Because a man becomes an elder does not mean that man ceases to be a disciple. His being an elder does not mean he stops learning or stops thinking. In fact, because of an elder's "exposures" in his work as an elder, as a disciple he may increase studying and thinking. In this is revealed one of the great ironies in many congregations.
(a) The congregation by choice makes a man an elder because of his Christian maturity. (Carefully considered, that means he likely has reached understandings from scripture that are not held in common with the congregation's majority. However, the congregation likes the influence of those understandings on him. The congregation likes who he is so much they want his leadership. To the majority, he symbolizes spiritual maturity. He demonstrates values consistent with Jesus Christ's focus.)
They want his leadership in what? In buying land? In caring for a building? In allocating funds? In holding positions consistent with the views of less spiritually mature people? Or, leadership in guiding people to a more mature relationship with Jesus Christ?
(b) What too commonly happens: a man becomes an elder because the congregation finds his spiritual maturity encouraging, and (once he is appointed an elder) the same congregation censors the same man because his spiritual maturity does not champion (1) the views of the majority or (2) the views of a vocal group.
That situation produces fascinating questions. Is twenty-first century congregational leadership about leading people (through scriptural understanding) to a closer relationship with Jesus Christ and others in Christ, or is twenty-first century congregational leadership about church politics and learning to be adept at "playing the political game"? Is it about pursuing the fullness of life in Jesus Christ or about defending the views of generations before us? If a study of scripture requires "me" to abandon a view held by my grandfather and father, should "I" champion the scriptural view or my heritage? Should I force scripture to contort to my inherited view, or should I let scripture speak for itself?
Commonly, these questions reflect the dilemma of the elder devoted to scripture. As he continues to learn as a disciple, he often understands (a) we do not ask the right questions, (b) we do not know all the questions that should be asked, (c) and we often assume Jesus' focus, and thereby justify imposing our views on Jesus. Thus an elder devoted to learning wants to lead the congregation to a better understanding of Jesus without choking people by demanding they understand Jesus' values that they do not yet understand (by reason of immaturity).
This frustrating dilemma is not a twenty-first century problem. It existed in the first century (and likely every century since). Read of Peter's struggle in grasping something from Jesus that Peter never considered by reading Acts 10. Then read Galatians 2:11-14 to note how NOT to deal with the dilemma. Read of Paul's struggle with a similar dilemma in 1 Corinthians 9. Read Romans 14 to see the impact of the dilemma on Paul's work. The Christian who is devoted to spiritual growth and development always assumes the risk of being misunderstood. Who are prominent among those who are misunderstood? These often are Christians who determine faithfulness by discipleship, not by customs or habits.
Every person who is in Christ has a right to personal views. Consider scriptures such as Romans 12:21, 14:10-13, 14:16, 14:20, 14:22, 1 Timothy 1:18-19, Titus 1:15, and 1 Peter 3:13-16. However, when should personal views become public demands?
Every Christian faces the troubling decision that asks: "When should I demand that others conform to my study and understanding? With what attitude should such matters be approached? Should 'faithfulness' be attached to agreement with my conclusions?" As a Christian, you must understand those are NOT easy questions with easy answers.
As an example, think about your general response when approaching unknown, never met people ("be direct and tell them what they need to hear"). Compare that general response with the approach you want to be taken with a person you love ("be careful and do not unnecessarily offend them"). As one who has spent a lifetime working with people, I assure you there are striking differences in our impersonal "desire" when approaching unknown people and our personal "desire" when approaching a person we know and love. Commonly, the comparison is between "directness" and "loving understanding."
Suggestion to congregations: appoint men as elders whose spiritual maturity you respect--even in difficult situations. If the congregation cannot respect the man in difficult situations, do not appoint him. Do not appoint him because he is a good, mature disciple before becoming an elder, and then expect him to suspend study and thinking when he serves as an elder.
Suggestion to Christian men: if you are approached to be an elder, and (a) you do not sense such respect for you exists, and (b) you easily are offended if your motives are questioned, do not assume the work of an appointed elder.
Respect for the person and respect for his motives are critical to congregational leadership.
For Thought and Discussion
Link to Teacher's Guide
Lesson 10