Perrydox.com is devoted to the pursuit of truth, whether plain or paradoxical, whether simple or sublime, or simply absurd yet absolute.
1 Peter 5:1-4 – Do Elders Have Authority?
Sometimes the very texts used to discredit and disavow certain beliefs and practices, upon further examination, prove the exact opposite. For example, many deny the necessity of baptism and cite 1 Corinthians 1:17 as proof. Further contextual review reveals the whole passage as actually very pro-baptism. That is why Paul uses baptism as such a powerful example in that context.
With that illustrating the ability to misconstrue the actual meaning of a text, let me address the question of whether or not elders have authority. Some use 1 Peter 5:3 to deny any authority to elders: nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge. Could this text actually teach the exact opposite of those who infer this means elders have no authority? Could Peter be teaching elders HOW to use their authority? Or maybe more accurately, might the apostle exhort HOW not to use authority? We will examine this text using the Inductive Study Method that asks, WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY, AND HOW.
Oftentimes, different people hold to two diametrically opposed views on the authority of elders. One view grants overseers no authority, only the power of their example. That would be akin to a believing wife’s relationship to her unfaithful/unbelieving husband (1 Peter 3:1ff). The other extreme warns us that disobeying or disagreeing with elders is on par with disobeying God since they supposedly exercise God’s authority on earth. Can you say the Pope? Both are wrong. Both are extreme.
Let us begin at verse one of 1 Peter 5. Peter exhorts as a fellow elder; he does not command as an apostle (Philemon 8), although he could have. Obviously elders do not have an apostle’s authority – although it does seem that some grant them such. We probably have all heard “if you disobey the elders you disobey God.” Wrong. Elders do not have that kind of authority. Now if you disobeyed an apostle, you disobeyed God, because they spoke directly from God. Nevertheless, elders are not apostles. Since Peter exhorts as an elder, part of the way elders rule is through exhorting, teaching, and comforting. That is definitely something other than simply being an example. Could this be part of HOW they lead?
Next in verse two we notice WHAT elders do: shepherd the flock of God. Also, notice an important WHO in this phrase – the flock is God’s, not the elders. That will help answer HOW elders rule. They do not rule for themselves. Every decision must be for God’s good, not theirs. Every decision must be for the flock’s good, not theirs. That is why one qualification is not being self-willed (Tius 1:7). Here in our congregation, the elders have congregational meetings every two months. In matters of opinion, they make many decisions that are not in-line with their own wishes. Why? It is not their flock!
Verse 2 also tells us WHERE elders are to shepherd – among them. While we often use this verse to disprove the Sponsoring Church, Peter’s words were not meant to prove a negative. The words actually suggest the close relationship between elders and congregations. They are among them. If elders are only to be good examples, are they only to be good examples among their own congregation?
WHAT are elders to do? As we’ve seen, they shepherd. While that analogy conjures many applications, the text itself explains it succinctly with the words, exercising oversight. For us, the Holy Spirit explains the parabolic plainly. Shepherding is exercising oversight (episkopeo). Isn’t that exactly what a real shepherd does? Doesn’t he watch over the flock? Notice that this is an active activity. Being an example is passive. Is exercising oversight by a shepherd for his own good? No. Does he make decisions for the good of the flock? Obviously. So the real question is, is there any authority in exercising oversight?
WHY does a man accept this responsibility? Not for sordid gain, but with eagerness. Something more than being a good example is involved here, or else we could pay elders for simply living good lives.
Nevertheless, none of these directly answer the question of HOW elders shepherd by overseeing. Peter explains it both negatively and positively. Yet too often we miss the necessary implication of the negative, thus only seeing the negative. First let us look at the word nor (mede) in v.3 This interjection precedes a negative explanation of HOW elders were not to oversee. The very necessity of explaining HOW elders were not to oversee actually implies a valuable assertion of WHAT overseeing involves. Nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge (v.3) As we all have heard, katakurieuo (i.e., lording it over) is found in Matthew 20:25; Mark 10:42 in speaking of Gentile rulers. But in these passages, was Jesus speaking of WHAT Gentile rulers do, or HOW they rule? There is a difference. Notice that katakurieuo is also used in Acts 19:16 – The man, in whom was the evil spirit, leaped on them and subdued (katakurieuo) all of them and overpowered them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. Lording over someone is more than authority. It is the forceful use of authority. In other words, it is HOW authority is used. It is not authority by itself. It is force.
Therefore, if my analysis is correct, when the Holy Spirit exhorted through Peter for elders on HOW not to oversee, the very word He used necessarily implies the existence of authority. Otherwise, if there is no WHAT, there cannot be a HOW.
Now for the positive side of HOW elders rule, they are to be examples. Can’t you be a good example in showing HOW to exercise oversight? Isn’t that what Christ did? All through 1 Peter we are exhorted to follow the example of Christ. Did Jesus ever exercise authority while on earth? Yes, but only in the role of serving both God and man. When He said He did not come to be served, but to serve, that definitely did not mean He possessed no authority (Matthew 5:29). When I say elders imitate Christ in their authority, I do not mean in WHAT kind of authority Christ has, but HOW Christ ruled. Their authority is much more limited than Christ’s. Elders authority in matters of faith has already been settled. Elders authority in matters of opinion can only be expressed in sync with the flock, not in isolation. Elders authority in wisdom, must supersede their own wishes, and the spiritual immaturity of the congregation.
There is no authority in scriptures for the type of authoritarian elder that sits in a board room making decisions in isolation of the needs and wants of the congregation by forcing his will upon them. However, there is the type of authority in making decisions for the good of the congregation, while walking among them. Jesus Christ Himself showed us that self-sacrificing authority. Elders, be examples in exercising oversight. Be good shepherds.
Perry Hall
Comments