|
| Home > Books > The Lord's Service Questions - The Priesthood of All Believers, Part 3 |
| The Lord's Service Questions - The Priesthood of All Believers, Part 3 | | Date Created: Dec 02, 2005, 11:57 AM |
I'm still thinking about this objection to a liturgically ordered service where the pastor presides as somehow violating the reality of the priesthood of all believers in the new covenant.
Perhaps someone might object to the fact that the pastor leads the service and does most of the speaking and reading as well as presiding at the Lord's Table. But if that is the real issue, then it's not my book that's causing the problem but rather the Reformed tradition as a whole, indeed, the historic practice of the Church throughout her history.
The practice of including a variety of non-ordained men and women in the leadership of corporate worship on Sunday morning is a very recent, mostly American phenomenon. But the novel practice arose in the 1960's with the introduction of "informal" worship services, even "folk Masses" in the Catholic church. Now, of course, it has spread to other parts of the world. Nevertheless, it took decades to drive the pastor away from his ordained place as liturgical leader (not just preacher) for the congregation. In many 21st-century Evangelical congregations the pastor may welcome everyone to the church at the start of the service, but doesn't do much else but preach. Lay people pray, read, and often lead the congregation with informal, chatty directions and comments.
Now, I don't think this kind of thing is evil or wicked. What I do think is that the Bible says more about pastoral leadership in these areas than is commonly conceded. And the reason for this is that Christ's people are better served by a well-ordered and pastor-led worship service. I've argued this in my book (chapters 14-15). But again, I wonder how many people who jumped to the conclusion that I was violating the priesthood of all believers principle actually read that far in the book.
I suspect someone might argue that removing the pastor from everything but the sermon was overdue and nothing but an application of the doctrine of the priesthood of believers. Something like this: Protestant pastors were effectively acting like Roman Catholic priests until we started to behave in a manner consistent with our commitment to the priesthood of all believers. There are a couple of problems with this.
First, the priesthood of all believers principle does not mean that everybody ought to get a chance to be a liturgical leader on Sunday morning. It never has. Nobody ever dreamed that it might imply such a thing until very recently. The Reformers certainly did not think that this is what the doctrine meant. This observation, of course, is not a slam-dunk because it is always possible that the Church had been wrong about this in the past. We have to grant that possibility. I do not believe in the infallibility of Reformed tradition. The Bible is our ultimate authority.
Where in the Bible do we read that leadership in the community has been democratized in the new covenant? We don't. Rather, in the NT we read about pastors, elders, and deacons. I don't need to cite references. But one example is instructive. Paul writes to Pastor Timothy that he "not neglect the public reading of Scripture." It seems to have been part of Timothy's vocation to read the Scriptures to his congregation.
Every member of the Body of Christ has full sanctuary access in the new covenant. In Christ the barriers of the OT have been removed. When God draws us into his presence we are taken up into heavenly places in union with Christ. That happens to the entire congregation. No one believer is closer to God than any other. There are no degrees of nearness or holiness. That goes for the pastor as well. The pastor is not nearer to God because of his office. Rather, he is called to serve the congregation so that they will experience and receive all the gifts offered through the Word and Sacrament.
But this is standard Reformed, even PCA stuff. There's nothing Romish in the notion that the Pastor serves the congregation in this way. To ask the pastor to speak as the Lord's representative in the Sunday assembly is not to ask him to violate the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, rather it is to ask him to fulfill the vocation to which he was called.
I don't believe I've deviated from what I've learned about the ministry from Reformed sources. What I have written is pretty standard Reformed teaching on the meaning and function of the Ministry. For example, in the Westminster Assembly's "The Form of Presbyterial Church-Government" (1648) the minister's function in the church is lined out. Eight duties are listed. "The pastor is an ordinary and perpetual officer in the church, prophesying of the time of the gospel. First, it belongs to his office, [1] To pray for and with his flock, as the mouth of the people unto God, Acts vi. 2, 3, 4, and xx. 36, where preaching and prayer are joined as several parts of the same office. The office of the elder (that is, the pastor) is to pray for the sick, even in private, to which a blessing is especially promised; much more therefore ought he to perform this in the public execution of his office, as a part thereof. If you didn't know that this document was produced by the Westminster Assembly, would you think that saying that the Pastor prays as "the mouth of the people unto God" was priestcraft?[2] To read the Scriptures publicly; for the proof of which, 1. That the priests and Levites in the Jewish church were trusted with the public reading of the word is proved. 2. That the ministers of the gospel have as ample a charge and commission to dispense the word, as well as other ordinances, as the priests and Levites had under the law, proved, Isa. lxvi. 21. Matt. xxiii. 34. where our Savior entitles the officers of the New Testament, whom he will send forth, by the same names of the teachers of the Old. Which propositions prove, that therefore (the duty being of a moral nature) it follows by just consequence, that the public reading of the scriptures belongs to the pastor's office A couple things to note. First, see how the Westminster divines used the OT ecclesiastical and liturgical situation to inform their understanding of the function of the Minister today. Second, if the pastor is called to read the Scriptures publicly, why is this reading so neglected today? And why does everyone but the pastor seem to be the one called on to read Scripture in church? Continuing with the pastors ministerial duties:[3] To feed the flock, by preaching of the word, according to which he is to teach, convince, reprove, exhort, and comfort.
[4] To catechize, which is a plain laying down the first principles of the oracles of God, or of the doctrine of Christ, and is a part of preaching.
[5] To dispense other divine mysteries.
[6] To administer the sacraments.
[7] To bless the people from God, Numb. vi. 23, 24, 25, 26. Compared with Rev. i.4, 5, (where the same blessings, and persons from whom they come, are expressly mentioned), Isa. lxvi. 21, where, under the names of Priests and Levites to be continued under the gospel, are meant evangelical pastors, who therefore are by office to bless the people.
[8] To take care of the poor Once again, pay attention to how the Assembly saw the NT pastorate as the fulfillment, in some sense, of the OT priestly calling. The link between Christian pastors and Hebrew priests is made explicit by Westminster when they summarize the three ordained offices in the Church:As there were in the Jewish church elders of the people joined with the priests and Levites in the government of the church (2 Chron. 19:8,9,10); so Christ, who hath instituted government, and governors ecclesiastical in the church, hath furnished some in his church, beside the ministers of the word, with gifts for government, and with commission to execute the same when called thereunto, who are to join with the minister in the government of the church (Rom. 12:7,8; 1 Cor. 12:28). Which officers reformed churches commonly call Elders. I'm not necessarily saying that this is the best way to explain the connections between the old order and the new situation in the Church. But one should notice that the Reformed tradition can make these links without denying the "priesthood of all believers." A high view of the Ministry does not necessarily mean that one is a Romanist or that one has denied the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers.
If you have never heard Rob Rayburn's lecture on this subject from a few years back at Covenant Theological Seminary, it fits wonderfully with what I am saying here. It's called "The Centrality of the Christian Ministry" and you do download it as an mp3 file or listen to it online.
The ministry does not replace Jesus, but stands in for him in his absence (he's in heaven) and serves his Bride in his Name. It's one thing to say that the pastor stands between God and man as a priestly mediator like Jesus. It's something else entirely to know that the Bible says that our Mediator Jesus uses our pastors in a special way to communicate his gifts to us. The pastor is not a mediator between God and man, but Jesus does use the ordained pastorate to communicate his will and grace to his people.
And there's a reason for this. It's to help assure God's people that what happens in the worship service is indeed the Lord's work for them. The people should be left in no doubt that Jesus is speaking to them and feeding them in the assembly – the presence of a ordained, robed minister helps them know this is true.
Continue to Part 4 in the series on the priesthood of all believers. |
|
