The following charge was given under divine inspiration by the apostle Peter to the elders in the large district composed of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. In it we find the call of God today to those who are given any measure of supervision in the church, be the responsibility great or small.
"Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint,, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock." I Peter 5:2, 3.
The expression, "the flock of God," has always seemed to me to be peculiarly touching and fitting. As I move about among the churches and particularly among the small companies, I sense keenly the fact that our believers are an upright people, loyal, willing, even eager. But still, how much they need care, direction, inspiration, sympathy, leadership—in a word, shepherding. With this need in view, we approach the realities of the case. A minister could handle with some degree of satisfaction a single church of four or five hundred members, but when a like number of persons are scattered over a district which comprises ten or twelve churches and companies, and covers hundreds of square miles, the problem becomes one which requires serious thought and planning.
Granted, then, that the district director cannot personally shepherd such a scattered flock, it becomes his very first duty, after getting acquainted with his field, to come into close and sympathetic touch with the officers of the local churches and the leaders of the companies. In his ability to guide and inspire them lies the secret of his success. Not as a lord "over God's heritage," but as a kindly, friend and adviser, he should watch their work, noting its strong and weak points, commending the wise moves and suggesting better plans and methods where they are needed. It is easy for an energetic director to step in and practically take a church out of the hands of its regular officers. I believe that to do this is a great mistake, for while he may initiate a particular plan better than they, he cannot stay by to see it worked out, and the officers will not give the enthusiasm to the policy of another that they would give to a plan which they felt was their own.
Well before the end of the year, the district director should have a good idea of the strength or the weakness of the leading officers of each of his churches, and should have in mind possibilities of stronger help for the places in question. The idea prevails in far too many places that an office in the church is a reward for good behavior, and is bestowed upon those who are approved by the nominating committee, not necessarily for their ability in the line indicated, but for their character in general. I have even seen, as recently as the 1938 election, an effort to put persons into office in order to get them interested in church work. Long before the nominating committees are chosen, the churches should be set right on these matters. If, during the year, when no election issue is at stake, the people are carefully instructed in the duties of church office, and are given light on the proper procedure for nominations and elections, with stress upon the fact that officers are elected for one year, and that no stigma is implied in one's being retired at the end of the year, many hard feelings could be avoided.
Securing Cooperation of Local Elder
As opportunity offers, or rather as it can be made, the director should meet with the elder of a church, and possibly some of the other officers, for prayer and counsel. When a minister kneels in some quiet place with the elder of a local church, and together they earnestly beseech God for themselves and for the flock which is committed to their care, a contact is established with heaven and between themselves that is conducive to producing results. This act is almost sure to create a bond of sympathy between the two men that will make their work together a pleasure rather than a duty.
Our church elders are usually busy men who must earn their livelihood apart from their church duties, and, faithful as they may be, they cannot always care for the isolated, the backslidden, and the tempted. Nor have they invariably the ability to do so. Too many are quietly dropping out of our churches. The process usually runs about like this: Somebody says or does something that hurts Brother X's feelings, bitterness rankles in his heart and takes root, he neglects prayer, he stays at home from church occasionally, then altogether, he stops paying tithe, he lets the Review and Herald and other church papers expire, and side-steps family worship. He comes to look upon his brethren as his enemies instead of as friends, becomes careless in Sabbath observance, and—he is gone. Of course there are many variations, but the end is always the same—a lost soul, and often a lost family. Without a doubt we are in the shaking time. Not much noise is made as the chaff slips through the sieve, but it is gone just the same.
Now nobody, not even a district director, can turn chaff into wheat, but I do believe that in some cases tragedies can be averted, weak spines strengthened, and the half-converted helped to a better experience. The best time to bring back a wandering sheep to the fold is right when he begins to wander away. I wonder whether we are instructing the people in the way of life as we ought. I am of the opinion that we should preach more of practical, everyday Christian living. We should instruct them how to get hold of God, how to pray and exercise faith, how to deal with our families and neighbors, how to eat and dress, how to be examples in such everyday matters as paying our bills and keeping well-ordered homes and premises, how to compute tithes —all from the background of the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy.
We need to return to the early Adventist habit of visiting the people in their homes, sitting by their firesides and talking of eternal realities and our personal relation to them. We need to kneel and pray, not for the widows and orphans and everybody in general, but for Johnny and Mary to give their hearts to God.
It scarcely needs saying that the ideal supervision of a district includes a hearty promotion of all the regularly established lines of denominational work. How long, for instance, would a director be allowed to direct if he gave the Harvest Ingathering a shrug of the shoulder ? The ideal district leader watches the Sabbath schools. He notes the order, organization, and spiritual atmosphere, and jots down the offering for the day. He may speak a few words of commendation to the superintendent, or offer a little counsel. He will not tolerate disorder in the house of God. I do not think "tolerate" is too strong a word, though great tact should, of course, be employed. The idea that our children and youth, and sometimes older members, too, must be allowed to laugh, talk, and move about in the church during services, lest they be offended and stay away, is false on the face of it. Our youth will stay away quickly enough from a church for which they have no respect. I know one church which allowed a group of boys to talk aloud in services because no one dared to reprove them. Where are they now, some five years later? I do not know, but I do know that they are not in the church.
Quarterly meetings must be cared for, particularly in places where the elders are new or hesitant about conducting the services alone. .Home missionary campaigns must be organized and papers distributed. The Review and Herald campaign must be pushed till every member possible is reading our church paper. Church schools must be promoted, encouraged, financed. Young people must be directed and helped to our academies and colleges. Any district in which the bulk of the children are still in the public schools is a dying district, no matter how many evangelistic campaigns may be conducted in it. I believe that every director should be an enthusiastic, rather than a passive, supporter of our system of Christian education.
As interests arise in the wake of missionary efforts, it will be the happy task of the district leader to foster such interests, to study with those concerned, to bring them across the deciding line, and to establish them in the faith. As he goes from place to place, the leader should occasionally ask the clerk for the church roll, and carefully check the record. Transfers should be suggested where necessary, and "dead timber" should be cautiously but certainly cut away.
Yes, the shepherd should carefully feed the sheep. This comes first. But there is one more duty to perform before the flock will be healthy and comfortable. It must be sheared. The successful director will carefully watch every church in his district to note the record of tithes and offerings. He will compare it with the record for the corresponding period of the year before. If there is a loss in any church, he will find out the reason. He will consult the books of the church treasurers to learn who are robbing God, and with such he will faithfully labor. Always he will strive to raise the standard of offerings.
The foregoing program calls for a rich spiritual experience in the life of the worker himself. "A hireling," one who works "by constraint," or who is greedy of "filthy lucre" —such a man should not be called to shepherd the flock of God.
The fierce light of scrutiny beats constantly around the heads of men who lead out in any phase, in any place, in God's work. The people are watching us. Do we believe what we teach? Do we practice what we preach? Even the little children have sized us up and the youth have solved us to the last decimal. Do we bear the test? Do our own children believe in us ? Do they see enough of true religion to want it themselves? Are we true through and through? Is our influence, our conversation, uplifting? Do we pay our debts ?
Do we know the meaning of sacrificial giving? Do we carry a real burden for souls? Do we study, that we may be workmen unashamed? Only in the strength of heaven can we be fitted for such a task.
