Frank

I hope that in my last comment, I did not give anyone the impression that either Dr. Norrington or myself deny the NT teaches that there are leaders in the church, both men and women, designated as “elders” and whose primary functions are described as “overseers” (episkopoi) and “servants, ministers” (diakanoi). For we do not disagree; but on this, the nature, function and limitations of leadership, we do agree as follows:

Whatever local leaders were required to do, Christians were to obey them and submit to them (1 Cor. 16:16; Heb. 13:17; 1 Pet. 5:5; cf. Phil. 2:29; 1 Thess. 5:12f). Taken out of context, this element of New Testament teaching might seem to imply an authoritarian leadership upon which the church was highly dependent. This interpretation, however, is counterbalanced by other evidence:
First, Jesus insisted that leaders should be servants (Mt. 20:25-28) and this point is taken up by Peter in the very passage where he urges subjection to elders (1 Pet. 5:1-5).
Second, throughout the epistles of Paul, we find an emphasis on mutual submission–and there is little evidence to suggest that leaders are exempted from this requirement.
Third, following Old Testament and later Jewish teaching, Christians were instructed to submit to the governing authorities (Rom. 13:1-7; Tit. 3:1; 1 Pet. 2:13-17. The verb used for submission here is hupotasso, the same as in 1 Cor. 16:16 and 1 Pet. 5:5 where submission to Christian leaders is in mind). The precise limits to this obedience are not worked out but the early Christians knew that, in the event of a conflict between their duty to God and to the state, they should obey God rather than men (Acts 4:19f, 5:29; Heb. 11:23; cf. Mt. 22:21). Here too they followed Old Testament precedent and later Jewish practice (Ex. 1:17; Dan 3:13-18, 6:10; 1 Macc. 2:22)….(TO PREACH OR NOT TO PREACH, p. 53)

And according to Ephesian 4:7-13, where Paul speaks of leaders or elders, not in terms of office or authority, but in terms of their Spirit-gifting and the purpose of that gifting, which is to bring believers to maturity, help them discover their own gifting and calling, and then train and equip them to be competent ministers of Christ–he calls such leaders as gifts to the Church, given by Christ himself for that purpose. On this, Norrington says,

Whatever we are to understand by local leadership in the New Testament, there is at least one and probably two gifts of leaders hip (e.g., Rom. 12:8; 1 Cor. 12:28) and it is, I suggest, as leaders exercised these gifts that Christians were to obey and submit to those leaders. This should not have resulted in an unhealthy form of dependence because little or no competition was involved. Even when Christians had the same gifts as their leaders, such trainee leaders could then be prepared for posts of leadership in their own or another house church (TO PREACH OR NOT TO PREACH, p.55)

So leaders who fulfill the gifting and calling the Lord Jesus gave them, which by word and example, is to prepare the rest of the congregation to be mature, wise, competent ministers of Christ–such leaders are to be respected and honored. But those who teach and practice heresy, who deny the gifting and calling of other Christians, and refuse to train and equip them to be competent ministers of Christ–to such leaders, our response must be, “No! In this case, you are out of line with Scripture and the Holy Spirit. Here we must obey God and stand firm against you and your false teaching and practice.” This is, I believe, the stance to take when the nature and function of Christian leadership is being perverted for worldly ends.