Rick Mansfield is ruminating about “video pastors” on his blog. As an Encyclopedia Britannica fan, you might imagine that he’s not terribly fond of the idea of mega-churches starting new churches and using a video feed to provide the sermon. You’re right! And you might think that I, as a Wiki-Head, am crazy about the idea. Well, I have to agree with Rick on this one. To a point. Interestingly, last Sunday I was attending a Union Baptist church in South Africa where the pastor reported that in a denomination of 52,000 members, more than 900 students are involved in seminary education. More pastors are being trained than there are churches to employ them. Perhaps this would be a solution to the problem in the U.S. Send South African pastors to the U.S. to pastor these satellite churches that are being started. South Africans have a terrific accent by the way.
The best section of Rick’s post was an anecdote about modern prophetic ministry:
Our pastor stood up and said that during the worship experience, he felt convicted to abandon his prepared sermon so that he might address some critical spiritual needs our church was facing.
Check out the rest of the story in his post.
A few questions came to mind as I was reading Rick’s post:
- Maybe video is the best medium to reach a generation raised by the television.
- Maybe a video-feed is the modern equivalent of the first-century epistle.
- Is the pastor of a mega-church the equivalent of an apostle, relating to numerous churches without being involved at the local level?
- Could a local pastor or counselor add the “personal touch” to a church that uses video-feeds?
- Is the position of “pastor” biblical? It is ironically never found in the “pastoral” epistles to Timothy and Titus. In those letters, churches are led by elders with a roving “apostolic representative” like Timothy who gets things set up and steps in when there is a problem. Hmm… that sounds a lot like a video-pastored church!
May I answer your questions?
1. Maybe video is the best medium to reach a generation raised by the television.
I believe that’s equivalent to saying the best way to get an alcoholic’s attention is to give him a beer.
2. Maybe a video-feed is the modern equivalent of the first-century epistle.
Technically, an email would probably be the equivalent. But it’s neither here nor there. The reason your analogy doesn’t work is because NT writers such as Paul didn’t send letters to the churches they were pastoring. They didn’t have to because they were there. They sent epistles to churches that were in other places than their present location. So, the video feed would be good for special guests or communicating with someone who is far away, but not as a replacement for the pastor.
3. Is the pastor of a mega-church the equivalent of an apostle, relating to numerous churches without being involved at the local level?
I would equate that to the role of a bishop instead. In keeping with what I said at point 2, a word via video feed from the bishop now and then would be fine, but keep a real pastor on the local level with a live (i.e. in-person) proclamation of the gospel.
4. Could a local pastor or counselor add the “personal touch” to a church that uses video-feeds?
All of these kinds of video ministries already exist (Piper uses them, and so does Hybels), and in all cases, they have local pastoral leadership of some kind on site. But my concern is that the message itself be preached locally, that part of the pastor’s role is to proclaim the gospel. The need to send the main leader’s message across to satellites [let me choose my words carefully here] may indicate a certain amount of hubris in some cases.
5. Is the position of “pastor” biblical? It is ironically never found in the “pastoral” epistles to Timothy and Titus. In those letters, churches are led by elders with a roving “apostolic representative” like Timothy who gets things set up and steps in when there is a problem. Hmm… that sounds a lot like a video-pastored church!
No, it sounds like the role of a bishop/overseer in relation to the local pastor. Even if we use your speculation above, Timothy is not depending on Paul to send him messages to preach. Rather, he is preaching them himself (2 Tim 4:2) and exercising all other forms of pastoral ministry as well.
I forgot to respond to the first part of #5. It’s hard to say that the position of pastor is not biblical in light of verses like Eph 4:11. However, it’s always open to question regarding the issue of whether or not today’s pastors are performing the same kind of role as what was being described in the New Testament. I don’t find the same irony that you do because the letters to Timothy and Titus are written to those whom are fulfilling a role we would consider to be pastoral roles (local leaders of a congregation WITH the repsonsibility of preaching).
Undoubtedly, the role of pastor was elevated once the apostles began to die off. This is seen as early as the second century writings such the letter of Ignatius to the Magnesians: “I exhort you to strive to do all things in harmony with God: the bishop is to preside in the place of God, while the presbyters [elders] are to function as the council of the Apostles, and the deacons, who are most dear to me, are entrusted with the ministry of jesus Christ, who before time began was with the Father and has at last appeared” (6:1). If you assume the role of pastor to be equated with the role of elders (the pastor being the elder at the forefront of a local ministry), you see how quickly their status rose in the early church after the apostles died–they, in fact, replaced the role of the apostles. Ignatius’ letter is thought to have been written sometime between AD 96 to AD 110.
“the best way to get an alcoholic’s attention is to give him a beer“. Indeed! Don’t leave him (or her) there of course, but we shouldn’t start by judging people, or treating them as children by not letting them have what we know is not good for them. Instead we should meet them where they are, even offer them a beer, in order to show them the way to where we would like them to be. Also giving him “a beer” rather than a whole case of them sets an example of responsible drinking.
“The need to send the main leader’s message across to satellites … may indicate a certain amount of hubris in some cases.” Possibly. But that may depend whose idea it is. My own pastor’s sermons are on the Internet. Is this hubris? It might be if it was the pastor’s idea. But it wasn’t, it was proposed by congregation members, and approved by the pastor. In these megachurch examples, don’t assume that everything is the personal initiative of the well-known name at the top. These ideas may come instead from lower down in the team which keeps such a large work running.
Peter,
Okay, so at what point do we say, “Okay, now that we have everyone’s attention through the availability of video, we are going to now expect you to mature in your faith and from now on, the messages will be preached live and in person”? I don’t see it happening.
Your pastor’s sermons on the internet may benefit me by reading them, but he’s not my pastor. They may benefit you as a member of his church because you can take more time to reflect on his message. But my reading your pastor’s sermons is not a substitute for me being involved in a local church myself. And your reading your pastor’s sermons is not a substitute for your active involvement in your church AND hearing the message in person as often as you are able.
I carefully worded my statement so as not to say that it’s always hubris. But you know it may also be vanity and pride for a pastor to sit back and let such decisions be made without saying anything. If a pastor of a megachurch doesn’t have the final say regarding the initial implementation of satellite churches, something’s wrong.
I’m going to let the “alcoholic” comment slide since I think it was made in jest and isn’t an argument based on any direct equivalence.
Rick wrote: “Paul didn’t send letters to the churches they were pastoring.” and also “Timothy and Titus are written to those whom are fulfilling a role we would consider to be pastoral roles”
While I think your argument is defensible I also think there is strong evidence that Paul, Timothy and Titus were never full-time, on-the-scene pastors. They were involved at a higher apostolic level setting things up locally and then moving on. Thus, Paul’s instructions to “come to me as quickly as possible” to both men. They were “just a-passin’ through.”
But it is obvious as you have shown through your excellent quote of Ignatius that “pastor” came to be defined very quickly as a local leader of a congregation although not using that term. I wish Paul had given a bit more detail about the duties of the positions he lists in Ephesians 4:11, but it seems pretty obvious from the “shepherd” meaning of the word pastor.
I don’t have a problem with video-feeds together with a local pastor. I think that a lot of churches suffer from the lack of good preaching and maybe using video-feeds or the oh-so-old-fashioned video tape series might be a way of providing sound teaching to a wide audience.
So as always, I think Rick and I basically agree but enjoy the chance to quibble about details!
Speaking of hubris, what could be more egotistical than blogging our every thought as if anyone actually needs to know what we think! ;^)