"Assistant" or "Associate" Pastor?

There's nothing humble about working beneath your capacity.
That wasn't the point, (Philippians 2 is pretty clear of what Christ did "but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. ")

Someone qualified to be an associate pastor, rather than an assistant to the pastor, should be an associate.
Sure, but regardless of title shouldn't we serve one another, not thinking we are above anything

And, speaking of humble, how about of the head pastor shows some humility giving his associates more respectful titles ant "assistant."
Yeah no senior pastor should treat anyone disrespectfully, they should always be showing the example.

Just thought the whole thread was interesting where a few of the comments that were made about "never would be an assistant to anyone" - Wherever Christ has someone, if it be for a season then so be it. Humble ourselves in the sight of the Lord and He will lift us up. Right?

We are called to be bond-servants, Paul made that statement enough times. In all circumstances he learned to be content.

People who think they deserve more than what they have are just hirelngs.

 

I prefer one of the three options:

1) Associate Pastor. Honestly, if Walmart can call their hourly cashiers associates, it's not that much of a stretch.

2) Minister of _____. I know some churches use this for unordained ministers, but it need not be so.

3) ______ Pastor. This classifies by function. Discipleship Pastors, Youth Pastors, Worship Pastors, Executive Pastors----all of these fit the model, and Senior Pastor fits right in because it also describes a function (the primary leader of the congregation).

I do not like the term "Assistant Pastor" unless it is attached to a function. For instance, "Assistant Worship Pastor" would be someone who assists the Worship Pastor. Similarly, an "Assistant Youth Pastor" might assist the Youth Pastor by working with 7th and 8th grades.

Now, if "Assistant Pastor" means "Pastor's Assistant," I would prefer to call him "Assistant to the Pastor."

 

Sounds like a bunch of self help your church ideas instead of biblical models represented in scripture that many churches are veering away from and becoming bad examples to the flock that God has given them.

 

Don't be so judgmental. If you want to be truly biblical, use "episkopos" and "presbyteros".

 

Thats not being judgmental, that's a liberal view if you think that.

I was stating how sad it was when someone who is a pastor thinks they are above the task of any servant. Dont be so angry and defensive.

I recommend:

https://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/GTY121/The-Job-Description-of-a-Faithful-Pastor

 

I'm not angry or defensive. My point was that we use different terms to describe pastoral staff. Perhaps I was a bit hasty in saying you were being judgmental. For that, I apologize.

I'm not a fan of "Assistant Pastor," but I don't think it should be an obstacle to service. If God calls, the title is irrelevant. And, yes, a pastor should be willing to serve however God calls him, regardless of the title or prestige.

I was simply stating for a practical matter that a few different models exist that allow for a bit of clarification.

 

I apologize for coming across that way, I agree with you.

I saw this forum and was kind of thrown back how a believer who has been given the role to serve would never do certain tasks, but I understand that it was more of the term and also depending on the capacity.

And yes many Senior Pastors dont treat those (supposedly) under them properly. My heart is wherever Christ has me is to be faithful. Again not meaning to come across rude. God bless brother.

 

God bless you, too. I'm glad we were able to get past the misunderstanding.

 

While different people use and/or prefer different titles, I'd guess that on the whole a majority of Baptist churches mean pretty much the same thing whether they use "assistant" or "associate".

Since I affirm a more equal plurality of elders, I don't prefer either term.

 

That situation is when you can use the functional title. Even with equal elders, not all may have the same gifts at the same level. Those most gifted in teaching might be called "Teaching Pastors," those inclined toward worship leading could be "Worship (or Music) Pastors," those working with children or youth could be "Children's or Youth Pastors." As long as one does not have a "Senior Pastor," then the plurality and equality can be maintained. IMO, though, it's best to have more than one teaching pastor (or to have the other pastors preach regularly) in order to avoid the appearance of having a "Senior Pastor."

Of course, all of the elders/pastors must be able to teach. The teaching pastors would just be especially gifted in that area.

 

From Spurgeon's The Sword and Trowel, May 1866:

"the term elder is applied both to bishops and deacons. . . .distinct officers were recognized by the Church, but they were lovingly blended together. There was no contention about a name as expressive of an authority, which it would have been sacrilege for others to invade."

 

IMO, Spurgeon was wrong.

Titus 1:5-9 seems to suggest that overseers and elders are equivalent terms.

Qualified Elders
5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you— 6 if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. 7 For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, 8 but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict. (NKJV)