Description
Have some, or all, of the equipping gifts ended, now that we have the canon of Scripture? I started discussing this last time and in this episode we will conclude that discussion. We will look at the other extreme, which is that these are more than just gifts, but are actually “offices” or positions, perhaps even organized as a hierarchy. Rather than just an abstract theological discussion for wonks, we will see that it has real implications for the us today.
If you find the content of this episode useful, it would really help us reach more people if you click the Like and Subscribe for this episode on Youtube.
Check out our full list of The Fivefold Ministry Podcasts
To view all of our series, visit our LEADERSHIPmatters Podcast page.
Podcast Resources
Listeners of our LEADERSHIPmatters podcasts have exclusive access to our free bonus leadership materials. For this series these include Fivefold Functions: Personal Survey, Fivefold Functions: Team Unity, Fivefold Functions: Organizational Flow Chart, Fivefold Functions: Organizational Life Cycle.
Get exclusive access to free Resources or download Workbook
For other valuable leadership resources
Consider Helping
The majority of our work training new leaders in the church is international. In many cases, they cannot afford the material themselves. Please considering helping us reach those who can’t afford the resources by donating today.
If you can’t donate, you can still help by visiting our channel on Youtube and clicking Subscribe to tell Youtube that you value our content and they should show it to others like yourself!
Video Script
Episode 10: Two Views
Have some, or all, of the equipping gifts ended, now that we have the canon of Scripture? I started discussing this last time and in this episode we will conclude that discussion. We will look at the other extreme, which is that these are more than just gifts, but are actually “offices” or positions, perhaps even organized as a hierarchy. Rather than just an abstract theological discussion for wonks, we will see that it has real implications for the us today.
Reductionist View Continued
We are now carrying on with our discussion from Episode 9 on the two extreme positions regarding the equipping gifts that have historically developed within the Church over the last two thousand years. We began by discussing the Cessationist view that some or many of these gifts ended with the coming of the canon of Scripture. I provided a rationale as to why this does not line up with the most plain reading of the Ephesians 4 text. If you missed that I would encourage you listen to Episode 9 before you continue. For those following along in the workbook, we are now on pages 35-38.
Another rationale for Cessationism, or Reductionism, is that the primary role of the Apostle was to be a witness of Jesus and his resurrection. And because this was so exceptional a role, once those witnesses died, this function died with them. Again, the problem with this reasoning is that, while the original Apostles did have a unique, irreplaceable role to play in establishing the early Church, there were other apostles listed in the early church, at least one of which was even a woman (Junia in Rom. 16:7). So if the early church calls others who had not been a witness to the resurrected Christ, “apostles,” then it seems this designation was not limited to them then or now.
Another problematic issue for this view is the fact that Judas, as one of the “Twelve,” was replaced. Additionally, one of the best known apostles, Paul, was not part of the original Twelve and yet foundational to the early Church. As Hirsch points out, this doctrine, “dies the death of a thousand qualifications.” As to the resurrection, we know that there were at least 500 people who witnessed the resurrected Christ and so this, in and of itself, does not make the Twelve unique. The better question may be to ask, “To what degree do subsequent apostolic functions and callings reflect the foundational functions of the original Apostles?”
What becomes difficult to explain for those who hold the Reductionist view is as to why these gifts are evident in the early church—as seen throughout the New Testament writings, as well as throughout subsequent church history—but yet are absent today. It seems like a somewhat arbitrary exclusion of apostolic (and to a lesser degree prophetic and evangelistic) functions from the fivefold ministry gifts for the Church today. Hirsch and many others suspect that this rewriting of the fivefold theology, which is at odds with first century Christianity, was originally motivated to consolidate power in an ever increasing bureaucratic hierarchy. The real goal may have been to control the church and increase the influence of the administrative structure of the bishops and priests. A more gracious view would be that it was necessary to eliminate and isolate potential false apostles, so at to protect the integrity of the Gospel from heresy.
Within a few hundred years, the office of Bishop had developed in the Church and was seen as all encompassing, or at least overseeing, all of the other ministries. But what this also seemed to eliminate, or at least invalidate, was the pioneering aspect of the apostolic function. What eventually developed was an institutionalization form of hierarchy that emphasized the pastoral role based on a diocese model. This developed into a clear governance structure in some churches, that was not reflected in the 1st century church or intended by its early teachings.
As discussed previously, the Western Reformation, for all its good and radical return to a biblical understanding and practice of salvation, did little to reform the structures of the Church. Little was reformed in terms of leadership structures and in particular the redemption of the fivefold ministry functions for the Church. The Reformers had different issues with which they were preoccupied with at the time.
Due to the exegetical, theological, and even historical inconsistencies with the Cessationist arguments, in more recent years scholars and leaders have abandoned, or at least watered down, extreme Cessationism. The text in Ephesians 4, as well as Paul’s other writings, affirm that each of the fivefold gifts are for the edifying and equipping of the Church; it was not only normal in the first century, but normative for following generations. This reveals a troubling problem in the Western Church—and the Eastern Church also has its fair share of this—it is the problem of placing Church tradition and the practices of the early Church fathers on the same level as the Scriptures. Yet church tradition is not infallible nor binding; it was often a product of its time and limited to the current revelation available. A key figure of this train of thought was Clement—who contributed many positive teachings to the church, but not so much on the subject of church governance.
Has the Reductionist view affected your own particular church tradition? Has it had an influence on your own theology?
A Hierarchical Approach
Before the break we were discussing the short comings of the Cessationist view that believes that all or some of the fivefold gifts are no longer needed in the church today. Now let’s switch our attention to the other end of the continuum. Some who adhere to the tradition that all of the gifts are for today, including the fivefold giftings, can slip into the ditch on the other side of the road. While they recognize these as gifts for the church today, they tend to view them through the lens of a hierarchical authoritative position. This view has primarily developed within the 20th Century, originating from within some branches of the Pentecostal-Charismatic tradition.
While limiting the gifts is counterproductive to the mission of the Church, seeing these equipping giftings as a top-down hierarchy is equally damaging. In this tradition, these gifts are usually seen in terms of power and positional authority. As has been discussed in earlier episodes, superimposing a view from church history that overlays the idea of position and titles on Eph. 4:11-12, contradicts Jesus’ and Paul’s clear teaching on authority and power within the Body of Christ, and particularly the role of leaders as “servants of all.” So what developed in some circles was to infer on apostolic or prophetic functions an almost patriarchal status and authority. Those who had these gifts, or could fake it really well, were able to gather a following and instead of equipping and releasing others, built their own kingdom and ego.
The end result is obviously something quite different than what we see in Ephesians 4 and the early church. Instead of a mature body working together to fulfill the mission, those with the “lesser” gifts – you know serving, mercy, hospitality—were then expected honor and obey the truly gifted ones – that would be those at the top of the food chain: apostles, prophets and so on. In this scenario, ministry becomes a spectator sport. Actually this is the best case scenario. In the worst case scenario the “apostle” or “prophet” uses their gifts for their own good and not for what the gifts were intended – the benefit and edification of others.
This highlights the flaw of this approach and how it is contrary to Jesus’ model of “the greatest in the Kingdom is to serve others and not be served.” The five-fold functions as listed in Ephesians 4 are similar in this regard to the other gifts listed in 1 Corinthians 12 and Romans 12. All these gifts are to be used for the edification of the Body and others, not to elevate to a position the one exercising the gift. I think our study so far suggests that these gifts in Ephesians 4 are no exception. They were never intended to just be a position in the church, but gifts related to functions and callings within the Body of Christ.
To see these equipping gifts as positions of authority changes the meaning of the original text and creates boss-hood not servanthood type of leadership which is common in many churches that hold this view. As we saw in our last episode, all five of the gifts are to function in balance together. They each have an individual function, but also have a part to play within the Body as a whole. For individuals or groups to view leaders with these gifts as a “super-anointed,” or as Paul called them, “super-apostles,” — you know just a bit above the rest of us and never to be questioned—contradicts Jesus’ clear teaching on the upside-down nature of leadership in this new Kingdom. The values of this New Kingdom are to expressed in and through his Church.
Jesus was pretty straightforward in his teaching, we were not to aspire to position and title. According to Matthew 23 we are not even to allow someone to call us, “teacher” or “rabbi,” since we all are equal brothers/sisters. The correct attitude of the church leader is to lay one’s life down for others. When the equipping gifts are functioning as they should there will be a unity in the Body and believers will grow and be mature. They will no longer be like infants, dependant on the manipulation and craftiness of others. Unfortunately, this is what occurs in churches where apostle or prophetic-types are dictatorial and authoritarian. This can be expressed overtly or more likely in subtle manipulation like, “If you were really godly you would listen to me his humble servant!”
The results of this approach is always similar, an unhealthy, weak Body were members are not fulfilling their calling and have an unhealthy dependence on others. It creates a co-dependency between leaders and those they are called to serve. People who like co-dependency stay and the rest head for the exits. I may probably be entering a minefield here, but I have come this far so I may as well continue. Here in the Western evangelicalism – and much of the evangelical church around the world that is influenced by western theology—this misguided teaching has also developed into the model of leadership based on a business CEO model. Rather than Jesus’ model of leadership as the suffering servant, it has become one of position and power.
The knee jerk reaction of other groups to this power grab by some church leaders is to eliminate the most problematic gifts – as they see them – or at least sideline them from functioning. I would suggest that a better approach would be to seek to understand how they should function within the context of balanced New Testament Church. Many want the perks or at least the results of Jesus’ leadership, but fewer are willing to accept the level of suffering that is required of that level of calling. Now I am fully aware that this is not the kind of message this is likely to make my likes blow up—ya, no chance of this message going viral. Yet maybe in our consumer driven, modern church this is part of the problem.
As I mentioned, this unbalanced approach to the equipping gifts and leadership has created a bit of a cult of charismatic personalities in the Western church, particularly in the last decades. Unfortunately, this approach has also been exported around the world. It can take many forms, from a gifted Apostle or Prophet, famous writer/speaker, or a business CEO style of leadership. Whatever form it takes, the distinguishing feature is that these fivefold functions are used to create a hierarchy that is intended to enhance—or even demand—religious authority over others. This –and let’s call it what it is, spiritual abuse – always results in hurt and disillusioned members in the Body.
These extremes, are not the result of a flaw in the fivefold ministry model, but rather a failure to understand how they are to function within the Body of Christ. Add to this the failure of leadership to live by the Kingdom value of servanthood and mutual submission and you have a church that looks quite different than Jesus intended. To superimpose the CEO, or ultra-spiritual guru, model on the fivefold equipping gifts leads to unbiblical and life-sucking structures that were never intended—or practiced—in the early church. Ministry is intended to be given to the whole Body; everyone can, and should, participate. It is a new priesthood where the Spirit of Christ lives in each member.
The fivefold model of Ephesians 4 reflects giftings and calling. Although most of us would theologically agree with this, our models of ministry far too often perpetuate a clergy-laity divide. It is this misuse of some of the fivefold functions that has led some to reject the more controversial of the fivefold gifts – typically the apostolic and prophetic – all together. What seems to have happened is that since there has been so much misuse and abuse, a reduced model, which only emphasizes the evangelistic, pastoral, and teaching gifts, has been adopted in many churches.
So while the theology of the fivefold ministry is agreed to in most evangelical circles, fewer seem to know how to implement all of them in the church. In the last five episodes we have discussed how viewing these gifts through a Christological lens can help us come back to a balance in the Body of Christ. Fundamentally, these are a fivefold expression of Jesus’ ministry, which he then gave his Body to fulfill his mission on earth (Matt. 28:19-20).Yet, without appropriate wineskins of ministry, we have been left with a model first articulated by Clement, namely that of the pastor-teacher model.
How has this particular view influenced your own ministry? Are there any changes in thinking, attitudes or actions that you may need to make?
In the remaining episodes we want to look at some models of ministry that can help us implement this fivefold approach in our ministries and churches. I think you will not only find it thought provoking, but helpful in your particular context. Thanks for joining me.