ON BEING ORDAINED

I believe it is pretty clear that there is no method or form offered in the New Testament for what we call 'ordination.' In fact, I think it is clear that the biblical materials do not view ordination the way it is presently viewed in modern times at all. No instructions were given for who, how, or why anyone was to be ordained. The best we can do is derive from the meaning of the Greek word, cheirotonein, that people were to be "appointed" [The meaning of the word] for certain ministries [such as elders in Acts 14:23] and then we can find a few occasions in the text where that was done, thus, giving us an example. It could very well be that the idea of being ordained to the "gospel ministry" is an invention of human culture beginning long after biblical times. The writers of the New Testament surely were silent on that.

They did however, seem to view the "laying on of hands" as a method of recognition.
The Greek phrase "Epititheio tas cheiras" [to lay hands on] occurs five times in Acts in ways that might be indicating a setting apart or appointment to a particular ministry. As an example I'll mention three of them. In Acts 6:1-6 the seven servants were set aside for practical ministry. Acts 9:17 shows Paul was set apart for his work of preaching that began in verse 20. Who doesn't know of the incident in Acts 13:1-3 where Paul and Barnabas were set aside for their missionary work.

Basically what we see in the biblical materials is the recognition that a person possessed certain spiritual gifts and character that were necessary to do a specific needed ministry. The church then commissioned that person by the laying on of hands for that specific task. The appointment could be to preaching to serving as an elder to going on a missionary journey to feeding widows who were being neglected. In its simplest form, ordination could be defined as the church’s symbolic recognition of what the Holy Spirit was doing or wants done in the life of the church using people to do it for the benefit of the others.

One final thought. It should be noted that the Bible gives no specific instructions as to whether women should or should not be ordained. The refusal to "set aside by laying on of hands for a specific ministry" [The biblical meaning of ordination] of women would have to be based on an interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:12 that I believe is generally totally misunderstood. AND one would have to hold to the "office" concept of Pastor or Deacon with their understanding of 1 Timothy 2:12 to refuse women ordination to those "offices."

The truth of the matter is, using the biblical definition, there is no clear command OR condemnation in the New Testament for the ordination of ANYONE and the word "OFFICE" isn't used at all. [Except in the KJV where it is a mistranslation of the words] The scriptures simply indicate we are to recognize need and the people in the body who are gifted and anointed to meet that need and set them apart perhaps by the laying on of hands, so they can minister to that need...regardless of gender.

I do realize this may be much like the modern understanding of how to do church [Body-life] that we hold to that is so foreign to the biblical text and yet would need a miracle or major catastrophe to change. Ordination as we know it would take another miracle to be changed back into the biblical model. Until then I guess we'll all do the best we can with what we've got...awaiting that miracle or catastrophe. Frankly, I think either one would be for our good and His Glory.

THIS THING OF BEING A PASTOR

W.B. Johnson was the first President of the Southern Baptist Convention which was founded in 1845. In 1846 he wrote this after quoting a specific passage of scripture, which I failed to write down for my post, and was recorded in an article that I discovered written by an Internet friend in a research paper on the subject of ordination. The following is that statement..with some of my explanation enclosed. Johnson said..

“In a review of these Scriptures, we have these points clearly made:

1. That over each church of Christ [local church belonging to Christ, not a denomination] in the apostolic age, a plurality of rulers was ordained who were designated by the terms elder, bishop, overseer, pastor, with authority in the government of the flock.

2. That this authority involved NO [emphasis mine] legislative [to enact rules/guidelines] power or right, but that it was ministerial [serving] and executive [oversight] only, and that, in its exercise, the elders were not to lord it over God's heritage, but as examples to lead the flock to the performance of duty ...

3. That these elders were all equal in rank [position] and authority, no one having a preeminence over the rest. This satisfactorily appears from the fact that the same qualifications were required of all, so that though some labored in word and doctrine, and others did not, the distinction between them WAS NOT IN RANK, but in THE CHARACTER OF THEIR SERVICE..[Emphasis mine.]

4. That the members of the flock were encouraged to follow and imitate the faith of their elders, with due consideration [watching with knowledge] of the end of their conversation, [The way they lived] for Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and today, and forever...” [End of Dr, Johnson's statement.]

It is obvious to me that Southern Baptist people/churches, as a whole, have sure departed from the description of Church leadership taught by the first President of the Convention from his view of scripture.

It is apparent that Dr. W. B. Johnson believed there was no such thing as a one man pastoral role. Just as apparent is the fact that he believed there was no dictatorial authority vested in an "office" of "Pastor." We can even safely say that the idea of "do not question the authority [Pastor] God has placed over you" was foreign to his understanding of scripture. Otherwise there would be no reason to "Watch the way they lived" before imitating [following] them.

He [Johnson] DID believe the leaders of a fellowship were to be respected and followed [willingly] with an eye to testing their walk as believers. But there was no blind mindless sheep following a Shepherd BECAUSE he is the Pastor in Johnson's way of understanding the scriptural ministry of pastor.

I would add that the qualifications for that ministry had nothing to do with degrees, seminaries, or training. The qualifications were of character and conduct not sheepskins signed by a Seminary President. I have one of those but it has nothing to do with biblical qualifications for the ministry of Pastor/Elder or whether or not I'm qualified to pastor a fellowship.

I think all of you are aware that my view of Pastors/Elders or any biblical subject for that matter is held BECAUSE I believe I see it in scripture and NOT because some SBC leader, past or present, says it a certain way or culture wants it a certain way. Some of my friends see those same scriptures differently by the way. But that's the joy of our walk. The possibility of being wrong in our understanding but knowing that one day we will ALL fully and correctly understand.

It is interesting, however, to hear the views of a man who was with the SBC from it's beginning and to see how we've changed. Perhaps NOT for the better.

Paul B

REX AND SHERRY HOLT

I have nothing to say today. But I'm asking you to read my wife's blog about our friends Rex and Sherry Holt here..http://rebel4reality.blogspot.com/ It is worth the time.

STIRRING THE OATMEAL....ENJOYING THE ORDINARY.

I'm going to wax very personal here. So..If personal things bore you please move on to someone else's blog. You will be very disappointed with this one today.

I used a phrase [not original with me] when I wrote about our anniversary recently that I've been asked about. In fact, two phrases were used and asked about. One was "stirring the oatmeal." The other was the altering of an old cliche to make it say "familiarity breeds respect." "Familiarity breeds contempt" was, of course, the original way it was said. I'll write about that later perhaps.

The first was used to show how ordinary things can be turned into an adventure rather than waiting for only the extraordinary things to be that. Who experiences many "extraordinary things"anyway? Much of daily living is lived in experiencing mundane often boring things that are more routine than exciting.

What celebrating the ordinary does is it keeps us appreciating what we have and are experiencing rather than always hoping something will happen that is exciting. It keeps us from wondering what we're missing out on in life. We're not missing out on anything. That's the point. Life is fun and appreciated where we are and with what is happening.

It is very similar to the old idea of "stop and smell the roses." Some people live their life without ever really enjoying it. They may even miss seeing what they have and waste their time longing for what they think other people have or are afraid they have missed out on. What a waste of time and energy and of life itself.

Mary and I HAVE had extraordinary times together. We've pastored large, exciting churches as well as small ones which were just as thrilling. We've gone to meetings sponsored by the multi-billion dollar Corporation for which she works. We've traveled to places like Hawaii, Israel, London, Egypt, not to mention trips on our motorcycle to Colorado, Bear Tooth pass in Montana, Yellowstone and Jackson Hole Wyoming. Those trips can ONLY be described as extraordinary when you're on a motorcycle.

Add to that the REALLY extraordinary events we've shared like the birth/marriages of children and grandchildren and who's to doubt that some really great things have been experienced by the two of us.

But, generally, our days are made up of the ordinary and it is the celebration of those times that make life far more exciting. This, especially as age begins to dictate the slowing down of extraordinary times/events. In fact, the older one gets the more likely it is that funerals become more common place than do weddings and births or travel and sight-seeing.

This is when having learned to celebrate the "stirring of the oatmeal" [What's more mundane than that?] comes into play. But I do think it takes learning this early in life on rather than later. You don't magically wake up one day doing it. It takes a commitment, time, and it takes practice.

Let me give an example. Mary's coffee. What I mean is this. Mary works for a major Publishing company and offices about a mile from our house. When I'm home from traveling myself, which is a good bit these days, I take her to her office, walk to Starbucks, three doors down, get a tall, mild, with room, cup of coffee. I then doctor it with a little sweetener, a little non-fat milk and walk the few feet to her office where she's unlocked the front door. I step in, she comes to me, I get a kiss, and she gets her coffee.

Now that's celebrating a cup of coffee if I do say so myself. This is every morning unless Providence dictates otherwise. When I can't, she jokingly wonders how she will get coffee that day. She doesn't know how to make it taste right she says.

Another example. When I'm gone on a meeting, two, three or four days at a time, it varies, and I get home I find something. The morning papers I've missed reading are at my place at the table, along with my personal mail, and a note has been written welcoming me home [With a few words that are private telling me how MUCH she has missed me.] and left on the cabinet that I see as I enter.

This is the moment I sense I'm REALLY home and I find relaxing feelings starting to take shape in my shoulders and back. Try it sometime. It's worth leaving briefly just to get to come home. Of course you have to learn to celebrate it like we do.

I might add that when she travels the same thing happens when she arrives home only the thing she finds is perhaps a clean house or groceries bought or a meal cooking. That says the same to her that my papers and mail do to me.

I could multiply these examples by telling about our noon dip in the pool during the summer time as I pick her up at 11:45am and have a protein drink ready. We float, we sun, we laugh, and she drives back to work by herself. [I'm going to be too busy in the pool to take her you understand. ;)] Or, a simple thing like her calling me "mister." Nothing else..just "mister" which I happen to be crazy about. Don't ask me why? I just am.

I could tell of our forgetting things as we get older but celebrate it by jokingly saying "There she goes" [Meaning she's losing it.] or "There he goes," depending on which one forgot something. This, instead of dreading getting older or getting upset that we are. We just are. And we are forgetful. "Celebrate it" is our motto. And we do.

I could even tell you about the moment we get in bed every night and Mary snuggles in close to my back. There is a small thing she says that makes me laugh every time. I will leave unshared what she says since it is personal and of a nature that would draw a censure from some I'm sure. But what do they know!! They just need to get a life. ;)

We started learning this several years ago when we would take trips and Mary would navigate while I drove. We'd REALLY get upset and even fight if wrong instructions, turns, or whatever happened to be given/made. One day we decided we would travel with the philosophy.."There are no mistakes, only ways of going and doing things we hadn't planned on. So we'll celebrate the unplanned." [Mistakes]

You ought to try it sometime. It will revolutionize any trip you take together. It carried over into other things for us and most little things have become an adventure. "Stirring the oatmeal" we have found can be a great thing. Try it sometime.

I do know that one day, for the spouse that remains, if that time comes, it will likely be those ordinary things that were shared and laughed about that will be remembered with misty eyes and smiles, rather than the trips.

By the way, if this is all too childish to really be right and is kind of dorky...don't tell me. I'm having too much fun thinking this way instead of being mature and as miserable as some people are.


Paul B.