Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
I think that it is right here that Igzy says what's right about the leadership model he is talking about without really saying it.
If we all are in submission to each other, and we recognize those who are the "gifts given" to us with function to lead, and know that they are in submission to everyone as well, then we should be willing to submit to their leadership. I know that someone will suggest that the leaders cannot be in submission to everyone if there is not consensus, but if they are in submission to God and, in general, to everyone, then the group is in a reasonably proper place. That does not mean that everybody agrees in total. But if they understand the kind of leading that caused James to declare something like "it seemed good to to the Holy Spirit and to us . . ." then they will know that this does not mean that everyone was simply in total agreement, but rather that everyone was jointly in submission.
The ones who stand up to assert their preference over what "seemed good to . . . " are pretty much, by definition, not in submission. And they are the kind that will eventually just go their own way if they continue to be at odds with the direction of the group.
And all of this does not mean that there are not ever reasons to move on without accusation against a group, or to discern that there is something seriously wrong in the dynamic at play in a group. I would suggest that there is every reason to suggest that there is a seriously dysfunctional dynamic in the kind of agreement/submission that goes in the LRC much of the time. And every reason to move on, with or without accusation, from them to something else.
We just spent a week in the NW and the last thing we did before getting on a plane in Seattle to go home was eat lunch with my aunt and uncle. He is a retired Assemblies of God (AOG) preacher. While he definitely has his doctrinal preferences, he understands the difference between core and peripheral. His kids, grandkids, and great grandkids are all over the place in terms of theology at this time and he is OK with it. But he had a few questions concerning the LRC since it was sort of a big thing when my family just up and move out of the AOG in 73. There is too little time to cover everything. But a system the requires "fellowship" to move to another city does not understand submission. That is generally not a matter of submission. But in the LRC, it really is even though they won't say it out loud. They just comment behind the curtains about who is and isn't "marginal."
|
I don't think you are responding to the question. Should members obey or submit to church leaders, in my understanding, must be different from "submit one to another".
The only verse I can see that is applicable is "submit to those that have rule over you". So the question would be in what situations do "church leaders" have rule over you? Again, I don't think this thread is referring to the Bible having rule over you. There is no example of the exercise of NT authority that requires a "church leader" that I am aware of. Anyone can expose and condemn sin, you are not required to first be a "church leader". Therefore, if we exclude the authority of the New Testament, is there any situation in which a "church leader" has authority over you where you need to submit.
Obviously, within the confines of the church building a leader will have the authority to lock doors, open meetings, forbid eating in the sanctuary, etc. But then if the church leader visited your home they would also need to respect your authority.
So I understand this thread to be asking, does a church leader have "special" authority over you in addition to the requirement to "submit one to another". Does being appointed a leader of the congregation you meet with confer special authority to you other than the obvious authority over the building and assets.
If the question is defined as this, then I say No. Being a church "leader" does not give you any special authority over another believer. Church "leaders" have authority over the assets of the church, not over the members.
The Lord Jesus, the New Testament, and the Body of Christ all have authority over the believers. But there is nothing in the New Testament that says any individual has a special authority over other believers. Perhaps the best example is in 1Cor where Paul is talking about the sins of the brother. He says that he will deal with the situation when he arrives according to the authority given to him. However, he urges the church to exercise the exact same authority. So yes, the authority that was given to him was also given to all the believers, it just takes growth and maturity to exercise it.