Ministry Titles

In another thread Philologos wrote:In fact, if we have the Spirit of the Pastor in us we should expect every saint to 'pastor' others to some degree; it's in our nature.I find this a profound statement. I have long thought along these lines but haven't given clear expression like this. I found myself thinking: Are ministry titles such as Pastor, Teacher, Evangelist appropriate? At this point I would say "yes" to this question, but I don't know if they're always necessary and I suppose they could also be potentially more harmful than helpful. Perhaps someone is identified by a ministry title according to their primary identity in the church. Like Philo mentioned, we will all probably be pastoral to some degree, but that may or may not be our primary identity. We may be pastoral to a small degree- that is, our sphere of influence in that ministry is small- and we may be evangelistic to a very large degree. In this case, such a person could be called an Evangelist because it's their primary identity in the church, though it doesn't speak exclusively of the overall breadth of their ministry. I think having titles like this might be helpful to people in identifying more with their primary calling in God and their place in His Kingdom. This would likely help in focusing on those things God has especially gifted them in, cultivating that aspect of their ministry, and therefore being most effective for God's Kingdom. And of course it's foundational that we are primarily identified with Christ. But beyond that, finding and being established in our unique place in the church and Kingdom of God would seem to be very helpful.

I found myself thinking: Are ministry titles such as Pastor, Teacher, Evangelist appropriate? At this point I would say "yes" to this question, but I don't know if they're always necessary and I suppose they could also be potentially more harmful than helpful. hi toddI think some folk who have followed my thoughts on these things will grow tired of me saying this, but I can find no indication that words like 'apostle, evangelist, prophet, pastor, teacher' were ever used as 'ministry titles'. I am personally convinced that there were no 'titles' in the early church. These designations are not ranks but simple descriptions of particular functions that marked the contribution of certain saints. I am personally convinced that no-one ever referred to Apostle Paul, or Evangelist Philip or Pastor Timothy; these are descriptions of their recognised giftings not their places on an org chart.

Ron,Yes, I think I follow your train of thought. I'm not so interested in somebody being called "Apostle Paul", "Teacher Jeff", etc. as in a ranking system. But I do think it might be helpful to consider people this way and sometimes refer to them as such. Because although Paul didn't call himself "Apostle Paul," he would refer to himself as "Paul, an Apostle of Jesus Christ" or something along those lines. Right? Why do you think he did that? Why didn't he just always say, "Paul, a fellow saint." And Philip was called "Philip the Evangelist," right?Don't you think it can be helpful for people to be known or understood in a distinguished way from one another by title? Like if I was talking to someone I might bring up the name Ron Bailey to someone and they might say, "Who is that?" And I could simply say, "Oh, he's a Teacher" instead of "Well, he's just a saint, you know, and sometimes he teaches and is good at it." I'm just thinking that sometimes it is helpful for different reasons to distinguish by title. Don't you think so? But I don't know about using titles like in a ranking system type of way. I am a bit weary of that myself. But I suppose if God calls one and they know it, there's no use in being falsely humble. I suppose it's difficult to know whether the title is being used like a rank or simply as a helpful distinction.

I think i agree with Todd, are'nt these descriptions quite helpful? Ron,is your main point on this,the over use or abuse of titles?Or do you strongly believe most of evangelical groups have got it wrong.I know we have talked before on this,and your certainly not boring ;-) I really want your take on it.I mean Todd has a point,Paul did say he was an apostle,was this not just helpfulregardsDisciple Del :-)