couple years, how can anyone accomplish anything if constantly moving to be where the latest "move of God" is? There's something very wrong about that attitude.

Anyway, rather than assenting to becoming nomads, why are we not fighting that trend instead?

Arthur Sido said...

i have not heard a lot of people advocating you move to be near a house church but there are too many "leaders" who travel about telling people how great house church is and then leaving to go somewhere else. house church is not a cure-all, in fact in many ways i wonder if the problem is focusing on a particular gathering rather than on relationships with one another.