The Lord's Anointed, Pt. 2

What is the relationship between clergy and laity? Is it ruler/subject? Boss/employee? Parent/child? Brother/brother? Who is ultimately in charge of the church? What is the proper attitude toward the one that is in charge?

“The interests of Christ's kingdom call for diligence and faithfulness in as much greater degree as spiritual and eternal things are of more importance than temporal things. There must be no feeble working, no sluggish, tardy action, for this would imperil our own souls and the souls of others…

“What general would undertake the command of an army while the officers under him refused to obey until they had satisfied themselves that his command was a reasonable one? Such a course would mean loss to the entire army. It would weaken the hands of the soldiers. The question would arise in their minds, Is there not a better way? But even though there be a better way, the orders must be obeyed, or defeat and disaster would result. A moment's delay, and the advantage that would have been gained is lost.

“Every good soldier is implicit and prompt in the obedience he renders to his captain. The will of the commander is to be the will of the soldier. Sometimes the soldier may be surprised at the command given, but he is not to stop to inquire the reason for it. When the order of the captain crosses the wishes of the soldier, he is not to hesitate and complain, saying, I see no consistency in these plans. He must not frame excuses and leave his work undone. Such soldiers would not be accepted as fitted to engage in earthly conflicts, and much more will they not be accepted in Christ's army. When Christ commands, His soldiers must obey without hesitation. They must be faithful soldiers, or He cannot accept them. Freedom of choice is given to every soul, but after a man has enlisted, he is required to be as true as steel, come life or come death” (Manuscript 7 1/2, 1900).

God is in charge of the church. To God, our General, we own absolute obedience. But what is the role of the clergy?

“But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light” (1 Peter 2:9).

“The believer in Christ is consecrated to high and holy purpose. Before the service of the royal priesthood the glory of the Aaronic priesthood is eclipsed. Called according to God's purpose, set apart by grace divine, invested with Christ's righteousness, imbued with the Holy Spirit, offering up the sacrifices of a broken and contrite heart, the true believer is indeed a representative of the Redeemer. Upon such a worshiper, God looks with delight” (Review and Herald, October 30, 1900 par. 7).

The first thing that should be noted is that the word “clergy” doesn’t appear anywhere in the Bible. The word and the concept behind it are of human invention. God never intended for the work of spreading the gospel to be relegated to a few full-time individuals. God’s plan is for all of His people to be His messengers. The role of clergy to laity should be one of facilitator-participant. When all are active in the work as God intends the purpose of the clergy is to coordinate, facilitate, and advise—to be the “point person.” This role calls for respect, as can be seen in the following scriptural example.

“Paul looked straight at the Sanhedrin and said, 'My brothers, I have fulfilled my duty to God in all good conscience to this day.' At this the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him, 'God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! You sit there to judge me according to the law, yet you yourself violate the law by commanding that I be struck!'

“Those who were standing near Paul said, 'You dare to insult God's high priest?'

“Paul replied, 'Brothers, I did not realize that he was the high priest; for it is written: 'Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people'" (Acts 23:1-5).

Notice that Paul’s action here is one of losing his temper and hurling an insult at the high priest. This is clearly unacceptable behavior toward a leader, as Paul himself quickly acknowledges. This does not, however, preclude disagreeing with or even disobeying leaders respectfully.

“Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. 'We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name,' he said. 'Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood.'

"Peter and the other apostles replied: 'We must obey God rather than men!'" (Acts 5:27-29).

The apostles here appeal to a concept common to both scripture and the Spirit of Prophesy: human leadership, whether religious or secular, should be followed only as long as it is in obedience to God’s principles and directions. If that leadership ceases to follow God, the true follower of God is obligated to disobey that leadership.

“For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me” (Matthew 10:35-37).

“We cannot, we must not, place blind confidence in any man, however high his profession of faith or his position in the church. We must not follow his guidance, unless the Word of God sustains him. The Lord would have His people individually distinguish between sin and righteousness, between the precious and the vile” (Signs of the Times, Aug. 17, 1882).

“There are those who have stood as managers and yet have not managed after God's order. Some have served on committees here and committees there, and have felt free to dictate just what the committee should say and do, claiming that those who did not carry out these ideas were sinning against Christ. When the power of God is manifest in the church and in the management of the various departments of his work, when it is evident that the managers are themselves controlled by the Holy Spirit of God, then it is time to consider that you are safe in accepting what they may say, under God. But you must know that you are guided by the principles of the Word of the living God. The Great General of armies, the Captain of the Lord's host, is our leader” (General Conference Bulletin, April 3, 1901 par. 32).

In other words, it is the responsibility of each individual church member to verify that interpretations, assertions, and recommendations made by clergy (or even lay leadership) are biblically accurate, and act accordingly.

“When this power which God has placed in the church is accredited to one man, and he is invested with the authority to be judgment for other minds, then the true Bible order is changed. Satan's efforts upon such a man's mind will be most subtle and sometimes overpowering, because through this mind he thinks he can affect many others. Your position on leadership is correct, if you give to the highest organized authority in the church what you have given to one man. God never designed that His work should bear the stamp of one man's mind and one man's judgment” (Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 3, p. 493).

The Seventh-day Adventist Church operates by representative government because there is safety in collective wisdom. In order for this to work properly all members of the collective must be informed and involved. If members choose not to be involved, or show up but defer to the opinion of the clergy rather than expressing their own, then the benefit of collective wisdom is not attained. There is great danger in this because, as the statement above points out, it is far too easy for Satan to target and influence the opinion of a single individual in a leadership position to whom others leave the decision making.

“I have often been instructed by the Lord that no man's judgment should be surrendered to the judgment of any other one man. Never should the mind of one man or the minds of a few men be regarded as sufficient in wisdom and power to control the work, and to say what plans should be followed. But when, in a General Conference, the judgment of the brethren assembled from all parts of the field, is exercised, private independence and private judgment must not be stubbornly maintained, but surrendered. Never should a laborer regard as a virtue the persistent maintenance of his position of independence, contrary to the decision of the general body . . . . God has ordained that the representatives of His church from all parts of the earth, when assembled in a General Conference, shall have authority. The error that some are in danger of committing, is in giving to the mind and judgment of one man, or of a small group of men, the full measure of authority and influence that God has vested in His church, in the judgment and voice of the General Conference assembled to plan for the prosperity and advancement of His work” (Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 9, pp. 260, 261).

When it comes to the principle of individual thought and judgment there is one exception—decisions made by the General Conference in Session. Ironically, in a situation where at nearly every hand the Group is being told to submit independent judgment to the wisdom of the church the one expression of collective wisdom which God ordains to supercede independent judgment is the one the local clergy are trying to ignore: decisions made by the General Conference in Session as expressed in the Church Manual.

“One Rule for Directors and 'Inferiors.'--Let men in responsible positions consider to a purpose that there is not one rule of action for the men in authority and another for the class who are expected to submit to their decisions; not one rule for the director and another for the supposed inferiors. I say supposed, for many who are treated as inferiors are men whose principles and course of action are such as heaven approves…

“I have risen a long while before day to write these words, for I see a great deal that needs to be done in heart and practice for men in authority who are very officious to make laws and restrictions for others, while they themselves do not obey the law of God” (The Publishing Ministry, pp.130, 131).

“The minister is not to rule imperiously over the flock entrusted to his care, but to be their ensample, and to show them the way to heaven. Following the example of Christ, he should intercede with God for the people of his care till he sees that his prayers are answered… The principles that rule in heaven should rule upon earth; the same love that animates the angels, the same purity and holiness that reign in heaven, should, as far as possible, be reproduced upon earth. God holds the minister responsible for the power he exercises, but does not justify His servants in perverting that power into despotism over the flock of their care” (Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 4, pp.267, 268).

Our final observation in exploring the relationship between clergy and laity is that we are all on a level playing field before God. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. No one gets a free pass because of his/her profession.

“We are to recognize human government as an ordinance of divine appointment, and teach obedience to it as a sacred duty, within its legitimate sphere. But when its claims conflict with the claims of God, we must obey God rather than men. God's word must be recognized as above all human legislation. A "Thus saith the Lord" is not to be set aside for a "Thus saith the church" or a "Thus saith the state." The crown of Christ is to be lifted above the diadems of earthly potentates” (Gospel Workers, pp.389, 390).