Should Pastors Be Obeyed? Part III
Pastoral-Theological Reflections on Hebrews 13:17
Below is the third and final installment of a paper I presented at conferences between 2019 and 2021. Part I and Part II can be found here and here, respectively.
V. Practical Considerations for the Church
a. Pastoral Work with Human Flourishing as its Aim
In view of the argument we’ve developed, we might say that pastoral authority is the capacity for and exercise of spiritual responsibility toward the people of God for His purposes in their lives. Construed this way, we see that authority is not an end unto itself. Instead, it is oriented toward the glory of God and the good of man. God’s glory and man’s good aren’t unrelated either. For image-bearers, there is nothing more glorious than for a believer to recover something of his humanity through Christ and in the course of our service to His church. This recovery effort is overseen by faithful pastors.
In Scripture we find examples of the pastoral mindset of those preoccupied with this achievement, not earthly accolades. This is Paul’s heartbeat when he called the Philippians “his joy and crown”, or when John said, “I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth” (3 Jn. 4).” While the Lord of heaven isn’t dependent on the groans of pastors to figure out what is going on with the sheep, the prayers, intercessions, efforts, and anxieties of the pastor should be seen as reflecting, to some degree, the spiritual progress and obedient spirits of God’s people. Any obedience or submission that is rendered to pastors must keep this larger, holy aim ever in view: the maturity of the saints.
Congregational submission is never an end, only a means to glorification of God, and the fulfillment of the church’s mission, which entails the discipleship of all people into Christlikeness. This discipleship means flourishing. We might even say shalom. Shalom is, after all, not merely the “right ordering of all things,” but it is a reality personally enjoyed by those in union with Christ.[1] True shalom comes through Him, and faithful shepherds direct people to Him.
Pastors spend a lot of time thinking about discipleship strategies, but it’s tempting to avoid meditating quite as long on their own personal discipleship within the flock. And since our conduct is simply the overflow of our character, let’s consider a few ways that pastors can reorient their own self-concept that will help them see their own efforts as rooted in their stewardship as servants, not their positions as pastors.
b. Pastors as Members[2]
Pastors are so in the habit of presenting others to the congregation for membership that it is likely easy to forget their own identity as members of the body. Yet due partly to the hiring practices of many churches, this is seldom considered. Most pastors do not serve churches they were first united with in membership. How might it be different, then, for pastors to be formally presented to their congregations for membership, at least in conjunction with their actual hiring? While this would largely have symbolic value, symbols matter. Christians of all people understand this.
Pastors function as pastors by virtue of their calling by the congregation who has recognized the giftedness and character of the individual. Pastors must remember that the proper order of their roles is believer, member, then pastor. Admittedly this is easily obscured by contemporary thought and practice concerning the pastorate. Lloyd Rediger’s observation is disconcerting in this respect: “The clergy role is sui generis, for it is the only profession that wraps personal identity, professional identity, and religious [identity] all in the same package.”[3]
If pastors are members, too, then their spiritual progress is not primarily a function of maintaining employment, but of their own spiritual maturity and building up the body as they grow in Christlikeness. Too often an inflated view of self-importance is the basis for pastors’ pursuit of holiness. This isn’t hard to imagine. As one megachurch pastor put it, “The local church is the hope of the world and its future rests primarily in the hands of its leaders.”[4] Primarily? With assertions like this, no wonder so many are crushed and leave the ministry. Spiritual realism is needed in this discussion.
To be sure, “The Pastorals repeatedly stress the congruity between right teaching and right behavior by the elders and deacons…”.[5] And sound leadership is essential to a healthy church. But true spirituality is rooted in the simple foundation of identity in Christ, not in ordination. Indeed, pastors get into trouble when they forget that a pastor is not only a pastor, but also a person.
c. Pastors as Co-Pastors
Over the last two decades there has much discussion in Baptist circles about the need for plural leadership.[6] Much of this discussion has been spurred from within the Southern Baptist Convention, and particularly parachurch ministries like 9Marks. While some of these groups conceptualize this leadership structure slightly differently, there is nothing within Free Will Baptist polity that would prohibit Free Will Baptists from developing a much more intentional effort to develop plural leadership. Hammett helpfully reminds us that, “The New Testament uses the terms elder, overseer (or bishop), and pastor interchangeably and so did Baptists for much of their history.”[7] Congregations can be taught this truth as well as the New Testament pattern of plural eldership in the earliest churches, while at the same time having a pastor who may well be tasked with the primary oversight responsibilities.
Additionally, having others in staff roles which are not always asymmetrical to a lead pastor creates a greater likelihood that poor shepherding will not go overlooked. Better instruction on the ministry of deacon and the proper constraints on church boards would also ensure that the biblical pattern and congregational wellness is always in view.
Forming these new identity markers will be challenging. Yet they can provide a healthy foundation for a life of responsible stewardship. In closing, I’ll mention two test cases for how obedience and submission to such stewards might look, first for laity, and second for pastors.
d. Transitions as a Test Case
Stanley Outlaw makes a powerful observation in relating Hebrews 13:7 to 13:17. He says that in verse 7 the writer referred to
past leaders, those who originally delivered God’s Word to them and who had apparently died. They are to remember them and follow the courageous example of their faith. Now, new spiritual leaders have taken their place. When we have experienced good leaders in the church, we often feel that no one can possibly take their place, but that is not true. We must never refuse the leadership of a new pastor, or other church leaders, because of an emotional attachment to the past. The church must continue. Elderly and retired leaders will go to their reward, but Jesus Christ is ‘the same yesterday, and today, and for ever’ [sic] (13:8).[8]
These words are sobering, but ever so appropriate for congregations who won’t often view transitions as inevitable and potentially positive, but as frightening and frustrating. But Outlaw’s admonitions are practical and timely, given the large-scale transition from Baby Boomer pastors to Millennial and Generation Z generations. To be frank, more and more churches will likely transition from older pastors who served for decades to younger pastors who are the age of the departing pastor’s grandson. This raises the stakes for all parties involved. The New Testament gives specific admonitions to younger leaders such as, “Let no man despise your youth” (1 Tim. 4:12), and “Do not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you would a father” (1 Tim. 5:1). Yet is it possible that Hebrews 13:17 offers crucial guidance for the congregation led by such young men? Transitions will require mutual understanding, humility, and submission.
e. Preaching as a Test Case
Authority, or the perceived lack thereof, also can profoundly shape preaching and teaching. This issue was famously addressed in Fred Craddock’s widely discussed book, As One Without Authority. He contends that “how one preaches is to a large extent what one preaches.”[9] This leads him to make the substantial argument that no longer can preachers depend upon a deductive form of preaching. In an age where religious authority is so contested, more indirect, less heavy-handed and assertive approaches to preaching must be adopted.[10] His proposal for an inductive approach places more responsibility on the listener to participate in and to complete the message.[11]
I don’t intend to litigate Craddock’s argument here fully, especially since its problems have already been considered elsewhere. But including it here reminds us that homileticians have been grappling with the way religious and pastoral authority may influence the practice of preaching. Pastors must carefully consider how their approaches to handling texts, including ones like 13:17, are heard through the matrix of contemporary experiences in the lives of their congregants.[12] The preaching of any text, for that matter, is heard against that backdrop. Pastors have little to no control over that.[13] They do, however, have the capacity to model forth a life of holiness that shows itself in submission to the same passages being proclaimed week after week.
Conclusion
Responsible pastoral authority in the pulpit derives its authority from the Lord who inspired the Scriptures. Richard John Neuhaus puts it well: “Our own competence and success are not, then, proof of our authority; nor does our proven incompetence withdraw the warrant from what we so inadequately try to do and be.”[14] But that authority is much more effective when it emanates from a life profoundly shaped by those Scriptures.
No doubt serving well has its horizontal benefits and acknowledgments (e.g., 1 Tim. 5:17; 3:13). Yet this hints at the subtle, but important moral distinction between doing what we do in order to be seen, versus doing what we do mindful of the fact that we will be seen.[15] Make no mistake: spiritual benefit does accrue to those who lead well. “Believers’ submissiveness to the leaders will result in the leaders’ being able to carry out their ministry with joy.”[16]
The connection between leadership and thriving is unmistakable (e.g., Acts 16:3-5). Appreciating the facets and nuances of this connection requires that the church teach and model godly spiritual authority, even when confidence in religious institutions is waning. While authority will remain a contested subject, its existence and influence are unavoidable. Therefore, all those authorized to live before God must grapple with its role in the relationship between shepherds and the flock.
[1] Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert, What is the Mission of the Church? Making Sense of Social Justice, Shalom, and the Great Commission (Wheaton: Crossway, 2011), 52, 200.
[2] Pastors would be well served to adopt a full biblical grammar for helping them see themselves relative to the congregation. Shepherds are over the flock (responsibility), but also under the flock (accountability). They are among the flock (as a believer in need of growth and maturity) and alongside the flock (as someone who observes them and also experiences life beside them).
[3] G. Lloyd Rediger, Beyond the Scandals: A Guide to Healthy Sexuality for Clergy (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 22. Also see Burns, Chapman, and Guthrie, Resilient Ministry: What Pastors Told Us about Surviving and Thriving (Downers Grove: IVP, 2013).
[4] Bill Hybels, Courageous Leadership, Hybels (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 27.
[5] Will Willmon, Calling and Character: Virtues of the Ordained Life (Nashville: Abingdon, 2000), 44.
[6] Mark Dever gives one of the most recognized endorsements of this approach to church leadership. See Dever, A Display of God’s Glory: Basics of Church Structure (Washington, D.C.: 9Marks, 2001, 24. More recently, Dave Harvey, The Plurality Principle: How to Build and Maintain a Thriving Church Leadership Team (Wheaton: Crossway, 2021).
[7] Hammett, Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches, 154. Picirilli gives a concise, exegetical case for this assertion in Teacher, Leader, Shepherd, 1–12.
[8] Outlaw, 370.
[9] Fred B. Craddock, As One Without Authority (Nashville: Abingdon, 1986), 52.
[10] Craddock, As One Without Authority, 55.
[11] Craddock, As One Without Authority, 51–159.
[12] As Tripp and Lane helpfully remind us that experiences are hermeneutical in nature. “They become lenses we use to interpret life.” Timothy S. Lane and Paul D. Tripp, How People Change (Greensboro: New Growth, 2008), 95.
[13] More attention is being given to preaching with such contexts in mind. See Matthew Kim, Preaching with Cultural Intelligence: Understanding the People Who Hear Our Sermons (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2017).
[14] Richard John Neuhaus, Freedom for Ministry (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 68.
[15] Simply contrast Jesus’s admonition in Matthew 5:16 with the one found in 6:1.
[16] Picirilli, Teacher, Leader, Shepherd, 101
