The title of Pastor has been popular among Protestants since the mid-18th century. For centuries before then the title was Father, as it still is among Roman Catholics. The Pietists, who were at their peak in the 18th century in Germany and Scandinavian countries, used pastor to reduce the distance between the clergy and the laity, as the social status of clergy grew ever loftier. “Pastor” in Latin means shepherd.
I am surprised that the pastor title is used so extensively even in American Evangelical circles. There are two alternatives. One is “Reverend” and the other is “Preacher.” Reverend is used frequently among mainline churches, as Rev. John Doe. I think Pastor is the loftier title, used only for those pastoring a congregation. Rev. applies to all ordained, whether or not they are pastoring.
I am proposing a new title for the leader of a suburban church. Pastor is very appropriate for a village church. Jesus self-identified as a shepherd. Paul, however, self-identified as a master builder, and the Greek is architect on (1 Corinthians 3:10). A good title for doing ministry Paul’s way would be Mb. (Master Builder) or Arch. (Architect). That kind of title is most appropriate for a new suburban strategy.
In the Gospels, Jesus used the shepherd analogy eight times, five in his teaching on the Good Shepherd. He used “church” only once. Paul, on the other hand, in his letters implied the shepherd image only once. He used the word for building up fellowship twenty-five times and the word for church 103 times. Jesus discipled his twelve followers and taught the basics of relationships with God and each other. Paul, on the other hand, planted and led local congregations in many cities. He is really the founder of the worldwide Christian church on earth. I enjoy studying how he did that.
Key, I think, is that he thought in terms of a fellowship builder. The Greek word is oiko-domeo, to build a house. The oikos is literally the physical house, and then by extension the people living in it. The Greeks had no name for family other than oikos. By extension, oikos became the fellowship we call church, which met for centuries in private homes—house churches. His letters went to the house churches (the fellowships) then existing in large cities.
Most of the twenty-five times Paul used the oikodomeo term were in verb form. He was continually encouraging the house churches to “build up the fellowship.” I like to put the “up” in the English—to build up the fellowship. To the Ephesians Paul writes, “From Christ the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.”
In the same Ephesians chapter, he encourages leaders “to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up.” A popular translation is “to equip.” Five other passages where that Greek word is used suggest getting something in alignment, organizing. My personal preference is to translate that the purpose of church leaders is “to get God’s people organized for works of service.”
Centuries of pastors looked at the Latin version “to edify” (aedos-facare, with aedos as an edifice, a building with facio meaning to make) and translated edification to their advantage, to give spiritually uplifting messages. That rather bland function takes on a whole new meaning when leaders are encouraged to get their people organized for works of service, something that is crucial to a suburban strategy for planting and building churches.
To the Corinthians Paul points out that “everything is permissible, but not everything builds up. Accept this maxim: If what you are about to say and do does not build up the fellowship, don’t do it. Think of how many existing churches would become more attractive if their members took Paul’s precept seriously.
What is your reaction to church leadership as building rather than shepherding?
Paul was an Apostle – hence a “builder.” We are not. Paul saw the Lord and was a direct witness, therefore, to His resurrection. We are “those who have not seen, and yet believe.” That is why we are not apostles.
I follow the church history convention that there were only 12 Apostles, those who saw the Lord. Jesus saw himself as the Good Shepherd. Paul identified himself as a fellowship builder. His approach is a better model for leading churches today.
Paul was an Apostle, but he was our example to follow. I agree with the notion that we are to grow into master builders. We learn by letting God fit us for service on step at a time. You learn small parts and then eventually like a father, you can start to see the bigger picture. God wants us to see the finished building project by faith and trust his blueprints. We get a small part at first and must be faithful in little things. Eventually, he reveals more of the plans until we too have the eyes of a project manager, but not just things. God invests in his household made of people. I have known builders that did not view people properly. They could not really feel for people because their ambition and force of will only wanted to climb on others to show what they could build “for God”. They had zeal, but the manner of their ministry is built on the pile of sheep that could not survive the rigors of their proving grounds. There are many butchers that think they are builders. They shepherd survival for themselves and those closest to them. Any deviations are crushed in their insecurities. If you are not “building” you are nothing to them. Mary sat at Jesus’ feet. She let the Master build her up. The last word to the church in Rev 4 was up… COME UP HITHER. But before that in Rev 3:20 it was not “up” but “sup”. And it is fellowship or supping that truly builds us up. Thank you.
Very well said. Some pastors move people away who don’t fit into their plans. I do read and hear about people getting hurt in some Evangelical and Pentecostal churches by domineering and poorly trained pastors. I like Eugene Peterson’s (the translator of The Message) view that people in a congregation are the topsoil for building up the fellowship. The Spirit is already at work in their lives. The wise leader is like a farmer or gardener nurturing the individual plants.
Centuries-old mainline congregations are organized to prevent bad things happening to members but fend up functioning at a minimal level. We need to learn how to organize to let good innovative ministries happen. But at least we seldom squash individuals. Many new churches have good things happening but aren’t organized to protect individuals from a domineering leader with little self-awareness of how he is hurting others.
Thanks for the good conversation.
You’re very welcome! Thanks for taking the time to read it.
Why can’t it be both building up AND shepherding? Christians who happen to live in suburbs still need the feeding and care of the Good Shepherd, being served by His under-shepherds (pastors). As the sheep are fed, perhaps they “grow up”, “mature”, and are “strengthened” and “equipped’ in body and soul.
Yes, both are good and necessary. Shepherd pastors could do well in a village parish. But churches that are growing today have leader who are builders needing specialists in “feeding and nurturing.” I advocate that senior pastors see their job as “equipping the people of God to build up the body of Christ (Eph 4:12). That is primary an organizing and administering function so that others can minister out of the giftedness.
Actually, Ancient and Koine Greek had “Oikogeneia” as family, those born in the house. Oikomene (ecumenical) referred to those who lived in the house, and oikos is simply house. Interestingly, oikogeneia never appears in the Greek scriptures, but your assertion is not quite right about there being one word, “oikos,” for family.
I stand corrected–sort of. My Exhaustive Concordance to the Greek New Testament does not have a single occurrence of oikogeneia. Oikomene is used in the sense of tribe or nations I don’t see a use of it to describe what we would call a nuclear family. When Paul was referring to building up the oikos, he was thinking the fellowship gathered together in a house church.
Christianity is transformative. The Gospel changes lives. However, when it is used for one’s security by clinging to in changing external structures and forms there is no building up. Luther said many have gone to church for years with no change (Lg Cat 3rd Command). Security in Christ brings building. Security is structures and forms does not.
Yes, the Spirit does change lives John 3:6. It is no secret that many ministers have lives minimally transformed. Then the institutional church becomes a place for security and status. Institutional churches with minimally transformed leaders will not last long in today’s American culture.
With no disrespect for history and historical rationale, in today’s world, titles reflect the relationship between two or more people. In today’s world, a master builder or architecture deals with inanimate objects such as a building. So if the goal is to build church buildings, I agree. However, if the goal is to help Christians to grow, then the pastor seems more fitting to me. A pastor or shepherd leads his people (sheep) to where there is food, water and rest. The Pastor leads us to Jesus where we find rest for our souls. Understanding that I am of an age who resists change from ” the way it is always done”, I would prefer to go back to Father if Pastor is unacceptable. Father also represents a relationship between two or more people.
Yes, shepherd is good for the reasons you cite. I am simply observing that Paul thought of himself as building up the relationships within a congregation. It is the face-to-face caring relationships that are important. Paul did not think of constructing special physical buildings for churches. That reality was several centuries in the future. He thought of himself as doing oikodomeo. The first part of that Greek word means house in the sense of household. It was the word for what we think of as family. He also used it for what we call congregations. He saw himself building up fellowships of the Spirit. In Ephesians 4 he lists leaders as apostles, prophets, evangelist, caregivers and teachers who were leaders in those house churches. The Greek word for caregiver is shepherd. My guess is that the wife of the host family did most of the follow-up caregiving.
Dave, thank you again for your article. I would argue that both terms can be used. Someone called into the Office of the Ministry is called by a local congregation or church to serve, “in the stead and by the command of Christ.” So, the term “pastor” or under-shepherd is certainly appropriate in any setting, rural or urban. I also think that Paul’s concept is helpful as he talks about “building up” the church through the Word and Sacrament and as he talks about the body of Christ going out into the world serving our fellow man.
Yes, both concepts ae important. Word and Sacrament ministry is a simple way for a priest to take care of several thousand or so parishioners, as was standard in Roman Catholic parishes. But ministry can (and should) involve so much more caring in terms of relationships that can be built up among members of that fellowship. Building up those relationships themselves can build layers of others who do additional valued ministry.
When I think of builder or shepherd, I am reminded of David and his son, Solomon.
David, the humble shepherd was a man after God’s own heart. He submitted to the Lord but God would not allow him to be a builder of the temple as David desired. That job was destined to his son, Solomon. David advised Solomon to observe what the Lord your God requires: Walk in his ways and keep his decrees and commands… so that you may prosper in all you do and where ever you go (1 Ki. 2:3). Thus, Solomon built the magnificent temple to the Lord and people came from all over to hear his wisdom. However, he eventually went down the path of self-indulgence and forgot his father’s warning to follow the Lord’s decrees and commands. The kingdom became divided. Two men, both flawed, yet one remained a man after God’s own heart and the other fell from God’s favor. One a shepherd, one a builder.
So how does this relate to today’s churches? You state, “If what you are about to say and do does not build up the fellowship, don’t do it”. Good advice but like David’s advice would a master builder follow it or like Solomon build himself up?
The title master builder lacks personal touch. I prefer the title of ‘Pastor’. To me that implies love, caring, a person who sees me through the eyes of Jesus. Even Paul says, “if I have not love then I am like a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal”.
Our society with texting and social media lack fewer in person relationships. However, people are always searching for love, someone to care and a sense of belonging no matter what the times may indicate. Personally, I don’t want a master builder; I want to have a humble shepherd, a man after God’s own heart. I’m not saying a master builder couldn’t also be caring but the title reflects who they are, i.e. your child doesn’t call you his ‘life trainer’; they call you mom or dad. The difference is a loving relationship.
Lori, great comment. I would like to think most pastors take individual pastoral care seriously. Ironically the word “pastor” is Latin for shepherd. It’s a great title for a village ministry. But suburban churches today especially need a builder who can organize and build fellowship through others, thus reaching beyond the perhaps 80 or 100 members an individual pastor can relate to face-to-face. Watch for the Virtual Church Fellowship online community I am close to making public.