"For they watch for your soul"

Spiritual Authority 3

“Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.” Hebrews  13:17

Particularly in fundamentalist circles a verse like this can become a license for leaders to spiritually abuse people.  In my professional opinion most spiritual abuses are justified through a misuse of Scripture.  There is a real danger that when we correct a misuse we may fall into the trap of advocating for 'no use.'  I  believe misuses are best corrected by implementing proper use as opposed to abandoning all use.   

So what does this text really mean?  How should we interpret this verse? How do I apply a verse like this to my life? 

First, this text is not giving authority carte blanche to a leader (read ch. 13).  Hebrews 13:17 was God’s inspired Word to a community of believers who lived in a large city and had a rich Jewish heritage.  The apostle validates the leaders of this specific community of believers.  His letter is not to all leaders whoever and wherever they find themselves, but specifically to those who oversaw the “Hebrews” community.   In other words, he knows these leaders and is vouching for their character, orthodoxy, and heart.  If he didn’t know them his recommendation would have been invalid.  Hence, to a specific audience, whose leaders he knows and trusts he says “obey” and “submit.” 

The leaders of the “Hebrews” community (I will refer to them as such since that is the name of this epistle, but we do not know who the recipients were) were not self-appointed dictators.  They were men who went through an approval process. The vetting process for leadership would have included something like that seen in First Timothy (13:23 indicates that Timothy is connected with this church).  In other words, these men are not self-appointed, self-autonomous, self-ruling men.  They are not merely accountable to the brethren in Jerusalem, but they are accountable to the people they serve, and they are accountable to each other. These leaders would have been trained and tested.  They would have studied as if their approval depended on it (2 Timothy 2:15); they would have been filled with love; and would have had an authentic relationship with the Writer.  The context of this chapter makes it clear that the leaders had lived in such a way that their lives reflected hospitality, love, exemplary behavior and a faith worthy of imitating.  These leaders would have been accountable to their local body of elders as well as the leaders of the global church.

Let me suggest that we put verse 17 in the context of verses 7-8 “7Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith.”  Here we see that a church leader's authority is not intrinsic to the leader.  The authority is intrinsic to the Word of God.  The leaders authority remains as long as the word he speaks is the Word of God.  These leaders spoke the Word, and the Word is authoritative.  They are not remembered for their opinions or theories or words.  They are remembered and commended for speaking God’s word and having a good testimony with their life. Obedience in the context of this chapter was imitating the faith of the leaders while considering the outcome of their life.

Second, this doesn’t say obey your leader (singular).  The early church centered its life and government on community not personality.   Read Acts 15 for a real-time picture of how disagreements were handled, how authority was viewed and submitted to, and how much authority the individual had.  They believed that God was in the midst of them when they were in community (“two or three gathered in my name there am I in your midst”).  Paul says to the Corinthians that when prophets prophesy one should speak while the others sit and judge whether the prophet is accurate or not.  In order for the prophecy to be validated as accurate there needed to be two or three witnesses agreeing to the veracity of the word.   

Third, and beyond the scope of this article is the whole issue of what was a leader?  What we call leaders today and what the Hebrews called leaders may be vastly different.  In fact, the difference may not just be by degrees but polar extremes.  Hebrews may have read something like, “obey your spiritual servants and submit to those who serve you.”   Perhaps the reason the writer instructs them in submission is because their love and kindness had been taken advantage of.  Remember leadership by Jesus’ standards was more like followership.  It was upside down, counter cultural, radically correcting the leadership models and paradigms of Jesus’ day.  We don’t seem to get this.  Our leadership basically comes either from contemporary scholarship of Harvard Business School, pop-culture of John Maxwell or the arrogance of the autonomous self.   Jesus’ was serval and communal.  His leadership was hewn from bended knees, broken voice, and wounded hands.  Leadership wasn’t about scepters and gavels, but crosses and nails.

Fourth, by calling the church to submit to community leaders the Writer is bringing awareness to communal health.  Without a system of accountability and communal order chaos and injustice will rule the day.   The “obey” and “submit” is couched in the context of brotherly love, hospitality, social justice, purity, and fiscal moderation.   The leaders of this local assembly were striving for community and the apostle calls the Hebrews to obey and submit as a means of achieving unified hospitality and justice.  The writer strives for an outcome of joy and gratitude.  This last point really needs to be underscored.  The purpose of authority in this chapter is to keep joy and gratitude alive in the community and remove grief and complaint.  The Hebrews come to see the value of harmony and submission as a means of bringing joy.

So where does that leave us?  Since it was written to a specific group of leaders other than us should we dismiss this?  I would argue—no.   Value can be found at the heart of this text. Unity depends on texts like this.  And it is true church leaders watch for the souls of believers.

I tell my children to listen to their teachers and obey them.  The notion is that schoolteachers are qualified in the fields they labor.  A teacher devotes her life to the academic upbringing of children; she knows how to prepare a 4th grader for life at the 4th grade level.  If Jerusalem, my daughter, does not obey and submit to Miss Chanel, Jeru’s 4th grade teacher, Jeru’s academic and social development will be hindered and postponed. Therefore, Jeru heed’s her teacher’s words.  Julie and I support Miss Chanel, helping where we can, reinforcing what she says.   When Miss Chanel gave Jeru a 20-page project on the Chumash Indians, which required numerous visits to SF Library, interviews with Chumash chiefs, and research on the web, we obeyed and completed the project.  Why?  Miss Chanel watches out for Jerusalem’s academic development.  If we disobeyed, Jerusalem would fail and stunt her growth. As long as Miss Chanel maintains her teacher credentials, follows the school’s set curricula (since each grade has to work together to prepare students for succeeding grades), and works within the common guidelines of human decency and law we obey and submit.    But Miss Chanel doesn’t have authority carte blanche. 

Last year one of our teachers said something negative and discouraging to one of our kids.  Or at least that is what we were told.  In a spirit of meekness I asked the teacher about this, questioned their actions and made it clear that I disagreed.  The teacher explained what had happened and apologized.  She was accountable to me as a parent and my child was accountable to her as a student.  Is there anyone in this equation that is not accountable?  No!  If I refuse to take my children to school or refuse to give them an education I will be held accountable to the state of California, and the state of California is accountable to the people.  So no one is unaccountable.   

Now as it relates to matters of faith and the practice of following Jesus the church has been served with servants who are well versed in the ways of faith, who have proved themselves in their conduct and are submitted and accountable, who know the Manual of Life and have studied and researched how to interpret this Book of Faith.  These servant-pastors have prepared their lives to serve in this capacity.   And just as a school teacher provided order and discipline, instruction and help in the areas of academic development so a ministry servant provides help and service in the arena of faith and spirituality, salvation and communal belonging.   And by the same token just as a school teacher must remain accountable to the curriculum, so a leader in the community of faith must remain accountable to Scripture.   As long as the leaders teach a sound exegesis of Scripture, live what they preach, follow an orthodoxy of faith, and are ethical and decent, respectful and followers of peace these leaders should be followed.

For teachers and doctors, dentists and coaches we know what to expect, but what does that look like in a church family?  What qualifies a pastor to serve a congregation?  What credentials should a minister possess?  It is no longer enough to say you have a license, are ordained, or subscribe to a particular belief.  If I were looking for a community of believers for my family here is my short list of qualifications I consider indispensable to the calling of a pastor in 21st century America.  These are the criteria by which I would measure the legitimacy of a pastor's calling:

• Spiritual Intimacy.  Is s/he passionate about his/her relationship with Jesus Christ, I mean really passionate?  Does s/he seek to be a disciple first and foremost?  Can you see Jesus Christ in him/her? Is s/he secure in his/her relationship with Jesus Christ?  If there are any spiritual insecurities it will come through loud and clear in spiritual manipulations, power control and other leadership dysfunctions.
• Exegetical Theology.  Is the teaching sound?  Are the beliefs and teachings based on Scripture alone?  Is everything supported with “rightly interpreted Scriptures”?  Or is a culture of proof-texting, eisegesis, and unsupported Scriptural demands cultivated?   Paul said that a ministers approval is related with the skill and study applied to interpreting the Scripture (2 Timothy 2:15).
• Community Culture. Is the community an accepting, embracing and loving community?  Does the community empower the people or condemn each other?  Is it spiritually healthy or dysfunctional?
• Leadership.  How would you characterize his/her leadership?

    o Grace OR Control
    o Servant OR Dictator
    o Humility OR Arrogance
    o Respectful OR Demanding
    o See the big picture of God’s love OR lost in the details of all the rules.
    o Bold OR Boastful

• Preaching.  Does he come across as if he is the only one living right?  Do you leave feeling shamed, not good enough, beat-down?  Is he vulnerable, real, authentic?  Does he give you faith or leave you in despair?  Does he preach in love or in anger? 

• Submission and Accountability.  Are there checks and balances in place for how finances are handled?  Is the pastor submitted to a board of elders within the local congregation?

• Education.  Finally, and personally, this last criterion would not have been necessary years ago but today and tomorrow’s world require it.  What I speak here I speak to the issue of pastors (not evangelists or other ministers within the church).  Does the pastor value the Scripture enough to know it in its original languages?  Does the pastor value people enough to learn how to be the most effective minister possible?  Does the pastor respect his calling enough to approve himself through disciplined study, rigorous examination, graduate work?  Can he sit and learn from others?  Is his degree legitimate?   I know of preachers who send in for these fake doctorate degrees.  Anyone who would do this is looking for a shortcut and likely cannot be trusted in other areas of their life.
• If the pastor could not learn the original language, but had submitted his theology and preaching to the counsel of an elder who could understand the original languages then i would be more comfortable.  Or of the church had a team of leaders and pastors and on that team there was someone who offered a check and balance kind of system, then i think that would work as well.  Basically, what i am saying is that I would not submit myself or my family to the leadership of a man who was an island to himself, and manipulated the text to his own whim and whack.

With great joy I remain submitted to my pastor, and have for over thirty years.  I trust him.  I learned humility, kindness, generosity, and passion from him.  In addition to him there are 4 other elders (a gifted teacher, compassionate pastor, prophetic seer, apostle-like missionary, and a voice of compassion for lost humanity) that guide me both on a ministerial level as well as personally.  My commitment to these elders is to lovingly obey and submit to them. I have a close relationship and trust with each of these men.  I know they have my best interest in mind.  Therefore I submit to them.  This does not mean that I see and interpret every verse of Scripture with the same voice as all of them (they don’t even agree).  At times we have disagreed on interpretive issues.  I can be very passionate about my interpretations of Scripture and am not afraid to disagree when I feel someone is misinterpreting a text.

As it relates to the church I pastor I remain submitted to the Board of Directors in areas of finance, business, and ethics.  In addition to that I have three colleagues who hold me accountable in my personal and spiritual life.

I obey and submit.  I am a better person for it.  I am healthier for it.  I had a financial decision and I submitted my challenge to one of my accountability partners and he warned me and cautioned me.  I followed his advice. They keep me from getting bitter, they warn me of the pitfalls of immorality, they challenge me to deepen my spiritual disciplines and devotions, they warn me about lingering too long in the corridors of doubt.  A couple weeks back when a fellow minister took occasion to weasel his way into a communal situation I called an someone I am submitted to and submitted my situation to them.  “Call him and do it now.  Don’t talk about it any more.  Talk to the man that’s done this.”  I obeyed.  I am better for it. 

Comments

[Jaime G]

Jeff... You posed the question: "Does the pastor value the Scripture enough to know it in its original languages?" What is the best way to go about learning the original languages if your grad work does not require, or perhaps even offer, courses in them? What, in your experience, would be a good program or method to use? I would love to hear from you on this...

Thanks, Jaime

[Jeffrey Garner]

To qualify this remark, these are the things that I personally would want if i were looking to submit myself to a local pastor and church. Part of my reasoning is rooted in the fact that much of my study was in languages so i have come to appreciate the Bible in a whole new way. Its more than knowing what verses actually say and goes to the heart of sincere appreciation for the Sacred Text. It includes a way of thinking, a humility associated with understanding the latitude of meanings and thought.

Now to your question. Is there a synagogue in your area that offers a look at Hebrew? There are course you can take from seminaries that offer online components to learning biblical languages. You can also audit biblical language courses at most seminaries in your area. This very inexpensive and gets your hands on the text. I would recommend for Greek finding a good book on Greek that covers the Gospel of John and start there. Even if you never learn it fluently if you can learn it enough to respect it and embrace the humility that comes from accepting that you dont know everything about the Bible.

I would recommend D.A. Carson's Exegetical Fallacies; Page Kelley's Biblical Hebrew an introductory grammar. William Mounce's Basics of Biblical Greek as places to start.

[Justin Proulx]

Hi Jeff,

I'm in your Disciple class at Western. A few years ago my church added a second campus and the head pastor (an MDiv PhD) is the main site pastor for the other campus. Our pastor is a very educated English major, and he has enough reference books to access the Greek and Hebrew, but he's not been through a seminary course on the materials. In your point above, where you suggesting that only a master's program worth of study is displaying the correct respect for the languages and text?

Thank you,
Justin

[Roger Yadon]

Jeff,
I really enjoyed this post.

you mentioned five elders in your life. do you feel it is necessary to have a mentorship/discipleship agreement with these men? or can it be a casual voice?

There are elders in my life that i seek guidance from, but they probably don't know it.. kinda like that 6th grade girlfriend. lol. should they be aware that they are on my life council? or is it ok to have a casual mentorship?

there is a local church here that has all of the five fold ministers. each with their title and picutre on the back wall. it all seems so freakish to me, is this what you mean? each in their assigned seat? or a couch where they can come sit when time and circumstance permits?

[Jeffrey Garner]

It depends on what stage you are at in your life. These men have been a source of strength and have a voice in my life. I think we all need a discipler/spiritual director. It will make us better followers of Christ. I would let these men know. It can add so much to your experience in ministry and life. I am not into the freakish couch slouching cozy covering thing. It then gets away from the relationship and becomes somekind of weirdness.