Last week I began listening to a series of teachings on Shared Congregational Leadership. This course is being taught in order to give an overview of the model of leadership in this particular community. The goal is to identify men that have the desire and fit the requirements to be leaders in this community. While listening to the second class in this series, the instructor made a very troubling comment. Most of the time when I hear aspects of teachings that I do not agree with, I let them roll off because they are usually common areas of disagreement. But this one comment in particular, really grieved my heart.
The teacher began to discuss the role and responsibilities of the elders and their relationship with the flock or the community. The teacher explained the importance of the elders relationship with Adonai. Before they can effectively lead and protect the flock, they must have a good relationship with Him. I agree with this statement. If the leaders of the community are not walking above reproach, they will not be able to function properly in their role and the community will suffer.
Then the discussion moved to the sheep, the members of the community. The comment was made that the sheep did not belong to the congregational leader but to Adonai. I agree with this statement too. I have not met a congregational leader that would disagree about the sheep, the flock, the Church (Ekklesia), belonging to Yeshua (Matt 16:18-19). We are the Body of Messiah.
Then the troubling comment was made. The teacher made an abrupt change of direction in the discussion. A distinction was made between the flock and the church, between the people and the corporation. One was said to belong to Adonai and other did not. Here is the comment:
Someone asked me, “You think that this Church is yours?”
And I answered him, “Yes, it is mine. It is not the sheep’s, it is mine. My wife and I worked hard for this church with our own blood, sweat and tears for many, many, many years. We assumed all risks and liabilities and we went without wages off and on for many years. Yes, this Church is ours and not the sheep’s.”
He was upset about my answer. But what he didn’t understand was this; the sheep belong to God but the corporation does not. Jesus’ name is not on it. Do you think the State is going to come after JESUS if something happens to THIS corporation? NO, they will come after ME! My name is on the corporation! I assume the responsibilities! I will go to jail, I will get fined, or whatever!
So of course the sheep belong to God. They are His, we are just under-shepherds; but if you create a club, called a 501(c)(3), and you have a board and you have officers; that [organization] that helps facilitate fellowship is a different matter.
The sheep belong to God, they are His. We are responsible to minister to them [and there are] a lot of different ways to do that, [and there are] a lot of different models for eldership.
I had to listen to this part of the recording over and over again because I thought that I had misheard what was being said. But no, I heard correctly. Then I thought that maybe the instructor was using a play-on-words or a metaphor in order to emphasis his point. No, this was not the case either. The teacher made it perfectly clear that the sheep, the community, did not own the corporation but he and his wife did. Nobody in the community could make the same claim. It was their hard work and their sacrifices that established this church; therefore, it belonged to them.
He did, however, make it clear that the sheep do belong to Adonai; but he also made it clear that the corporation does not, it belongs to him and his wife. It was this brazen statement that jarred me. Just because a church receives authorization through government organizations to operate as a non-profit does not mean that Adonai did not establish it. If Adonai can raise up nations, He can also raise up churches. He is the Sovereign Ruler of the universe. The teacher also stated the obvious: Yeshua's name was not on the 501(c)(3) documents but his name was. I'm sure this was a sarcastic statement designed to get a laugh from the class; but in reality, as believers in Messiah, our name on a document should reflect the name of Yeshua. We are His representatives in the world but not of the world. His statements made it obvious that this teacher has a great fear of the government and highly regards their approval as a non-profit organization. (side note: Why would someone be afraid of the State coming after them if they are not doing anything wrong?) After listening carefully several times to what was being taught, I considered the idea of private ownership of a church.
If a person owns a business, they usually run their own business. Likewise, if someone believes that they own a church, they will run the church as their own. In a business model it is highly unlikely that the business owner would give equal ownership and authority to their employees. Likewise, if someone owns and operates a church the leadership structures that they put in place will not jeopardize their ownership and authority; not to mention their income. This is especially true if this person, or couple, truly believes that it was their own hard work and sacrifice that built their church. They will do whatever they can to safeguard what they worked hard for; they will make certain that they will not lose their investment. This is what I hear communicated by this teacher in his comments.
In the Torah Resource article A Community or a Congregation? For What are We Striving?, author Tim Hegg explains the difference between the modern church ‘congregational’ model and the more biblically patterned Torah ‘community’ model:
At the risk of being overly simplistic, I would say that a "congregation" is essentially the product of our Western, Greek worldview, while a "community" is based in an Eastern, Hebraic worldview. For the "congregation," truth is what we know (cognitive); for a "community," truth is what we demonstrate by our lives (relational). For a "congregation," the core values (truth) are summed up in a doctrinal statement; for a "community," the core values (truth) are seen in the life of the community.
Based on this definition one can conclude that running a church according to the Torah is relational and running a church according to the 501(c)(3) Non-Profit Bylaws is cognitive. Running a community according to the Torah includes the people by getting them involved because they are co-owners. Running a congregation according to the Bylaws, like a business, does not allow co-ownership nor does it require involvement of the people.
Tim Hegg makes another important point in the Torah Resource Yeshiva Course, I Will Build My Ekklesia, An Introduction to Ecclesiology. This time he is speaking about the differences in the leadership structures of the 'congregation' and the 'community' models:
"Leadership in a Torah Community must be in plurality. It will not work any other way; not for a 'community'. It will for a 'congregation'; a single man can build his own kingdom if he is an executive type, but he will not build a community that has generational longevity and THAT is what we must be doing."
In a 'community' the ownership and authority are shared. In a 'congregation' the ownership and authority are under the control of one person, the senior pastor.
I find it interesting that someone teaching a class on shared leadership would emphasize the fact that they, him and his wife, are the ones who worked hard for and made personal sacrifices to build the church that they are leading. After making these comments, I find it hard to believe that they would allow anyone else to step in and become equal partners with equal authority. If they are careful in making it crystal clear who established this church, I doubt they will share the ownership of it. In the end, they will not install a true plurality of equal leaders to run the church; but instead, Bylaws in order to run their church like a business with the pastor/CEO at the helm. It sounds to me that the teacher of this online course, the owner of this church, is building his own kingdom. Unfortunately no matter how good his intentions are, like Tim Hegg said, this church will not have longevity. Once the pastor is gone, so is his vision and the driving force behind his organization.
Since this is only the second class in this series, one cannot help but wonder how this important detail regarding the ownership of this church will steer the remainder of the lessons and more importantly how it will affect their method and structure of church leadership. I am curious to listen to more of their teachings but at the same time, I do not want to waste my time if more of this is to be expected. The most frightening thing about this whole ordeal was that nobody in the class challenged the teacher on his comments. Either these future church leaders did not understand what was being taught or they were in agreement with it or it went over their heads. I hope for the latter.
So, who owns the Church, what is the Church, and who runs the Church? Here is a quick overview of how I see it:
1) Messiah owns the church. He paid for it with His blood (Acts 20:28).
2) We cannot separate the people from the church because the people ARE the church; they are the bride of Messiah (I Cor. 6:11, I Cor. 6:20, Eph.5:26-27, I Pet. 1:18-19).
3) The people through the designated elders (as they follow the Torah while being led by the Ruach) run the church (Acts 14:23, 1 Tim 3:1-13, Titus 1:5-9). Paul instructed Titus to establish elders, not 501(c)(3) corporations, in every city. A non-profit corporation is only the means for us, here in our modern society, to establish and run a church as a tax-exempt entity. 501(c)(3) status should not be our focus or our goal nor should we lord our Bylaws over the church body. Our approval comes from Hashem and from Him alone and not through our non-profit status. In my opinion, this 501(c)(3) non-profit stuff is nothing more than a distraction. Who cares about being tax-exempt anyway? Even our accountant who has worked with churches for many years does not see a benefit in the 501(c)(3) status and actually advises against it.
I pray that we never get to the point where we are claiming ownership of and taking credit for establishing The Front Range Messianic Community. We see the hand of Adonai in every aspect of our fledgling community. Are we working hard for this community? Yes. Are we making sacrifices for this community? Yes. But the work and the sacrifices are all for His glory not ours. We have done nothing for this community apart from Him. This community is His work with our hands.
I cannot help but remember in the Torah when the children of those who died in the wilderness were about to enter the land. Adonai warned them not to forget who was about to make them prosper. It would not be the work of their own hands that would bring them wealth. Their wealth and provision would come from Hashem, the very One who freed them from of the bondage of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. (Deut 8:11-20)
As we prosper,
May we remember Hashem, the one who provides for our needs.
May we remain His humble servants.
May He keep us from the snare of pride.
- mdg
Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.
- Proverbs 16:18
---•---
~
Definitions:
Ekklesia (pronounced ek-klay-see'-ah) is The Greek word used in the Bible for church, which actually means “assembly” or literally “called out ones.” It is made up of the two Greek words, EK—“out of,” and KALEO—“shall be called.”
Referenced Material:
A Community or a Congregation? For What are We Striving?,
Tim Hegg (Torah Resource, 2007)
I Will Build My Ekklesia: An Introduction to Ecclesiology,
Tim Hegg (Torah Resource, 2009)
Related Links:
Elders or Board of Directors?
Whose Church Is It Anyway?
Whose Church Is It, Anyway? (PDF, 127 KB)
Who Owns A Church?
Who Owns the Church?
Who owns your congregation?
-
No comments:
Post a Comment