(This short article is part of a larger exegetical paper on Numbers 11:16-30. The full text of thatpaper is available from the author s webpage,
www.thamwan.org.)
The Spirit and Structure
Can the Spirit function within a political or cultural structure? Will the political or cultural mindset of the community stifle the charismatic? Friedrich Baumgartel hints at the clash between the Spirit and structure:
"Through His ruach God equips for national political action by raising up charismatic leaders for the people in the period when there was as yet no hereditary monarchy, e.g. Othniel (Jud. 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), Saul (1 Sam 11:6) . . . the Spirit is unfathomable and incalculable, distributing where and to whom he will. Menhither to disregarded suddenly emerge as leaders under the work of the ruach.
Lloyd Neve is more forthright when he suggests that "as soon as the monarchy became a dynastic institution, its successive rulers could no longer be charismatically designated."
However, this is only true if the structure derives its authenticity solely from human institutions. If the structure has clear endorsement from the divine, the leadership authority derived from it is still charismatic. Therefore, it was necessary for the eldership (in Num. 11:16-30) as a leadership structure to receive authentication from the Spirit. The Church has similarly received divine endorsement as an institution. Institutionalization is not necessarily negative and to contrast it with the charismatic will unnecessarily dichotomize the two and create an unreal "either/or" choice. To be charismatic, one does not necessarily have to be anti-establishment.
One must realize, though, that "the establishment" is not static. As it evolves, it may sometimes come to a point where it loses its divine endorsement. The Malaysian Assemblies of God must be aware of its history and recognize its cultural baggage so that it can honestly reflect on its past history, present status and future direction. It must honestly ask whether there is a need for a renewed divine endorsement for its leadership structure. Only when there is a certain measure of confidence concerning its divine endorsement and empowerment can the leaders be confident of their charismatic authority.
The Spirit and the Servant
There is always an incarnational dimension to the workings of the Spirit among men. While the charismatic Spirit may take the initiative (e.g. Eldad and Medad of Num. 11) to endorse leadership, the developing spirit traditions of the Old Testament indicate an increasing awareness of the moral and internal dimensions so that the Spirit is ultimately expected to work a permanent moral change in the individual being endorsed for leadership. In Num. 11, Moses was granted mercy while the rabble was cursed probably because of the difference in their attitudes. Moses genuinely laments for his deficiencies. Moses was the meek servant that the Spirit could endorse for leadership.
In the ensuing Old Testament episodes, different individuals were endorsed with the leadership Spirit but their individual personalities were not totally lost in their experience of the Spirit's presence. It is reasonable to assume that the seventy had different personalities and these were not lost because they had received the same Spirit as Moses. The judges and the kings who were endorsed and equipped by the same Spirit performed their functions differently. In fact, individuals among them had different conclusions to their ministries as leaders because the servant was just as much a key to charismatic leadership as the Spirit.
The growth of the Malaysian Assemblies of God has given the denomination many new possibilities as different people with varied personalities and giftings are recruited into membership. The servant must be willing for the unexpected and the unprogrammed to happen. While the organization will have certain biases for what constitute leadership material, it must remember that the most unlikely person can also be endorsed and equipped for leadership.
The Spirit and the Signs
For divine endorsement on leadership to take place, there must be signs to indicate the Spirit's presence. Wonsuk Ma implies that for the sign to be effective, it must promote the acknowledgment of the spirit's presence upon an individual and provoke a spontaneous response of awe. While the authority of the Church in endorsing leadership within itself cannot be denied, truly charismatic leadership must have a sign or signs to authenticate the Spirit's presence. All the charismatic leaders of the Old Testament have a sign or signs for their divine call.
The signs need not always be totally supernatural. Some signs can perhaps be explained by natural theories. However, they must sufficiently convince the established structure and the servant himself/herself of the divine choice. For some cases, the fact of a simple majority vote could be sufficient. For others, it may be necessary to have a landslide popularity vote. Yet others may require a miracle provision of funds or something of that nature. Indeed, sometimes the endorsement by the Church itself can be so unlikely that some of us may consider that as a "miracle" of sorts!
Whatever the case may be, the leadership candidate must be motivated to function beyond what would normally be his/her capacity. With the endorsement by the Spirit's presence, the seventy (or seventy-two) elders in Num. 11 can now function as Moses' equal in sharing the leadership burden. We can reasonably assume that these elders had not been doing this before. With a divine sign, the leaders are brought into another realm of possibilities.
Conclusion
There can be no charismatic leadership within the churches today if the role of the Spirit in the endorsing and empowering of leadership is neglected or minimized through man-made bureaucracies. Lloyd Neve has successfully proven that "the course of the charismatic leadership in Israel (is) traced by means of the gift of the spirit. It moved from Moses to the elders, the judges and finally to the early monarchs."6 The church today will do well to renew its emphasis not only on the empowerment of the Spirit for leadership but also on the role of the Spirit in the selection and endorsement of leadership. Both the servant and the structure must receive due consideration for the charismatic leadership to thrive.
While the role of the Spirit may be minimized when a church considers itself mature enough to commit to the democratic process of electing its own leaders. Indeed, that has been a key feature for the recognition of a "sovereign" local church in the Malaysian Assemblies of God. Many local church pastors are however uncomfortable about this requirement for a democratically elected church board and therefore chooses to stay as a "home missions" church. But, it is important that the pastors do not object to the "sovereign" status merely out of insecurity. The incumbent leader's insecurity cannot be the reason for changes in the structure. Apart from political and cultural reasons, there must be valid biblical and theological reasons for choosing to appoint elders in ways other than through a democratic process. Numbers 11:16-30, read in the light of the leadership Spirit tradition of the Old Testament, can help stimulate a healthy discussion on the biblical and theological bases. |
