Intriguing Smith quote. Though I remember Hauerwas saying that where we studied theology is more determinative than our denominational contexts so that whatever your background, you’re going to think more like a Yalie or a Dukie or a Fuller alum than your denominational coreligionists.
I'm glad that the conversation is happening but I believe that polity itself determines the level of maturity a believer is allowed to achieve within their community. In an elder led context there are a certain amount of elder positions and then no one else is considered mature (men usually fill these positions exclusively). In a congregation led context maturity is conglomerate; either everyone is mature or no one is because it's basically democracy. Neither are altogether biblical. We do not currently have healthy metrics for maturity in the body of Christ because all of our models are extra-biblical by nature. They have more to do with getting a Bible degree or being married or a man or having kids or (quite honestly) being the right height, weight, gender, sexual orientation and ethnicity. It's a real problem that unfortunately every person in this conversation is a contributing part of due to our polities.
TLDR; Polity for the Least of These has less to do with who holds the power, it's more about who we all are in Christ and the spiritual rights that flow from that identity. It's what my whole publication is devoted to uncovering how to be one in love, faith and hope in the gospel.
Paywalled, so I can’t engage with the entire substance of your thought. So I’ll do the best I can based on your comment.
I think I would probably agree with the theory there but the practice may be an interesting discussion.
The way we work it out in my church (and relating churches) is through gifting and call - eldering, for example, is a function, not a position. I’ve never encountered us hitting a ceiling on eldering: so long as we are moving forward missionally (apostolically) I’ve never been in the situation you described about “elder-led” churches. But I suspect you mean something rather different. (It was that comment that caught my attention). We always have elders being raised up and most of them end up planting in some way. So that way people are growing into maturity at all times. (And besides, we don’t see elders as the peak of maturity - it’s a call, not necessarily the only call).
It sounds like you're in a missional community which (to be fair) do way better than other models in terms of raising up people to full reproducing maturity in Christ, but regardless are Elder led. Missional communities tend to get around some of the pitfalls of Elder led polities for a good while because they are always shifting and changing and sending, but what usually happens in an Elder led community is that a hierarchy forms--the ones who are being sent out are the most mature by default otherwise no one would follow them, and no one who is mature sticks around long enough to show what a broadened view of spiritual maturity looks like. The people of God are soft and formless by nature and so when form starts to set it harden like an artery constricting the flow of blood to the heart. Missional Communities get around this by maintaining very small groupings that are ever changing, which works really well if you're in a city context but not so well in the back field of Northern Ireland where every form of Christianity is like a hardened, blocked artery. They all suffer the same heart failure and so maybe only one or two are raised to fill reproducing maturity.
I use elder as an example because it's what most people use as evidence of spiritual maturity which maybe 1 or 2% of the body will achieve and, depending on your form, women can never achieve. Eldership (by which I mean elder Christian as the scriptures seem to say) isn't a tidy package of church documents and forms and functions and giftings but a clearer wider view of Christ through what it looks like for as many giftings as possible to have reached maturity in Christ and to lead as a whole body--not to splinter in our very protestant manner after we get the stamp of approval from the reigning gaggle of men who it cannot be said are mature in Christ though they make themselves out to do or not do the necessary things in the flesh. Elders (according to the Word) judge (which all Christians are called to) take on disciples (which all Christians are called to) and evangelise (which all Christians are called to) if we do these things well, then we are afforded the right of Eldership.
All are called to be pastoral - but elders are generally the guys who look after a specific community in a specific context.
If we understand that the gifts in scripture are for all, and all share the same call to the Kingdom, worked out in different functions, we understand that maturity isn’t about function at all - it’s about relationship with Jesus. In this way we can avoid what you’re outlining.
So I think you are right in your assessment to a degree, but I think you are also being very sweeping about communities. One thing that is very important is “values”. Two churches may have the same polity, but are very different because of the values of that church (usually the responsibility of leaders to instill those values). Eph 4 shows us that God gifts in different ways to raise all to maturity, so the gifts are important when it comes to instilling the right values.
A church polity must be one that aids the leaders to instil the right values. I think you are alluding to this in your comments. So it might be interesting to hear from you what values you think lead to the most mature church bodies.
Intriguing Smith quote. Though I remember Hauerwas saying that where we studied theology is more determinative than our denominational contexts so that whatever your background, you’re going to think more like a Yalie or a Dukie or a Fuller alum than your denominational coreligionists.
That’s interesting too. The idea that an institution shapes us by form and values is surely a part of it.
I'm glad that the conversation is happening but I believe that polity itself determines the level of maturity a believer is allowed to achieve within their community. In an elder led context there are a certain amount of elder positions and then no one else is considered mature (men usually fill these positions exclusively). In a congregation led context maturity is conglomerate; either everyone is mature or no one is because it's basically democracy. Neither are altogether biblical. We do not currently have healthy metrics for maturity in the body of Christ because all of our models are extra-biblical by nature. They have more to do with getting a Bible degree or being married or a man or having kids or (quite honestly) being the right height, weight, gender, sexual orientation and ethnicity. It's a real problem that unfortunately every person in this conversation is a contributing part of due to our polities.
What do you think is a more Biblical polity?
I make a start of answering that question in Polity for the Least of These https://dlbacon.substack.com/p/polity-for-the-least-of-these?r=2v2ne0
TLDR; Polity for the Least of These has less to do with who holds the power, it's more about who we all are in Christ and the spiritual rights that flow from that identity. It's what my whole publication is devoted to uncovering how to be one in love, faith and hope in the gospel.
Paywalled, so I can’t engage with the entire substance of your thought. So I’ll do the best I can based on your comment.
I think I would probably agree with the theory there but the practice may be an interesting discussion.
The way we work it out in my church (and relating churches) is through gifting and call - eldering, for example, is a function, not a position. I’ve never encountered us hitting a ceiling on eldering: so long as we are moving forward missionally (apostolically) I’ve never been in the situation you described about “elder-led” churches. But I suspect you mean something rather different. (It was that comment that caught my attention). We always have elders being raised up and most of them end up planting in some way. So that way people are growing into maturity at all times. (And besides, we don’t see elders as the peak of maturity - it’s a call, not necessarily the only call).
It sounds like you're in a missional community which (to be fair) do way better than other models in terms of raising up people to full reproducing maturity in Christ, but regardless are Elder led. Missional communities tend to get around some of the pitfalls of Elder led polities for a good while because they are always shifting and changing and sending, but what usually happens in an Elder led community is that a hierarchy forms--the ones who are being sent out are the most mature by default otherwise no one would follow them, and no one who is mature sticks around long enough to show what a broadened view of spiritual maturity looks like. The people of God are soft and formless by nature and so when form starts to set it harden like an artery constricting the flow of blood to the heart. Missional Communities get around this by maintaining very small groupings that are ever changing, which works really well if you're in a city context but not so well in the back field of Northern Ireland where every form of Christianity is like a hardened, blocked artery. They all suffer the same heart failure and so maybe only one or two are raised to fill reproducing maturity.
I use elder as an example because it's what most people use as evidence of spiritual maturity which maybe 1 or 2% of the body will achieve and, depending on your form, women can never achieve. Eldership (by which I mean elder Christian as the scriptures seem to say) isn't a tidy package of church documents and forms and functions and giftings but a clearer wider view of Christ through what it looks like for as many giftings as possible to have reached maturity in Christ and to lead as a whole body--not to splinter in our very protestant manner after we get the stamp of approval from the reigning gaggle of men who it cannot be said are mature in Christ though they make themselves out to do or not do the necessary things in the flesh. Elders (according to the Word) judge (which all Christians are called to) take on disciples (which all Christians are called to) and evangelise (which all Christians are called to) if we do these things well, then we are afforded the right of Eldership.
All are called to be pastoral - but elders are generally the guys who look after a specific community in a specific context.
If we understand that the gifts in scripture are for all, and all share the same call to the Kingdom, worked out in different functions, we understand that maturity isn’t about function at all - it’s about relationship with Jesus. In this way we can avoid what you’re outlining.
So I think you are right in your assessment to a degree, but I think you are also being very sweeping about communities. One thing that is very important is “values”. Two churches may have the same polity, but are very different because of the values of that church (usually the responsibility of leaders to instill those values). Eph 4 shows us that God gifts in different ways to raise all to maturity, so the gifts are important when it comes to instilling the right values.
A church polity must be one that aids the leaders to instil the right values. I think you are alluding to this in your comments. So it might be interesting to hear from you what values you think lead to the most mature church bodies.
Perhaps, in that case, we'll stop hijacking this post and I'll write something about it.
Your posts are ever so edifying and enjoyable. Thank you, Ashley, for sharing.