A Theological Foundation for Healthy Authority Structures in Churches
Introduction
The catastrophic collapse of many influential church leaders around the world is a sad but predictable phenomena. The first cause, of course, is the ubiquity of sin, and the reality that God’s image bearers fall far short of displaying his character and attributes in the world. The second cause is less obvious and more specific: the lack of healthy authority structures in the churches and organizations in which these leaders ministered. There is an astounding lack of awareness on the part of Christians regarding how authority in the church is supposed to work. However, by understanding how God the Father stewards the authority he gives to Jesus, God the Son, during his incarnation and earthly ministry, churches have a foundation upon which to build healthy authority structures.
What is Authority?
Authority is the power and right to act or command. Jesus acts authoritatively on many occasions: he rides into Jerusalem on a donkey (Matt. 21:1–11), he flips the tables of the money changers (Matt. 21:12–17), he takes the scroll and opens the seals (Rev. 5:9), etc… Jesus also issues authoritative commands: he calms a storm (Matt. 4:35–41), he casts out demons (Luke 11:14–23), he calls Lazarus to come out of his tomb (John 11:43), etc… In many stories, Jesus’ commands are indistinguishable from his actions. When he tells the paralytic to “rise and walk” (Matt. 9:5), his command is the only action needed.
The Incarnate Son is Given Limited Authority by the Father
Many of Jesus’ contemporaries were puzzled as to who had given him such authority. Some even concluded he had been given authority to cast out demons by the king of demons (Matt. 12:24). Of course, the true source of his authority was God the Father. Jesus came “in [his] Father’s name” (John 5:43), authorized by God to carry out his mission on earth. However, Jesus’ authority, as great as it was, was limited. On one occasion, when a Gentile woman begged Jesus to heal her demon-oppressed daughter, he at first ignored her, explaining, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). His earthly ministry was limited to the mission authorized by the Father.
The Incarnate Son Is Under the Authority of the Father
During his earthly ministry, Jesus served with limited authority under the authority of his Father. In Matt. 8:9, the centurion explains, “For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me.” The centurion recognized a similarity between his role in the military and Jesus’ role as Messiah. Jesus, like the centurion, had great authority, but he exercised his authority in submission to a higher authority.
The Incarnate Son Is Evaluated by the Father
Jesus’ ministry, serving under the Father with limited authority, was a period in which the Father observed and evaluated him according to a standard of perfect obedience. Jesus “learned obedience” (Heb. 5:8), was “obedient to death” (Phil. 2:8), and ultimately submitted to the Father’s will in contrast to his own (Matt. 26:39). He was tempted as we are yet never once gave in to temptation (Heb. 4:15). Ultimately, he allowed himself to be led to his death in obedience and submission to the Father.
The Incarnate Son is Given “All Authority” by the Father
Due to Jesus’ life of obedience, especially in submitting to death, the Father deemed him worthy to be given “all authority in heaven and earth” (Matt. 28:18). Now, the resurrected Jesus reigns over creation as “Lord of lords and King of kings” (Rev. 17:4). Due to the faithfulness he demonstrated in his limited earthly ministry, he is found worthy of unlimited “power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” (Rev. 5:12). Now, he expands his ministry, through his Spirit in his Church, to “the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8).
The Trinity Is a Model For How To Administer Authority
In the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, the Church sees a model for how to administer authority. In his earthly ministry, Jesus is given limited authority by the Father, serves under the authority of the Father, is evaluated by the Father, and is rewarded by the Father. In the same way in which the Father oversees the authority given to his incarnate Son, churches should oversee the authority they give to their leaders.
God Does Not Give Church Leaders Authority; That Is the Responsibility of the Church
Often, church leaders will claim the authority to govern their churches was given to them by God himself. In response to such claims, it is important to ask questions of such leaders: “When did God give you this authority?”, “What are the requirements, expectations, and standards God has for your position?”, “How does God evaluate you and how regularly?”, and “What has been God’s assessment of your performance so far?” Many church leaders will actually attempt to answer these questions, often believing themselves to be in a unique position of direct revelation and communication with God that removes them from the need to be accountable to higher authorities in the church. In the best of cases, these leaders are sincere, confused, and in need of correction. In the worst of cases, they are malignant narcissists. Jesus, through “the Holy Spirit speaking in Scripture”, has given the responsibility of administering authority in a church to the church itself.
Church Leaders Should Be Given Limited Authority by a Higher Ecclesial Authority
Positions of authority are given by a higher authority, and the authority given can never exceed the authority of those giving it. Churches have often operated in this way, with higher authorities in episcopal and presbyterian church governments appointing church leaders to positions of authority below them, and congregations appointing leaders to serve the congregation in congregational models. The authority given to these leaders is limited. They do not have unlimited authority over every aspect of the church, its members, and its assets. In many cases, financial authority regarding major decisions such as purchasing buildings is reserved for the higher authority.
Church Leaders Should Serve Under the Authority of a Higher Ecclesial Authority
When positions of authority are given by a higher authority, those in the lower position serve under the authority of those in the higher position. Jesus, in his earthly ministry, serves under the authority of God the Father. Those in higher positions of authority define the job requirements, standards, and expectations of those in lower positions. Those in lower positions are expected to exercise their authority according to these guidelines. As a general rule, service always goes up authority hierarchies; those in lower positions of authority serve those in higher positions of authority. In forms of church government in which a higher authority, such as a bishop, presbytery, or congregation, appoint church leaders, these church leaders serve the interests of those in authority over them. In forms of church government in which church leaders appoint themselves to be the highest authority in the church, the congregation serves the interests of the leaders.
Church Leaders Should Be Regularly Evaluated by a Higher Ecclesial Authority
When a higher authority gives a position of lower authority to a church leader and outlines the responsibilities of the position, it is incumbent upon the higher authority to regularly evaluate those under their authority. The higher authority must be certain that those to whom authority has been given are exercising that authority in accordance with the expectations placed upon them. In Jesus’ example, he is ultimately evaluated by the manner in which he submitted to death. However, there are other examples in Jesus’ life in which God the Father makes evaluative pronouncements over him. At his baptism, the Father declares, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Matt. 3:17) Later, at his transfiguration, the Father again declares, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him” (Matt. 17:5).
Church Leaders Should Be Held Accountable by a Higher Ecclesial Authority
The end result of being given authority, serving under authority, and being regularly evaluated is accountability. Accountability carries with it a connotation of being punitive, but it is also a mechanism for recompense. Accountability can result in correction, discipline, or dismissal, but it can also result in commendation, promotion, and reward. However, accountability can only be exercised when the entire authority structure is in place and functioning as it should. In tragic stories of abusive leaders, we usually see a breakdown in the structure. Perhaps the leader appointed himself or changed the bylaws in order to hold the position of highest authority in the church. Perhaps he placed himself in an authority structure in which he didn’t serve under a higher authority. Perhaps he wrote his own job description or didn’t have one. Perhaps he was so powerful, those charged with evaluation were too frightened to say anything negative. What is so tragic about these stories is that it is much more likely, had a healthy authority structure been in place, that the leader would have been corrected or removed far before his abusive behavior could have had the widespread impact it eventually did.
Conclusion
It is a sad reality that much of the Church does not understand or recognize the need for the healthy administration of authority in churches. Instead of demanding healthy authority structures, many Christians are content (and eager) to serve the interests of leaders who are self-appointed, lack requirements, expectations, and standards, are unevaluated, and unaccountable. To compound the tragedy, not only does this result in the abuse of church members and the erosion of their faith, it destroys many leaders, allowing them to slowly wreck their lives with very little to no intervention until catastrophic collapse. Even in cases in which the church leaders’ personal strength of character, and the grace of God, help to mitigate the dangers of unhealthy authority structures, the leaders become accustomed to unaccountability and find it impossible to form accurate assessments of their ministries.
When the apostle John described the smoke rising from the destruction of Babylon, the epitome of corrupt, worldly systems, he also described a voice from heaven crying out, “Come out of her, my people…” (Rev. 18:4). Similarly, God’s people should leave behind systems in which self-appointed, unevaluated, and unaccountable leaders lord illegitimate authority over their followers. Christians, both leaders and followers, should demand healthy authority structures in their churches and work toward this goal with patience and kindness.
