The Hyphen House

I have been looking a bit at the Old Testament pondering this whole hierarchy issue. Specifically I have been examining the book of Judges and 1 Samuel. As a kid, Judges was one of my favorite books of the Bible. I appreciated its ironic sense of humor and surprising depictions of Israel's heroes. I always loved the way God used the least likely people to deliver Israel from destruction. I always liked the Old Testament as a child because of the narrative nature of much of it, but as I have matured, I have tended to stick more to the New Testament. I find now that when I revisit the Old Testament, I am often frustrated by the depiction of God as a tyrant who demands that heathen nations be annihilated and that those who disobey him be punished. I just have a difficult time reconciling this image of God with the image of God Jesus illustrated in the New Testament. Given the importance peace has played in my spiritual journey, it is especially hard for me to read about the constant holy wars fought between Israel and its neighboring kingdoms.

But that is somewhat besides the point. The point is that I read through Judges and the beginning of 1 Samuel because I was interested in what they had to say about hierarchy. I just happened to be distracted throughout by the graphic violence in Judges. From my limited understanding of Hebrew society during this period, it seems to me that the twelve tribes formed a loose confederation of mostly tribal societies. The Israelites seemed to have a great deal of autonomy during the period of the judges. They would go about their business until they started to do bad things and were consequently conquered by a rival nation until God called a judge to deliver them from bondage. The judge would lead Israel until his or her death, and then the cycle would begin again. This kept going until eventually Israel demanded that their final judge Samuel appoint a king to rule over them instead like the neighboring nations.

There are some fascinating aspects to the ruling system in Judges. Israel is basically a theocracy but not ruled by a priestly class. Rather they seem to be mostly self-ruled except in emergency situations when a judge takes over. These judges are not elected nor appointed. They have no training or qualifications. None of them are priests or Levites. They come from various places and backgrounds. If there is a common factor, it seems to be that they are all surprising people for God to use. Gideon is overly cautious. Samson is overly proud and stupid. Deborah is overly female in a patriarchal culture. Yet God chooses them to lead.

The Hebrews seem determined to establish a monarchy for one clearly stated reason - they want to be like the nations around them, which never turns out well for Israel. I suspect on some level they imagine a king will bring them greater political stability, unity, military glory, and wealth. However, the Bible makes it clear in two places that this is not God's first choice. The people in Judges attempt to make a monarchy out of Gideon's line, but he refuses. Later they demand a king from Samuel, and Samuel reluctantly agrees only after God tells him to. However, what God says when he conceded to the Israelites demands is particularly telling. He says that in establishing a monarchy, they have rejected him. This makes sense because the judges were chosen by God and more or less seemed to follow his commands directly. Now the Israelites would prefer a human king rather than being essentially ruled by God. Samuel warns the Israelites that they will regret this decision, but he goes along with their demands and anoints Saul who turns out to be a pretty terrible king in the end.

I find some parallels between this political situation and our current religious institutions. Basically it seems to me that we like the Israelites are afraid of the uncertainty of following God directly. We would like a more stable situation, one that gives us a sense of security. We want a hierarchy because it makes things easy for us to understand. Rather than following God's often strange requests, we would like to just set up an institution and system or rules. There is a certain logic here that is seductive. We also want to set up these hierarchies because that's what everyone else does. Everything in our culture is run by some sort of hierarchy. As a teacher, I answer to a department head and various deans who in turn answer to our division head who then answers to the headmaster who must answer to the board of directors. Every institution has a hierarchy, so it seems natural that the church would be no different. We imitate what we know and are comfortable with, but that doesn't mean our hierarchies are divinely instituted. Yet there are many who would claim so.

I wonder what it would look like if we allowed the church to work in a way that is similar to Judges. What if we let God call people to fill particular positions rather than depending on trained leaders to do all the work? What if we let pastors pastor rather than expecting them (or allowing them) to rule? I imagine on one hand we would have a total mess on our hands, but I think it would be a beautiful mess, the kind of mess where people meet God directly rather than following orders or programs or human leaders. On the other hand, these hierarchies are a mess in themselves. They divide us into denominations, sects, and factions. It is absurd the number of denominations we have. Even more absurd is the number of sub-denominations and the number of churches of the same denomination who cannot work together for some small reason. Then within the churches there are factions constantly arguing and fighting. This is often a result of hierarchy, a leader saying something another disagrees with or offending a follower in some way. Without hierarchy, we might still have a mess, but I would rather have a mess where God calls the shots than an institution ruled by bylaws and committees.

An elder at a former church of mine once said that the leadership at the church did not allow women to be elders or pastors because the church leadership modeled itself after a "Biblical" marriage. In other words, women in the church must submit to male leadership (not the other way around) just as wives should submit to their husbands. These men are then to lead the women in love (presumably the same way a husband should lead his wife). It should come as no surprise that I disagree with just about every part of this idea, but I mention this merely to illustrate the connection between gender issues and leadership issues within the church.

Lately I have been considering the issue of hierarchy in general within the church. The more I think about it, the more I believe that the gender hierarchy in the church is only part (a crucial part) of a larger problem within the church. That problem - hierarchy. I intend to write a series of posts exploring this issue, but for today I just want to talk about why this is so important to me personally.

LKH and I have spent the last year in a Methodist congregation in England. Here Methodists still operate under the old circuit system, meaning our pastor shepherds four congregations but that each operates mostly independently and the churches depend heavily on lay preaching and leadership to operate. Our pastor only leads services once a month, so it is necessary for us to take responsibility in meeting the basic needs of the body, especially because each congregation is small. This means that often times we don't get what we want. I don't know what to expect on a weekly basis. Some of the preachers prefer old hymns, and some prefer contemporary worship. Some preach with visual aids, some lecture. They come from varied theological backgrounds. Many Christians would find this alarming. However, I wonder if the early church did not operate in a similar manner. Sometimes Paul would stop in and preach, sometimes it was Priscilla and Aquila, or sometimes Apollos. Regardless of who was preaching, each church was responsible for keeping its affairs in order during the meantime. This is often a messy practice. It requires us to communicate and compromise and engage with each other. What is beautiful about it though is that we don't need to seek a pastor's guidance, we need to seek God instead.

It has made me reevaluate the hierarchical structure of most churches. Most Evangelical churches have a pastor (mostly men) who is the ultimate authority. There may also be a group of deacons or elders (again mostly men) who hold other various leadership roles. Then in a less formal sense depending on the size of the church, certain church members may run certain ministries (and isn't this usually the most effective part of the church - notice here that women often participate freely). What you have is a hierarchy that gradually distances us from God's leadership. In order to make a decision, I must first contact the person in charge of the ministry who then must go to the pastor or in larger churches an elder or associate pastor who then answers to another authority who ultimately answers to God. Isn't it a structure like this that Jesus continually challenged and ultimately made irrelevant when His death caused the veil to tear?

I see a few disturbing consequences of this hierarchy. One, it makes us lazy. We expect our leaders to do the grunt work. They will take charge of even the most minute details of running the church. Most of us will just sit in the pews. Second, it creates divisions. We speak at length about how it affects gender relations in the church, but it also affects relations between the young and old, established and new members, people who focus on different ministries, and the doers and pew-sitters. Third, it has created a new high priestly order, a set of various cults of personality. We have given pastors far too much power and authority simply because they have a seminary degree. I don't say this to undermine the pastoral calling or the importance of pastoral gifts. I just want to draw attention to how we have twisted the role of pastors. They are no longer shepherds; rather they are mini-gods. This is part of the reason we have televangelists and megachurches. It is why people like John Piper, Rob Bell, Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, and Brian McLaren have become famous and controversial to some. We have given these mere men far too much authority. We depend on them for our understanding of God, and I have seen firsthand how the kind of power these men have can destroy them and the people around them. Fourth, it puts more distance between God and us. We have essentially repaired the curtain that guards the Holy of Holies.

So I have decided to write some more about this issue because I think it is one of the most crucial problems the church faces. I believe we have created an institution that falls far short of the body of Christ, which only has one Head. I will be looking at some of the places where the Bible deals with this issue somewhat directly in both the Old and New Testaments, and I will also relate some personal anecdotes.