WHEN AM I TO BE PASTOR?

There are quite so many itching issues in the Church today, but this is not to say they haven't been before.  For Christ is still refining the Church so that it is presentable to the Father.

For issues such as: when should one be "pastor" cut across, even in countries where the church has been established for centuries. For in the west, it is not easy to simply claim to be Pastor without having gone to Bible College. Yet even in these countries, such issues still persist.

Society in the West is more informed and not as desperate. On the other hand, though, in much of Africa, especially Uganda where I happen to be, the Church is still young and still emerging. It is not yet streamlined and a lot of effort is being put just into working out all such issues.

It is therefore quite easy for someone to simply call themselves any titles they wish. In many of the LDCs, anybody can start ministry at will, without any scrutiny for caution.

Now, this challenge can be three fold.

• Self wish to be called by a certain title (Pastor)
• Called by such title by virtue of being active in church.
• Called such title by virtue of having been called by God

Self wish to be called by a certain title (Pastor)

Sometimes, some people have self wished to be called by certain titles for their selfish reasons, while others have actually been called by God to be so. To many of such people, the title of Pastor is easily perceivable and quickly paying. 

For to be a Pastor, most often than not, you will have to possess a flock, a flock in the sense that you can easily feed yourself on it. To be an Evangelist takes long to pay off. To be an Apostle means you will have to plant churches and leave them to others to shepherd them. To be a Teacher, you really have to be patient for your labors to literally pay off. Rather, because we are selfish mortal beings, we tend to look at it much in terms of quicker material gain than to simply love to serve the LORD.

And for this very reason, some people begin ministry with one different title but will change to another title after some time. This may not be done in the spirit of ministry, but because one may falsely believe that it is easier to begin with a certain servant title but change to another (more decorated one) when we are firmly planted in ministry. So, upon this, many people find it easier to begin as pastors, but will end up as apostles because it is more decorated to be called by the title apostle.

According to the Bible directive, it is the evangelist to bring souls to the Church. Albeit evangelism is the main gateway to ministry for anyone who may be called or wish to come into ministry. That is to say; evangelism is a command for every Christian to perform (Mark 16:15-16). For evangelism is the greatest commission.

Nevertheless, there are individuals who are particularly commissioned for this task. Yet Jesus designed the Church in a way that everyone at any level that he is serving, he is equally important as any other. For the Church to be complete, it pretty requires every bit of the gifts given for ministry (1Corinthians 12:4-31), (Ephesians 4:7-16).

The apostles are commissioned to plant Churches, organize them, and then hand them over to pastors. Now this is where the controversy currently is. It is pretty true that this has become impractical. Many individuals today are called by the title apostle simply because they think it is more prestigious and more decorated to be called so than assuming any other title. But as concerns performing the tasks of an apostle is becoming pretty impractical. For no one will start a Church and simply hand it over to another person.

Additionally, there is currently the prevailing notion that if you have not started a Church, then you are less of a minister. This very notion has culminated into everyone looking to plant a Church so they can have a feeling of independence. By one having a flock under their command, they can do what they wish. This is creating a scenario whereby everyone is in a rush to start a Church, anywhere, even when he is not been called to do so. And upon this, conflict is surely unavoidable.

So many funny characters are currently hiding behind serving the LORD yet they only execute much disservice. The LORD Himself will do the clean up, at the right time. For it is a process, the LORD can't fail (Matthew 13:24-30). Equally so, we should not give up the fight. For the Bible tells us we will know everybody by their fruits (Matthew 7:16-21).

But let me also seek to let you know that some people can be gifted twice. Someone could be a Pastor as well as a teacher. For I have come to learn that even to be pastor can be done in various ways. There are those who are pastors by way of counseling, others are by way of preaching, encouraging others, etc. So, you will realize that even pastors are gifted differently. We may all be pastors, yet each one of us is a pastor in a way.

Called by a title by virtue of being active in church.

It is pretty a common practice in much of African Churches for one to be referred to as pastor for simply being active in Church. I encountered the LORD when I was still a schoolboy. It was such an excitement that I loved to involve myself in every church activity.

I headed the Students Scripture Union during my Ordinary Level studies in one school (Kololo High School). I carried on as Prayer Secretary at another school (Old Kampala Secondary School) during my Advanced Level studies. 

At church, I headed the Church Students Union and later alone, I was very active in the Youth Department. By way of being this active, I was readily branded pastor even as I was yet to be ordained for so, neither had I undertaken any course in this regard because I knew not I would ever be one. Later alone, I concluded I didn't love it, for it is so demanding. I loved to be Evangelist and that is it. But the LORD led me slowly by slowly into being what I am today (pastor).

This is not intended to tell you much about myself, but to give you my personal view and experience. The title of pastor is being used the way it is because it is easy for those who wish to misuse it for self wishing purposes, but it is also easy to call a person so for those who would view them as being more active in the matters of church.

Called such title by virtue of having been called by God

There are some people who are called pastors by virtue of having been called by God.  Rather it is a calling by God. Nevertheless, despite having been duly called by God to be a pastor or any other calling, it still calls for preparation, training and interaction. 

• It calls for preparation because you need to know how you ought to conduct yourself while going about your calling. 

• You ought to be trained because you need to know what to do and when to do it.

• You ought to interact because you are called to serve and not to show off. 

Be it in Bible times, everyone who has been called by God for anything, has had to be prepared and duly trained for the calling. 

• When God called Moses, He (God) made him duly undergo a preparation and training process (Exodus 2:11, 3:22).

• Joshua duly underwent preparation and training for the task under Moses (Joshua 1:9).

• Samuel duly underwent preparation and training under Eli (1Samuel 3:4-8)

• David duly underwent preparation and training (1Samuel 16)

• Solomon duly underwent preparation and training (1Kings 1:34-50). 

So, upon this, it is pretty true that there are some people who have been called but they are not trained. And it is also true that there are many people who been trained but do not have the calling. Yet it is pretty a requirement that we are both called and trained. This is how we become complete servants of God.

Fair warning... Anyone who love to call themselves titles for purposes of their own selfish material gain will surely come to naught. This is not just a threat! It is simply a matter of time.

Yet we can't have an answer for every bit. For the Church is the Lord's. The Lord God alone will cleanse it of every impurity. Prayer then is better option.

Read More

JESUS ALONE IS THE ROCK

What is a rock?

This is the solid mineral material forming part of the surface of the earth and other similar planets, exposed on the surface or underlying the soil or oceans.

 Characteristics of rocks

• Hardness (is a measure of the mineral's resistance to being scratched)

• Luster (some minerals are shiny and some are dull, luster means metallic  or non metallic)

• Streak (Streak refers to the color powder that the mineral leaves after it scratches it)

• Cleavage and fracture (Cleavage is a way the mineral breaks and fracture is a breakage is rough and has jagged edges)

Jesus used the example of a rock because of its characteristics (Matthew 16:14-19). He (Jesus) was being metaphoric. For the rock is symbolic of something that can last for ages and ages if to say. 

Prior to this encounter, Peter was called Simon. But after this encounter, Jesus gave him (Simon) the name Peter. This name Peter means a small rock. Yet the person of Simon, or Peter for that matter, is not the rock being spoken of here.

The Church whose head is Jesus the Christ can't be founded on a vulnerable human being whose preferences and priorities keep changing every micro second. Mere men are always easily manipulated into the wrong way. It is unique only to God not to change and not to be manipulated (Malachi 3:6), (Hebrews 13:8). The Church therefore is built upon God alone. Only the nature of God has the required and fitting components to uphold it (the Church) firmly and for eternity (ages).

But then, what did Jesus mean when He said; "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"? (Matthew 16:18). Was it to mean the person of Peter or the content of the confession?

When Peter gave the perfect answer, Jesus made this reply: 'Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven" (Matthew 16:17). Meaning it was not a personal confession. Rather the confession was not of the person of Peter.

For if to ask, does a speaker speak by itself? Rather, is it of itself to say whatever? What tool is a speaker? Is it a transit tool or what is it? Was Peter the master of it or a tool?

He (Peter), (by expression) did not understand what he had confessed until when he was filled with the Holy Spirit at the day of Pentecost. At that moment, Peter could have never been in position to understand this. And at whatever point it could be or was, he could have understood nothing if it were not for the Spirit of God.

So, when Jesus said: "you are the rock and upon this rock...", it was not with the intent to glorify the person of Peter. But Jesus made an expression that Peter had confessed the absolute truth. And that truth was not of Peter but of the Spirit of God. It is the Spirit of God which makes us understand and do the things of God (Philippians 2:13).

We all know how God made the donkey talk the language of humans (Numbers 22:28). The donkey did not speak by itself, though, but by the command of God. Peter spoke by the revelation and command of the Father. Thus Jesus (the Son) glorified the Father.

To expound more on this, let us consider why Jesus rebuked Peter for trying to deny the fore narration of His (Jesus') Crucifixion to the disciples (Matthew 16:23). Jesus called Peter Satan. Is it that Peter (the rock upon which the Church would be built) had turned into Peter the Satan? Would the Church be built on Peter the Satan as the foundation? Was it to mean Peter was Satan? The answer to all these questions is "No not". 

Yet this is a good example of how the same Peter could go either way (just like any human would). If he had made the prior statement of Jesus being the Son of God with intent, he wouldn't then have gone on to make the mistake of ignorantly denying Jesus' fore narration of His (Jesus') Crucifixion. All this is clear manifestation of how Peter was very ordinary in everything. He (Peter) only came to understand things better when the Spirit of God descended on him.

For Peter had perceived everything literally, yet Jesus was establishing a Kingdom which is not of this world. The Kingdom of God is not here or there, but it is in our hearts (Luke 17:20-21), (John 18:36). For if you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus is the Son of the living God, that is the foundation upon which God's Kingdom is built. Thus to say, the foundation of the Church is not a person, but faith in the (Son of God) is the foundation of the Church.

To further demonstrate Peter's vulnerabilities as a human person, he, despite having been with and shared with Jesus so much, he went on to deny Him three times (Luke 22:54-62). Peter had gone back fishing after the Crucifixion of Jesus (John 21:3).

What then did Jesus mean by referring to Peter as the rock upon which He would build the Church that would never be shaken by the gates of hell? Just like we have seen above, this could have never been to mean the person of Peter. But the question is; what else could it have been? What odes it mean that Peter gave this answer; "...Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God"? (Matthew 16:16).

Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God. He was, He is, and He will always be. For before anything else ever was, Jesus was (John 1:1-4, 8:58). For scripture tells us nothing would have ever been if it were not for Jesus. And it is upon this fact that everything He did made absolute meaning. 

Jesus is the truth (John 14:6). Everybody else failed, yet Jesus alone overcame all. Thus then, Jesus is the rock being spoken of here, and Him being the rock of our faith, it makes it directly true that when we believe on and in Him, then we become the little rocks carrying on propagating the Kingdom of God. 

And upon this, together with the big rock who is Jesus the Christ and the Son of the living God, we build the Kingdom of heaven. That is that if one is a rock, so he is because he is an off-cut of the big rock who only is Jesus.

Yet again, one of the characteristics of rocks is that they are hard, and they can last for ages and ages. Does this character literally apply to Peter? Yet Peter's faith in Christ lives on in us. Thus then, it is not about Peter literally, but it is about his faith in Christ. 

And so then, if there is to be a heir of Christ (as is claimed by the Roman Catholic Church), it is not Peter the person. Everyone who believes Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God is the heir of Christ. And upon this, if to be, we who do believe Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God are all popes.

The doctrine that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of the living God is the foundation of the Church and that is the absolute truth. Peter was commended for having had this revelation. But to claim it is upon the person of Peter the Church is built is to credit him for more than he can afford or handle. 

 

The Roman Catholic Church desperately looked for scripture which seems to them to support their ideology of the papacy. For the papacy and many of the Catholic teachings are not founded in the basic Biblical scripture.

Is this to weigh down the person of Peter? No not. But neither should we weigh him more than he is. Neither does he claim what is said of him by the Roman Catholic Church. 

We all realize that Peter's character and teachings do not at all rhyme with the practices and teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Yet Peter was a great man of God who made immeasurable contributions to the body of Christ. It is about what we say, believe and practice; not what people say of us.

Read More