I know that’s a bold statement, but I didn’t say it. The apostle Paul did. That is a direct quote from 1 Corinthians 9:14, and it is preceded by saying that this is the Lord’s command (not Paul’s). Here’s the whole passage, in context:

This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me. Don’t we have the right to food and drink? Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?

Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk? Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn’t the Law say the same thing? For it is written in the Law of Moses: “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.” Is it about oxen that God is concerned? Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?

But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ. Don’t you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.

But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me. I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of this boast. Yet when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, for I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me. What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make use of my rights in preaching it (1 Corinthians 9:3-18, NIV, emphasis mine).

Matthew Henry wrote this in his commentary on v. 6:

[Paul] had a right to marry as well as other apostles, and to claim what was needful for his wife, and his children if he had any, from the churches, without labouring with his own hands to get it. Those who seek to do our souls good, should have food provided for them. But he renounced his right, rather than hinder his success by claiming it. It is the people’s duty to maintain their minister. He may wave his right, as Paul did; but those transgress a precept of Christ, who deny or withhold due support.

In other words, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel have the right to earn their living from it. This is the modern day pastor (which corresponds more to the biblical role of elder). Paul chose to serve in bi-vocational ministry, that is, he chose to earn his living from a separate job, that of tentmaking. But that was Paul’s choice. Paul makes it clear that biblically, ministers have a RIGHT to earn their living from preaching the gospel.

However, Paul also says that voluntary preachers receive a reward for their duties, while those who exercise their right to a salary “simply discharge the trust committed to [them].” In other words, their vocation is no better than the local plumber, teacher, tax collector, or nurse. Each of these is commanded to be a full-time minister of the gospel (all believers), but some may earn their living from it as a right, which has clearly been commanded by the Lord.

Paul recognized that as a missionary in his context, bi-vocational ministry was a more effective approach. He willingly sets aside his right to financial support so that people will not think his message is just a fancy speech designed to get money. Some Greek orators made their living by traveling and entertaining audiences with speeches. Others formed schools and charged students for lectures. Paul does not want anyone to think his message is motivated by selfish concerns. But Paul’s willingness to support himself does not change the Lord’s command. Ministers of the gospel have a right to financial support, and believers have an obligation to provide that support.

The command is not aimed solely at vocational ministers so that they should run around demanding their support (although it would be biblically warranted if their “flock” didn’t support them), the command appears to target all believers so that they recognize that it is their responsibility to support the work of the gospel.

1 Timothy 5:17-20 says:

The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,” and “The worker deserves his wages.” Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning.

Elders here are appointed leaders, not merely those recognized because of their age and experience. Those folks are actually addressed in v. 1: “Do not rebuke an older man harshly, but exhort him as if he were your father.” In Acts 14:23, “Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, committed them to the Lord, in whom they had put their trust.” “Double honor” in the 1 Timothy 5 passage does not refer to salary, but this passage does reiterate the point that “the worker deserves his wages.” It also establishes that those elders whose work is preaching and teaching are serving in an honorable vocation. It is a respectable career choice.

This becomes even more pertinent as more and more heresies abound and the resurrection of false teachings from the past continues. It is extremely beneficial to the church to have individuals who receive in-depth training in the bible, church history, theology, and practical ministry (counseling, helping people cope with traumatic events, addiction therapy, etc.). There is nothing wrong with this, indeed it is very helpful to the Church. Unfortunately, not everyone can afford to go to seminary to learn about church history, biblical languages, etc. Many more don’t have the opportunity to go, and even more do not have the intellectual capacity to retain this knowledge. This doesn’t invalidate the education and training, however. A lot of people aren’t smart enough to go to medical school, but we’re all glad that we have doctors. The same is true of pastors. They are not better than other believers because of their training, but they are to be respected and should be able to earn a living from their work.

Not everyone is meant to serve in this role. Ephesians 4:11-13 says:

It was [God] who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

Clearly not all are called to fulfill these roles in the Church. The purpose of these roles is to prepare God’s people for good works of service, building up the body of Christ “until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.” Since this hasn’t happened yet, we still need people to fulfill these roles. Not just anyone should jump into these roles, either. James 3:1 says:

Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

God apparently even has a higher standard of judgment for those who teach His people. This should not be taken lightly. To ensure that not just anyone became an elder, Paul set up standards for them. Hear his words in Titus 1:5-9:

The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you. An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. Since an overseer is entrusted with God’s work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.

There you have it, the requirements of an elder and parts of his job description, and a reiteration of the fact that it is an appointed position. Paul also mentions here (and in several other places) that elders should not pursue dishonest gain. This precludes those folks who would serve in these roles solely to make money, or to make it dishonestly (such as through prosperity teachings). That would be wrong. But it doesn’t preclude them from making an honest living from preaching and teaching the gospel.

There are a lot more scripture passages that we could explore, but this post is long enough as it is. It is a topic that deserves attention, though. And it is one I should have posted at least a few weeks ago before I started shifting some of my terminology on this blog. I apologize for not sharing these thoughts sooner with you, my readers. I know I have written blog posts with the opposite stance in the past, but the clear teachings of the word of God prevail, as explained above. Undoubtedly there will be more discussion on this issue, feel free to comment and read the comments to gain more insight.

Dick Rockenbach contacted me via email about this, then he posted it on Facebook:

This made me start wondering about codependency and the church’s relationship with clergy members. Here’s the definition of codependency from Way 2 Hope, an organization that helps those in codependent relationships:

Codependency is a condition that results in a dysfunctional relationship between the codependent and other people. A codependent is addicted to helping someone. They need to be needed. This addiction is sometimes so strong, the codependent will cause the other person to continue to be needy. This behavior is called enabling. The enabler will purposefully overlook someone abusing a child, will call in sick for someone suffering from addiction, will put roadblocks to prevent their child from becoming independent, or even keep a sick family member from getting the treatment that would make them well. These are behaviors common to codependents. A codependent often suffers from a ‘Messiah Complex’ where he sees problems with everyone and sees himself as the only person who can help. Here is where I need to work…trying to be ‘Mr. Fixit’ for everyone…even those who don’t feel they need anything fixed. A codependent counselor (common) will never think your sessions are done. In fact, they often create issues that weren’t there just so they can continue to feel they’re an important, no, essential part of your life. This is one of the reasons I always spend the first counseling session evaluating the problem and setting up a schedule of sessions to complete the work. If we’re not making progress, I don’t want to become the person you feel you have to take every problem to…it’s too addictive to me. That’s what codependence is…an addiction to being needed.

So how did this codependency develop? Clearly it is because of clergy-members’ addiction to being needed. This addiction is easy for any of us to fall into, but especially for those who are in positions where people come to them for help. But this doesn’t let the so-called “lay people” off the hook, either. They enable the clergy by continuing to look to them as having the answers to all of life’s problems. Thus the clergy maintain codependency among the “laity” by being all too eager to give an answer to any question, even when the answer is not or cannot be known, and the “laity” enable the clergy by remaining ignorant and relying on them for spiritual growth.

This has birthed not a few generations of biblically illiterate believers, returning us to the sacerdotalism that Martin Luther and the Reformers fought so hard to eradicate. Thanks to Sunday School (which, at its inception, was heavily opposed on grounds that it would destroy the father’s role as the spiritual head of his family), we now have codependency between humans rather than independence from man and dependence only upon Christ.

But it is not only clergy and laity who do this. This also happens among many other informal relationships, where those who are recognized as leaders become codependent with their followers/disciples, and home-based fellowships become cult-like in their codependency. Neither institutional nor organic ministry models are exempt.

But simply identifying the problem doesn’t help. What can be done to change this? The first important thing to understand is that codependency is possible for anyone because of mankind’s propensity towards sin, particularly pride and idolatry. Second, we must realize that we have a loving God who is able to set us free from codependent relationships and direct us toward Himself. Third, we must break the cycle. This means that leaders must be willing to admit when they don’t know the answers, and be willing to refer people to other sources for help and knowledge, teaching disciples to feed themselves, not just to wait for the leader’s spoon. Followers must stop enabling the leaders and begin seeking answers and help from other sources, most specifically from Christ Himself via His Word.

By the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit will enable us in a positive way to break free from the spiritually dangerous cycle of codependency, moving on towards maturity and freedom in Christ.

I’ve promised to post more of my questions causing me cognitive dissonance here for you to answer. Here goes. In the past I’ve written about what I believe to be the false dichotomy of clergy vs. laity. I feel that the clergy/laity dichotomy perpetuates an awful falsehood-namely, that some Christians are more privileged than others to serve the Lord. The contemporary practice of ordination creates a special caste of Christian. Whether it be the priest in Catholicism or the pastor in Protestantism, the result is the same: the most important ministry is restricted to a few “special” believers. When we make the pastor a professional clergyman who is distinct from laity we begin to view ministry as something that is only his responsibility. One person is not meant to sport all of these hats. Only an every-member functioning Body can accomplish the ministry that is required to be done. It shouldn’t be “lonely at the top,” because we aren’t meant to live in a separate caste from one another. The teacher is just as vital to the Body as the cashier and the pastor. How does Protestantism reject the Catholic priesthood while maintaining its own pastoral office, all the while affirming the priesthood of all believers (1 Pet. 2:9, Rev. 1:6, 5:10)?

A popular notion today is that there is a clear dichotomy, or distinction, between sacred and secular. Such distinctions are commonly made by Christians in the areas of music and vocations. In music, for example, we have secular, or “worldly” music. And then we have Christian music, which is often regarded as being sacred (even though most “Christian” songs are just as secular as “worldly” songs).

But the area I’d most like to focus on is that of vocation, the employment positions we hold. For some reason we continue to foster this sacred/secular distinction for jobs: some people are called into ministry, and the rest of us hold secular jobs. But that’s not what the Bible teaches. All believers are called into full time ministry! It is not something reserved for a clerical professional – we are all called to be full time ministers in God’s present kingdom! Everyday life is sanctified by God, we have a whole life embracing, fully comprehensive Gospel for the transformation of all things. This affects every aspect of our lives.

Far too many today espouse the idea that ministry is an institution that is reserved only for the few who are “called” and “ordained.” The problem is, this (in practice) denies the priesthood of all believers. Ordination was fashioned in the fourth century after the Roman rituals of the appointment of public officials to office, and the church adopted this when the lines between church and state were blurred under Constantine’s rule. This distinction between clergy and laity still exists to this day.

Don’t believe me? Why do many traditional pastors still dress differently than us “normal lay people”? Point stated. To quote Frank Viola in his book Pagan Christianity?: Exploring the Roots of Our Church Practices:

The contemporary practice of ordination creates a special caste of Christian. Whether it be the priest in Catholicism or the pastor in Protestantism, the result is the same: The most important ministry is restricted to a few “special” believers. . . .

Tremendous psychological factors make laypeople feel that ministry is the responsibility of the pastor. It’s his job. He’s the expert is often their thinking. . . .

The clergy/laity dichotomy perpetuates an awful falsehood-namely, that some Christians are more privileged than others to serve the Lord.

Hmm, I think this is a problem. But don’t take my word for it, think for yourselves. I’m not calling for an abolition of hierarchical leadership in the church like Viola and Barna, but I do think a lot needs to change in the way we do church and recognize leaders.

The pastoral office is really not something God envisioned, not in the way we utilize it today anyways. George Barna did a study on pastors, and some of what he found was eye-opening. Did you know these startling statistics about pastors:

• 94% feel pressured to have an ideal family
• 81% say they have insufficient time with their spouses
• 80% believe that pastoral ministry affects their family negatively
• 70% do not have someone they consider a close friend
• 70% have lower self-esteem than when they entered the ministry
• 50% feel unable to meet the demands of the job
• 80% are discouraged or deal with depression
• 40% of pastoral resignations are due to burnout
• 1,400 ministers in all denominations across the United States are fired or forced to resign each month
• The average length of a pastorate has declined from seven years to just over four years

Do you still think this is of God. I know there are exceptions to all of this, some congregations are very understanding and whatnot, but a majority of pastors are asked to essentially conduct all of the local ministry of the church (or have their hand in it). Many pastors crumble under this pressure — and that’s because it wasn’t designed to work this way!

When we make the pastor a professional clergyman who is distinct from laity we begin to view ministry as something that is only his (or her) responsibility. One person is not meant to sport all of these hats! They just can’t! Only an every-member functioning Body can accomplish the ministry that is required to be done. It shouldn’t be “lonely at the top,” because we aren’t meant to live in a separate caste from one another! Remember what Paul said about the different parts of the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12). Too many pastors are trying to be the head (which is reserved for Christ), or they are performing all the other parts’ functions since they are not doing it.

Now pastors may say, “we have to do this because the congregation won’t ’step up to the plate’ and do what they demand from us.” May I contend that in order to get them to ’step up to the plate’ you must foundationally change the very way we do church! The current structure clearly doesn’t work. It has failed to produce anything but a passive laity who is utterly dependent on one man, their pastor, for the past 500 hundred years. I think some revolutionary change is in order. That change is Christianity 2.0.

There is no such thing as a “secular job.” I am called into the mission field and minister to my coworkers and those brought into my path. This is no less “sacred” than any pastor’s job. The Gospel is meant to transform our entire lives, not just our Sunday morning experience.