ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 12:53 pm
mike wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 8:52 am
The only problem I have with the process is that it places the vetting process completely in the hands of the ministry, but is typically thought and spoken of as being a divinely ordered process of God selecting the leader. In my opinion, if we're going to say that God selects the leader in this process, the lot should include an additional book without a paper (or however it may be done) to give the option of none of the above being chosen. If the lot is viewed as simply a random selection among equally qualified candidates, then I don't really see a problem with the process as it is done. The lot falling on a particular person is no more divinely ordained (nor any less so) than our selection of a Sunday school teacher or janitor.
The only thing that really bothers me about the lot is when/if it is portrayed as completely the work of God, as if men had nothing to do with the selection process, which is pretty far from the truth. And I have no problem with men being involved; in fact, I think there is nothing wrong with simply voting and choosing leaders by a pre-determined process of elimination with no lot at all. At least two of the ordinations in our congregation never involved a lot because there was only one person who reached the numerical threshold required. Transparency and honesty is the key to appointing leaders.
Would you describe the ordiation of Matthias recorded in Acts 1:15-26 as being problematic for the reasons mentioned above?
Good question. No, I can't exactly say that this ordination was problematic, can I?
Acts 1:23 So they proposed two: Joseph, called Barsabbas, who was also known as Justus, and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “You, Lord, know the hearts of all; show which of these two You have chosen 25 to take the place in this apostolic service that Judas left to go to his own place.” 26 Then they cast lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias. So he was numbered with the 11 apostles.
"They" apparently refers to "the brothers":
14 All these were continually united in prayer, along with the women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, and His brothers. 15 During these days Peter stood up among the brothers—the number of people who were together was about 120...
The group of brothers obviously felt that both of the two men they named were qualified to be numbered with the apostles. And although they obviously nominated these men in a transparent process, they did propose two names, not one, and so they left the result up to the Lord and cast lots.
The selection is not presented as something entirely orchestrated by the Lord, and yet the apostles thought of the lot as the Lord showing who he had already decided upon. The two deciding factors in the selecting of leaders (the voice of the church and the casting of lots) clearly aren't mutually exclusive in terms of representing the Lord making his will known.
Where ordinations being thought of as God choosing a leader gets really distorted in my opinion is when leaders disregard the voice of the church in this process, a crucial part in this Acts story. If the apostles thought that God had already selected someone, why didn't they put the whole group into the lot and let the Lord decide? No, I think they understood the role of the church as being at part of how God reveals his will. Somehow, they came to the conclusion as brothers that two people were qualified. At that point, they turned it over to the lot. They trusted BOTH the voice of the church, and the lot. I think it is incumbent on leaders today to trust the voice of the church as well.
If we could overhear the conversations behind closed doors during an ordination, I wonder to what extent we would find that leaders trust the Lord to speak through the voice of the church, and how much they feel like they need to manipulate the list of those qualified before "letting the Lord choose." To what extent can the nomination process be controlled and guided by leaders and it still be said that end result is the Lord's choice?
In Acts 6, it appears that the apostles gave the responsibility for selecting servants of the church (deacons?) completely over to the group of believers, not even being involved in the selection process.
In those days, as the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a complaint by the Hellenistic Jews against the Hebraic Jews that their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution. 2 Then the Twelve summoned the whole company of the disciples and said, “It would not be right for us to give up preaching about God to handle financial matters. 3 Therefore, brothers, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and wisdom, whom we can appoint to this duty. 4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the preaching ministry.” 5 The proposal pleased the whole company. So they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte from Antioch. 6 They had them stand before the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.
Remember the prisoners, as though you were in prison with them, and the mistreated, as though you yourselves were suffering bodily. -Heb. 13:3