exploring how to and not to

do relationships

by ken e. read

1|one

2|family

3|love

4|risk

5|different

6|peace

7|loyalty

8|submit

9|power

10|grace

11|discipline

12|gifts

13|blessing

9|power

In a sense, all of life can be explained with the word control. It’s all about control. Some people invade the lives of others. Like one who seizes a dog by its ears, they interfere in matters that are not their own,[i] trying to “fix” (control) other people and their problems. Without invitation, controlling people watch over your shoulder, proofread your work, redirect your ministry, and undercut your authority.

Most of us control other people, but we mean well. We don’t want others to fail. We think that we are protecting someone from being hurt, though perhaps our actions cause them to think that we lack trust in them. No parents have raised their children all the way through the teen years without wrestling with this balance of protection-versus-control.

Not only do we control others; many of us have issues of control within our own lives. At the heart of every phobia is the fear of loss of control. So, we become obsessive about checking locks or washing our hands. We can’t go out into a crowd, get onto an airplane or even ride in someone’s car. Perhaps we can’t sleep at night because we worry about everything. We either procrastinate on projects until it is too late to do them well, or become anxious and inflexible, having to plan details so far in advance that we are hard to work with. These are very different manifestations, but they all have a desire for control at their heart.

So, what is the solution to the desire for control? Of course, any child in Sunday School could guess it: Let God be the One in control. He is the Sovereign One, and He already is in control, anyway. So we can let Him take vengeance, instead of ourselves.[ii] We can sleep in the boat, knowing that we are in His will and that we will not die before the time He has set for us.[iii] We can get over the fear of men because we are living only to please an audience of One. We no longer have to protect a reputation. We can let go and let God, rather than worry and grasp even more tightly.[iv] After all, it is only when we are weak that we are strong.[v]

Therefore, the ideal we can move toward is this: let the Holy Spirit do His work of convicting other people, and live in the freedom that God has given to you. Do not add rules and laws to your life that God Himself has not placed on you. Lighten up and enjoy life on this planet, preparing yourself for eternity. Speak when the Spirit tells you to speak, and learn to know the difference between His voice and your own. Consider all that you once held dear to be mere garbage compared to knowing Christ Jesus.[vi]

Let’s look at some myths about power in the church, and see how this concept plays out.

MYTH #16: Overseers primarily give direction, stop error, and prevent roadblocks to spiritual growth.

It takes a long time to become an elder (elder means gray-haired). When you finally get there, you have an awesome responsibility. The Bible is full of some warnings against those shepherds who did not stop false teaching or confront and dismiss an evil prophet.[vii] So elders must spend time in the Word and prayer,[viii] and must not shy away from those difficult conversations in order to protect the flock. However . . .

TRUTH: Overseers are primarily servants, and the goal of shepherding is restoration, not discipline.

The myth is not wrong; it is incomplete. Eldership is not like King of the Hill, where we work to climb up, and then once we get there we protect our position. If we use the King of the Hill analogy, once he gets to the top of the hill, the scriptural elder’s job is to help pull others up to join him at the top. His role is not to judge others so as to keep them from something, but to train and equip them so that they will also be able to do that something soon. The goal is release, not control.

 servanthood, not leadership

But actually, the King of the Hill picture is backwards, anyway. The picture of so-called leadership being on top is not really a biblical picture. Shepherds are to bind up the broken, to search for and retrieve the lost, and to feed and care for the sheep.[ix] Not powerful lords, but servants to the servants. We need to invert the pyramid in our minds, and put the elders at the point at the bottom, not at the top.

Jesus said that the greatest in the Kingdom is the servant of all.[x] Ironically, Jesus didn’t tell us not to try to be the greatest in the Kingdom! Spiritual ambition is not wrong. It is a noble work to aspire to be an elder.[xi] Ambition is not wrong, but it is often misguided. We race to be the servant of everyone, and we win when we lay down our life for those whom we serve.[xii]

Jesus said that the Gentiles “lord it over” those who are under their authority.[xiii] In the Kingdom of God , leadership and authority is different than in the world. Jesus said, “You call me Master and Lord, and that is right, for so I am.”[xiv] He never abdicated His authority; in fact, the last word He had with the disciples included His claim that all authority in heaven and on earth had been given to Him.[xv] However, in the kingdom, leadership and authority is marked by laying down your life for others. Jesus illustrated it by washing the feet of the disciples, then said, “If I, then, your Master and your Lord, have washed your feet, so you ought to wash one another’s feet.”[xvi] Jesus called His disciples friends, and then demonstrated that there is no greater love than that a man lay down his life for his friends.[xvii]

Jesus demonstrated that the way up is down. The positions of control and leadership are replaced with positions of service and humility. The Kingdom is marked by dying to self and learning meekness.

Is it about leadership, or is it about servanthood? I looked in a local Christian bookstore for books with the words leader or servant in them. I found literally dozens of titles on leadership, but only one title with the word “servant” in it (and in that case, it was on “servant-leadership,” so that didn’t really count). Yet when I went to an exhaustive concordance, I found about a dozen references to “leaders” in the New Testament and well over 200 uses of the word “servant.” The American church has concluded that we need leaders, and many seem eager to fill the role. But the Bible tells us we need servants, and no one seems to be standing in line to serve. At least, not at the local Christian bookstore.

 MYTH #17: The Senior Minister has control over the discipleship for a local church.

All of the preceding truths about authority and jurisdiction in the last two chapters are important, for most of us live under some authority, and we must respect it. In the Old Testament, David refused to lift his hand against Saul the king, whom he regarded as “the Lord’s anointed” (though he himself had also been anointed). The rule is that we are not to oppose the Lord’s anointed one, or we will be disciplined by God. However . . .

TRUTH: We must understand the difference between spiritual authority and organizational authority. Run toward spiritual authority, but not toward organizational authority.

Notice that the myth uses the word control. We should not seek to control others or to exercise organizational power in the kingdom. The word “minister” means servant, not administrator. Servants do not control people. But too often the ministry has become personnel, program, and organizational management.

 recognizing spiritual authority

When I am placed into a position of leadership or authority, what should I do? The answer is that I must run toward spiritual authority,[xviii] and run away from organizational power.

Spiritual authority is what enables Paul to declare healing to a man whose legs are lame. He doesn’t pray for the man, asking that if it be God’s will the man would get better and the doctors would be skilled. No, he perceives that the man has faith to be healed and he declares it.[xix]

Spiritual authority is what Jesus had: ALL authority in heaven and on earth.[xx] That’s a lot of authority! He told Satan to be gone,[xxi] demons to leave,[xxii] trees to shrivel,[xxiii] waves to be still.[xxiv] His word always came to pass because Jesus was given all authority in spiritual realms. But Jesus never used His authority to lord it over others.

 case study: Peter

Peter demonstrated spiritual authority when the Spirit nudged him to heal a crippled beggar who had been outside the Temple gate for years. Peter said, “I have no silver or gold, but what I have I give to you: in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, get up and walk.” And he did.[xxv]

John Wesley commented about the pope in his day: “Then said Peter, Silver and gold have I none—How unlike his supposed successor! Can the bishop of Rome either say or do the same?” In other words, maybe the reason we no longer have the authority to say “Get up and walk,” is because we no longer can say, “Silver and gold have I none.” Organized religion always wars against and grieves the Holy Spirit, because as we gain earthly power, we lose spiritual power. Peter uses the opportunity to preach to the curious crowd about Jesus.

Later that afternoon, Peter is brought before the council (the ones with organizational power) to defend his actions. The religious leaders of his generation ask by what authority or in whose name Peter had done this healing.[xxvi] Seems silly, doesn't it? How could religious leaders miss the point of a generous and loving act of mercy? But that's what organized religion will do. It creates power, and power corrupts.

In his reply it says that Peter was filled with the Spirit.[xxvii] I don't know what that felt like, but it must have been an especially noteworthy moment of sensing spiritual authority in the apostle's life. Filled with the Spirit, Peter gives an answer:

"If you are asking how and why a miraculous good deed took place, then let me be clear: It is in the name of Jesus."[xxviii] It is a temptation to run from spiritual authority in the name of Jesus when, for example, the government offers money to support "faith-based charities," so long as those charities comply with certain restrictions. Money is power, and power corrupts (sometimes through restrictions). But Peter ran toward spiritual authority, regardless of the earthly consequences.

After Peter's bold defense, the council noted that he and John were unschooled men, but that they had "been with Jesus."[xxix] They had seen spiritual power like this in Jesus, and Peter sounded just like his Lord in his answer.

In my professional world, we care about academic credentials, which mostly mean secular credentials. To adapt brother Wesley’s comment, you might say, no longer can we say that we are “unschooled.” But then perhaps no longer is it clear that we have “been with Jesus.” Rather, it is clear that we have education, which often substitutes for and mimics spiritual power.

Can you imagine a slightly different set of marks that would show that Peter had been with Jesus? Jesus calls Peter into His office. “Okay, Pete, it’s time for our weekly accountability meeting. I reviewed the video of the announcements you made before the Sermon on the Mount, and it was pretty good. But you stuttered a bit at the beginning of the first service, and you kind of wandered off the topic when introducing our new extension classes. Remember, man, we have two minutes for announcements, not four. And Dude, that orange shirt has to go. We’ve talked before about how it clashes with the backdrop, and the lighting people tell me it makes them sick. You know we had over 5000 men this last meeting. We’re not running a small ministry anymore, brother, and we can’t do things slipshod like this anymore. Remember, you don’t get a second chance to make a first impression. Let’s clean it up. Well, I have another meeting to get to, so that’s it.”

No, of course that didn’t happen. It was spiritual power, not professional polish, that marked those who were with Jesus. And it is spiritual power that should mark us today. But we have stooped to professional excellence.

Organized religion can turn good guys into bad guys in any generation, because it gives power to some and rewards certain behaviors. Then those who have power (authority, respect, money) work to keep themselves in that place, and they will, in the name of serving God, oppose His very work in the next generation because it threatens their position. Examples are innumerable.

In Peter's generation, the Pharisees and Sadducees were the ones in power, and they opposed Peter. In the middle ages, the pope had the power, and though he claimed to wear the mantle of Peter, his ministry was nothing like Peter's. Today, perhaps one might say, professional pastors and professors are part of the educated elite. Do they (we) oppose the work of God in our generation?

Jesus was tempted with worldly power and wealth. It was at least one of the three most significant temptations to him. When the temptation came, Jesus stopped quoting Scripture and arguing with the devil and told him to be gone.[xxx] I wonder if many of us would see the pay, the respect and the prestige that organized religion gives as temptations. I imagine that most of us would assume that such perks indicate God’s blessings, rather than possible stumbling blocks.

In the words of the songwriter, I’d rather have Jesus than silver or gold, riches untold, worldwide fame, or anything this world affords.[xxxi] Organizational power generates potential blind spots, even in the conservative evangelical world.

I would rather choose to be with Jesus than I would to study about Him. I would rather talk five words to Jesus than to write a book about the contemporary quest for Him. I would rather walk in discerning spiritual power than to fall prey to the temptation for temporal worldly power. Let us see through the wiles of our enemy.

 running from organizational authority

Running toward spiritual authority probably makes perfect sense. But why run away from organizational authority? Why not at least reluctantly accept it when it is given?

Certainly within government and other earthly organizations, authority is needed. But when the church becomes a place that has organizational authority, it becomes dangerous.

Traditionally, popes and bishops throughout the history of the Roman Catholic Church have reluctantly accepted their positions, often refusing their title. But for the most part, that is only a polite game intended to show humility. The very fact that a person would serve in a position of so much power shows that something is amiss.

Honestly, what do you think would have been Jesus’ reaction to becoming Pope? Do you think that day after day He would wear the robe and the miter and carry the scepter around, sprinkling holy water on the masses? Do you imagine our Lord living in opulence, and justifying it all, since, after all, He is King? Or do you think Jesus would dismantle the buildings, give away the wealth, sell the Popemobile, serve the poor, wear common garbs, and confront the power structure within the organized church, including all those cardinals who had elected Him? The answer seems obvious to me.

Jesus said it enough that it seems unthinkable that He would do otherwise: the Greatest becomes the servant, removes His robe and washes feet, and lays down His life for others.

the power of the hireling pastor

Years ago, an influential man in the early American Christian churches named Alexander Campbell was opposed to having a paid minister in a church. He called them “hirelings.” A paid minister has a built-in conflict of interests to make a church grow in order to provide his own pay. And Campbell observed that when trouble came to a church, a hireling will naturally seek (or be forced to find) a ministry elsewhere, abandoning the sheep for an easier congregation. The troubled church then hires a new worker to take his place, hoping that the next man can provide the right leadership to turn things around. The solution, Campbell thought, was a plurality of elders who served as long-term, life-long shepherds. Campbell 's thinking has become very rare today.[xxxii]

Where is the biblical justification for a one-man pastor in the first place?

I see practical (pragmatic) advantages to using the one-man leadership model, but it takes verbal gymnastics to justify any one-man pulpits in the New Testament.[xxxiii] It seems to me that if a church would truly start to function in community, it would change things tremendously. Instead of one man going up on the mountain to hear from God and deliver “the” message to the people week by week (what we might call the Mosaic Model), maybe churches (or at least their leaders in plural) could together seek God's direction and leading.[xxxiv]

Most church planters and senior ministers talk about doing ministry as a team. But what they mean is "You guys help me." Many senior pastors are badly egocentric, with an unrecognized desire to control. He keeps the saints dependent upon himself, rather than serving others and inviting those who will to join him in humble ministry. One reason he doesn't recognize that he is out of balance is because the single-pastor model is the only one he has ever seen.

Though they would not use the term, most senior pastors view themselves as benevolent dictators. They dictate the programs, the teaching, and the direction for the church, and their motives are benevolent. What makes them different from a tyrannical despot is their internal motive, but not their style of leadership.

The center of the point is not that a pastor should not have power or authority. The Bible provides support for a number of models of structure for a congregation. The center of the point is that a pastor should use his power and authority to empower others. The apostle Paul said of himself that though he had apostolic authority to demand obedience, and to command a salary, he had surrendered his rights for the sake of the gospel.[xxxv] It was in the best interest of the church for him to yield his control.

If you were to ask most preachers if they are fully committed to maturing the saints, they would probably answer, “Of course I am. That is my life’s calling.” Then if you were to ask if they agreed that those who teach learn best, they would say, “Yes.” (Bear with me now). Then ask him, “So who preached this last Sunday at your church?” He would reply, “Well, I did.” “How about the week before that?” “That was me.” “And the week before that, and before that?” “I was in a series and didn’t want to break the flow. But last summer I took two weeks of vacation in a row, and had my associate preach one of the weeks and brought in a supply preacher the other week.”

This pastor believes that he is using his pulpit to train the men in his church about Christian living, but he is not. If, after several years, he is still the lone voice for God, I would assert that this preacher is not really committed to maturing the saints. Rather, he is committed to keeping them immature enough to be dependent on him. Job security. Hireling.

empowering the unempowered

The empowered always must yield power to the unempowered. So the pastor who is committed to maturing his people might be more effective spending his time sharing resources and training his men to preach, rather than delivering a sermon every week. Just imagine the spiritual maturity that would take place over years of such a ministry! John Wesley advocated a system similar to this one in the early days of Methodism. The newest and weakest member would teach the lesson in the small group session, while the others trained and prayed for him or her. Thus, Methodism grew exponentially in its first century and changed the spiritual face of England , because they were effective in making disciples.

So I recommend that every church have a worship team, not just a worship minister. Also a preaching/teaching team, not just a preaching minister. Or perhaps I am recommending that those worship or preaching ministers, after being hired, live out a different model for ministry and share the "power" that was given to them.

It’s fine to offer a bus ride to someone, but if you set the routes and drive the bus, don’t be surprised if they choose not to ride. Make a note of it: until the church makes its leadership multi-ethnic (or multi-cultural, or multi-generational), the congregation will not become diverse. Until those with power give their power away, the followers will always be dependent on the leaders.

Jesus was empowered, but He surrendered all of His power to give His privilege to us. He became the servant of all, put us in the driver’s seat, gave us all we needed, and then left us with His Spirit to train us in how to get there. In the Kingdom of God , there is only one direction for power or control to move.

Jesus, not Pharisees

The Pharisees had memorized the Law and the Prophets, and they were earnestly dedicated to carrying out every nuance of the Law. They were very popular with the people. Scribes, likewise, were committed to preserving, copying and teaching the Word of God. We owe them much respect in this sense.

Jesus acknowledged that the Pharisees and teachers of the law had a certain amount of spiritual authority, for they sat in Moses’ seat.[xxxvi] But Jesus had nothing good to say about Pharisees. He called them a brood of vipers,[xxxvii] blind guides,[xxxviii] sons of hell,[xxxix] and hypocrites.[xl] They were not people who were mostly right, but missed one point!

The truth is, they were rotten. Somewhere along the way, they had missed the point of the Law. They thought that by keeping it, they could be good enough for the Kingdom of God . They never saw that the Law was designed to bring them to their knees in powerless surrender, seeking a Gospel of grace. Instead, they thought that they were in and others were out.

But something in them was completely turned around. Jesus healed someone on a Sabbath day, and it made them plot to kill Him. Did they not remember, “Thou shalt not kill” is one of those Ten Commandments that they were trying to preserve? What happened?

Could it be that we are all Pharisees, and to such a degree that none of us recognize it, anymore than the Pharisees in Jesus’ day recognized their own sin? We don’t see it in ourselves because when we look around at other modern American Christians, this is all that we see. Could it be that we are studying the rulebook of the game, but none of us really know how the game is played, because we’ve never really seen it? To borrow from my opening statement, could it be that the church is so subnormal that if it ever became normal, we would think it is abnormal? Yes, all of this could be true, and more.

The Pharisees were not good people gone awry. And maybe, neither are most of us. Perhaps that’s why there are so many problems in the church today, because our churches are filled with people who are better Pharisees than we are Christians. It’s worth considering. We imagine ourselves to be more humble than we are.

What is the solution to the problem of power? Give it away. Be the servant of all. Empty yourself. Humble yourself in the sight of the Lord. Choose the lowest seats. Allow yourself to be wronged. Count it all joy when others speak against you. Lose. Be crucified. And build up others. Do for them all that your flesh would wish them to do for you. Encourage. Give away. Pray. And Lift up Christ. Let Jesus be the focus of your attention and conversation.

When we learn that our mission and calling is about spiritual authority, we are ready to be used by God. And when we discern the danger of power in organizational authority, we are ready to stop getting in His way.