I refer to the Missouri Synod brand - not the technical term for presbyter. I was discussing this yesterday with a friend, and thought it might be of interest to post. Schmemann speaks of how the original form of the bishop as head of local parish, surrounded by fellow presbyters, gave way to the bishop as head of a diocese and the local presbyters as heads of the congregations. Due to the conciliar nature of the Church herself, this led to the inevitable rise of SOMETHING to replace the council of presbyters AROUND the local pastor. He was speaking of the parish council in the Orthodox Church, but I recall when I first read his words thinking: "Yes!" It's a description of what the elders, auf Deutsch, die Vorsteher, are!
I think the elders of the Missouri Synod, oddly enough, are a testimony to the conciliar nature of the Church. They are there not in place of the pastor, nor as his bosses, nor as his servants, but as his COUNSELORS in the task of overseeing the life of the congregation. Where there is a healthy relationship between pastors and elders there is never an "him" vs. "them" going on, but rather a listening to one another and an upholding of each other in prayer and in helping each other to be faithful in the offering of the means of the Spirit so that the life that is in Christ can dwell fully and richly among the people of God in that locality. I think them or something like them are simply inevitable in any gathering of God's people.
12 comments:
Alistair Stewart-Sykes makes mention of the North African office of seniores laici or 'patron-elders', of which Tertullian was one, in "On the Lord's Prayer (SVS Press, 2004). It's an interesting kind of 'official role' in the Church.
In Orthodoxy, at least, it should also be noted that even deacons are considered laity, officially, as are non-priestly monks, and all nuns, of course.
Other examples of lay 'support' would also be the Byzantine symphonia with the Empire - which is also to be found in other Orthodox countries through time, for better or worse. The Phanariotes were also very influential lay 'patrons' of the Church in Constantinople (and throughout the Ottoman Empire).
Some of my best memories are the prayer and Scripture study with pastor before getting to any business at hand. Truly a blessing, in itself, and for the business at hand.
I think Von Karajan guest conducted at the Byzantine Symphonia once.
It is my understanding that elders, as the custom is in many LCMS/LCC parishes, is a product of Walther. The office of lay-elder is an office that in Christian freedom we may have but it is not a biblical office nor is it mandatory.
I have found it intersting when asking several pastors regarding their understanding of the office of lay-elder either respond with general confusion or by saying that the office of lay-elder is somehow derived from the Office of the Holy Ministry.
In my previous parish, the elders believed that they were the pastors' bosses, and, in fact, my senior pastor agreed with them.
Here I have tried to teach my elders that though I will generally run things past them (especially worship schedule, changing hymnals, etc.) that I am the one responsible before God for what happens spiritually in the parish, and for that reason the decision has to be mine in the end.
When I was recruiting in the nonprofit world, an executive in one of the largest conservation nonprofits in the world made an interesting comment about the Boards of Trustees that he had in each state. This Board was heavily involved in the hiring process (and had very high powered IBankers leading the search), so we asked the executive who 'really' had the authority to hire. His response was that while the Board of Trustees was merely advisory and had no legal, fiduciary responsibility, he treated them as if they did. This was because they were his primary volunteers and primary donors, he couldn't do his work without them - and their donations and volunteering wouldn't do anything without the staff and their expertise. It was symbiotic, synergistic :) even. Of course, he noted, if push came to shove it was his decision, but he'd never had a situation where he had to 'pull rank' over and against a local Board and its President.
In our own governance problems in the OCA, I have thought this to be sage advice for leaders. Of course, at the end of the day the church is about a number of non-negotiables, and the leader has to stand up for those regardless of the consequences. I guess that's the art of what you guys do.
(Ruling) Elders, Church Councils, etc. filled the vacuum left over when the state no longer controlled these Lutheran congregations or compensated their pastors.
I agree. It seems to me that the LCMS practice is in spirit very close to the OT "elders at the gates," which, as I understand it, was mainly a consultative body, probably without a set membership.
Nonetheless, it was an important function, even one for which a wife would work hard so that her husband had time to join in (Pr 31.23).
Let's say you were planting a new congregation and proposing a constitution, with a description of the role of the board of elders....what would you include?
I think it makes sense to think about this as analogous to marriage in some ways.
As the undershepherd, the Pastor is analogous to the father/husband in the relationship. Therefore he does have authority over the flock and the flock is bound to submit to his authority.
I think the elders are in the position of a wise, godly wife. In a healthy family, the husband consults with his wife before any major decision, and weighs her counsel most seriously.
In extreme circumstances, a wife must hold her husband accountable for his behavior. This is not an act of rebellion, but of love, particularly on behalf of the children/flock.
I think Orrologion gets it very right above. The pastor has formal authority over the elders and the rest of the flock, but he would be foolish to lord this authority over them without a relationship of mutual respect, consultation, even functional equality.
In the best marriages, as in the healthiest congregations, the leaders submit to one another in love with no other goal than sacrificial love toward their children.
I had cause to quote this selection from Fr. Stephen Freeman regarding Orthodox ecclesiology, but I think it fits with what Matt said, too:
"...the weakest ecclesiology of all, because it depends, moment by moment, on the love and forgiveness of each by all and of all by each. Either the Bishops of the Church love and forgive each other or the whole thing falls apart. “Brethren, let us love one another, that with one mind we may confess: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” These are the words that introduce the Creed each Sunday, and they are the words that are the bedrock of our ecclesiology."
The rest can be read here:
http://fatherstephen.wordpress.com/2008/01/31/the-ecclesiology-of-the-cross/
I found in being married that there is some danger still in understanding 'headship' as authority. Our Head didn't throw His authority around - though He had every right to, and all the power to achieve His will. Instead, he let those 'under His authority' abuse and kill Him. That is headship.
As my spiritual father said to me once, it is far easier for us to identify with Christ cleansing the Temple than it is to identify with Him as the Suffering Servant or the Bridegroom of 'Extreme Humility' (see here: http://www.skete.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/product.display/product_id/1371/index.cfm ; this is the icon for the first 3 days of Great Lent in the Orthodox Church).
Sounds like most of us are on the same plane regarding the "symbiosis" of the relationship. That's reassuring.
I know there was a CJ article on the history of elders in the MS... For some reason, Jan of 04ish sounds about right... but I don't have time to check. I do know it is online though.
Post a Comment