RESTORING FALLEN MINISTERS - THE PROCESS (Part 4)

This process, so far, has become quite involved, so a review of Scripture and what is required for a fallen minister to be restored.  We need this, because things will get complicated in this part.

I need to bring up some early Christian history.  When Jesus and the Apostles taught on these matters, the traditional church organizational structure did not exist.  The closest organizational structure existing at the time was the synagogue.

I'm not sure where or when the first synagogues formed.  The Old Testament does not  mention them, but the foundation of their structure might have been laid in Ezra, the 8th chapter, where Ezra read the Law to a large assembly of people in Jerusalem at the (ahem) Water Gate.  Levites were scattered among the people to interpret the Law from Hebrew into Aramaic.  This was because the Law was written in Hebrew and the people spoke Aramaic.  They picked up that language when they were in exile.

Synagogues are not structured like churches in the traditional model.  The Jews might have modeled the synagogues after another practice they had, the 'minyan.'  A minyan was a group of ten men that would meet together for prayer and study.

A group of Jews of any size may start a synagogue.  Once they decide to do that, they elect a president to lead the group.  Then they select other officers as needed.

Cantors lead synagogue services, not the rabbis.  A synagogue does not need a full time rabbi, but they can hire one if they wish.  As far as I know, no organization appoints a rabbi to a particular congregation.

Jesus didn't want his followers to form synagogues.  If He did, He would have used that word when He spoke about His assembled disciples.  He used another word instead.  I believe when He talked privately with His disciples, they spoke Aramaic.  Whatever word He used, Matthew decided the best Greek word for what Jesus said was the word 'ekklesia.'   That word refers to people, usually citizens who have been called out to assemble for a purpose.

So, the first assemblies didn't have much of a visible organizational structure, like we see today.  The first assembly grew to 3000 people in one day.  The only visible leaders were the Apostles.  How could this small group lead so many people?

This is where we can connect some dots.  First, the Apostles remembered the concept of the minyan.  Then they remembered when they assisted Jesus with the feeding of the thousands, and Jesus had them seat the people in groups of fifty.  They knew they had to get these new disciples into smaller groups.

Acts 2: 42 - 47 NASB1995

They were  continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.  Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe; and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.  And all those who had believed were together and  had all things in common; and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need.  Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people.  And the Lord was adding to their number day by day  those who were being saved.

Notice the phrase, "breaking bread."  It appears twice, and the second time, Luke adds "from house to house."  They set up home fellowships, plus they had large meetings in the outermost court of the Temple.   I can see the Apostles recruiting the others that were with them in the Upper Room to lead these fellowships.  These home fellowship leaders later became known as elders.  Elders are also pastors or shepherds.  Since most towns and cities had only one congregation that included home fellowships, each congregation had more than one pastor.  These pastors were not paid to lead.  Actually, if the pastor was hosting a fellowship in his own house, and these fellowship meetings involved food, he was providing some of that food.

In these groups, if an elder or another minister fell, the process that Jesus outlined in Matthew would apply mostly the same.  However, since most Christians today follow the traditional church model, and from other changes in society and culture, the restoration process for ministers has become more complicated, but still must follow Scriptural requirements.

At this point, I must bring up another passage that applied then, but applies now too.

1 Timothy 5:17 - 21, 24 - 25 NASB1995

The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching.  For the Scripture says, “YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”

Do not receive an accusation against an a  elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.

Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning. I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality...

The sins of some men are quite evident, going before them to judgment; for others, their sins follow after.  Likewise also, deeds that are good are quite evident, and those which are otherwise cannot be concealed.

First, Paul upholds the honor of eldership.  Some peach and teach equally.  Some do one more than the other.  Some, counsel as well as preach and teach.  Some counsel without speaking to the group or in public.  But all elders have the responsibility of ruling, and it is a shared responsibility.  Those who rule well are worthy of double honor.

Because of the honor due to elders, if one doesn't measure up to the standards for ministers and elders, charges made against an elder must be confirmed by at least two witnesses.  Once this has been done, then the congregation can act.

But today, especially in the United States, the issue can get more complex.  At this point, I must point out something that most Christians don't understand, mostly because most leaders don't know it, so they don't tell others about it.

Sin and crime are not always the same.  Many sins are also crimes, but some are not.  Many crimes are sins, but some are not.

What is the difference?  What do they have in common?

Both are offenses.  The difference lies in who is offended.

Sin is an offense against a person.  That person can be God, an angel, or a human.

A crime is an offense against society.  Government is the mechanism by which society deals with offenders.

Romans 13: 1 - 7 NASB1995

Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.  Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.  For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil.  Do you want to have no fear of authority?  Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good.

But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.

Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also a  for conscience’ sake.  For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.  Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

We will examine the application of this in Part 5.