In my last post, I suggested some questions concerning pastoral authority – questions intended to help us think carefully and act responsibly with regard to this important, yet nuanced issue in the local church. With the multi-faceted nature of the topic in mind, let’s turn our attention to the apparent need for, nature of, and potential abuse of pastoral authority.
The Need for Pastoral Authority – Have you ever been in a situation where you bore responsibility without authority? It can be discouraging and even deeply concerning. As pastors, God holds us accountable for His flock, and in our society, the law holds pastors responsible for the actions of their churches. Intuitively, it makes sense that, if a person is going to have responsibility for something, that person must have some measure of influence or “say” in things, but let’s look deeper than intuition as we think about pastoral leadership.
I would suggest New Testament terminology for pastors implies authority, albeit loving and humble authority. For the most part, pastoral leadership literature holds the terms “elder,” “overseer,” and “pastor” are synonymous and interchangeable – thus we may draw on all three for our understanding of pastoral authority. An elder is one whose age and wisdom affords the opportunity to give counsel and guiding input. An overseer is one who manages or directs the affairs of some entity or group. And, “pastor” means “shepherd” – one who leads, feeds, and protects a flock of sheep and is thus concerned with and involved in all aspects of the flock’s life and well-being, as well as the one who leads the flock. Although the literature is clear that terms emphasizing official position or rulership are not applied to pastors, it does maintain that Scripture calls for pastors to have authority. However, in Baptist life, congregations grant that authority and may revoke it. 1
The nature of pastoral responsibilities also would seem to require authority. Of all the responsibilities of a pastor, those which most suggest a need for influence include the following:
Ensuring what is taught in the church is doctrinally sound (not only what the pastor teaches but all that is taught in the church)
Training the church and its members in the truths of Scripture for Godly living and sound decision making not only in public teaching / preaching but in spiritual direction, discipleship, and counseling
Shaping congregational culture and identity so that the church faithfully embodies Christ and carries out the work of the Kingdom
Directing the administrative concerns of the church
Leading corporate worship
Leading the church to carry out the functions of its God-given work and equipping members to minister in accordance with their gifts
Give admonition and correction when needed 1
The Nature of Pastoral Authority – By way of direct statement, as well as implications in pastoral terminology and tasks, scholarly literature points to the need for and legitimacy of pastoral authority. It also sheds light on the nature of that authority. First, the literature points to ethical means of influence, modeling, example, and teaching as a pastor’s leadership methods and adds the call for pastors to teach church members how to make spiritually-informed decisions and allow them to have a voice, thus respecting priesthood of the believer and the reality that people other than the pastor have spiritual maturity and insight. Additionally, the literature suggests pastoral character is vital – a Godly character of one in whose life the Word is lived out and the reality of Christ is present. Authority is connected to a demonstration of this type of character. Finally, pastoral authority not only must be humble, loving, non-domineering, and always with the best interest of the flock in mind. It is framed in terms of shepherding, which is leadership grounded in relationship and trust. Pastors are stewards of Christ’s flock and sheep themselves, and pastoral authority must answer to these realities. 1
The Abuse of Pastoral Authority – Churches That Abuse by Ronald M. Enroth, is a stark reminder of the existence of abusive churches led by abusive, power-hungry pastors – churches and pastors that do immense damage to people and the witness of Christ. Although a full summary of Enroth’s points is beyond the scope of this post, he lists several “red-flags” potentially indicating problems. These include an emphasis on experience over Scripture, defensiveness and resistance to accountability or being questioned on the part of pastors, an emphasis on authority and discipline, oversight of the small details of peoples’ lives to name a few. Entroth further maintains that even doctrinally orthodox churches may become abusive and many abusive pastors begin with good intentions but later go astray. Enroth further posits abusive pastors commonly “fail to distinguish between spiritual and worldly authority” (p. 196), and “potentially abusive churches foster an unhealthy form of dependency, spiritually and otherwise, by focusing on themes of submission and obedience to those in authority” (p. 201). He insists pastors must be accountable both to God and to the congregation. 2
There is a weight and a tension in this subject that probably is healthy and should be maintained in each pastor’s heart and mind. Pastoral work involves leadership. Leadership requires influence, and influence normally means some form of authority at some point, even if it is humble and loving, non-domineering authority. However, authority can be abused, so there is a need for care and some means of and openness to accountability and correction – preferably before the pastor harms people and the cause of Christ. As in so many other areas, balance is in order.
1. Danley, Ronald V. (2015). The Relationship Between Authentic Leadership and Church Health in the Baptist General Convention of Texas (Doctoral Dissertation)
2. Enroth, Ronald M. (1993). Churches That Abuse. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.