What is a bi-vocational pastor?

The man whom Scripture speaks of in Ephesians 4:11 as a pastor, is one who possesses from Christ the particular gift and qualification of shepherding and caring for God's sheep, wherever he finds them. He is a pastor in gift and service, though he may do secular work for his living, while looking after God's people in his locality. Or he may give all his time to shepherding God's children, traveling from place to place serving "the Church of the living God." Again he may labor much in one place. All is as his Master and Head in heaven may direct. There may be several such gifted pastors in a local Lathering of the Church of God, each caring for souls, but none taking the title or place of "the pastor" or "the minister" of the congregation, for this would usurp the place of the Holy Spirit, nullifying His sovereign right to use whomsoever He will as His mouthpiece in the Church (see I Cor. 12:11) .

It is a mistaken idea that one cannot carry on an earthly vocation for his livelihood and still be a minister of Christ, or that it is only those who devote all their time to the service of the Lord who are His ministers. There is no such thing in Scripture as the division of Christians into the two classes of "the official clergy" and the "laity," as is commonly known today, or the thought that the ministry is a kind of honorable profession to be taken up for a living, as are other professions. It is rather a holy calling and a heavenly service to be performed as a labor of love to Christ in dependence upon Him for sustainment therein. While it is true that "The laborer is worthy of his reward" (I Tim. 5:18), and that "'they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel" (I Cor. 9:14), yet we also have the example of Paul, the great apostle, who labored night and day making tents and preaching the Gospel without charge (Acts 18:3, 4: I Thess. 2: 9).

Paul was not proud. He was ready to work with his own hands for the necessities of life, not only for himself but for those that were with him (v. 34). Would this not be a test for many who seek to serve the Lord? Paul was no less a servant of the Lord when he was tent-making for his own support, than when there was no necessity for this.

This ministry is man's ministry, and receives not a shadow of foundation, but direct condemnation, from Scripture. It was before any such human systems were devised that the words above quoted were spoken. Their application, therefore, was to something quite different from what is called the stated or professional ministry of our day. We see how it was meant to be applied in the case of the apostle. Though for special reasons he would receive nothing from the saints at Corinth, he did from other Churches. When he was in Thessalonica, the Philippians "sent once and again unto his necessity." When he was at Corinth, he says, "I robbed other Churches, taking wages of them, to do you service" (2 Cor. 11:8). But how different this from what is called a paid ministry. Here was one led of the Spirit to give up his time entirely to the Lord's work. The Lord would not let him want, and He supplies his lack by putting it into the hearts of individuals or of Churches to contribute to his necessities. Does anybody say — But how can an ordinary servant trust the Lord? If his faith is not equal to the occasion, it is manifest that the Lord has not called him to go forth in that way, and he will simply make a mistake, to his own grievous injury, and that of others, if he attempts it. In such cases — and they are the vast majority — the Lord's direction is, that he should work for his living, and honest work will not in anywise interfere with the proper exercise of his gift.

An assembly would be to blame if they knew an evangelist labouring, and did not assist him. They would be losing one of their privileges. The Philippians were very forward to do it, and so it was now with some. Perhaps it might be to help some other gift, and in another place. I think that is a most happy thing to find, and would not only have blessing on the one side, but on the other. Locality makes no difference. An evangelist is a servant of Christ, not of the assembly. In Philippians, "now at the last your care of me" is a beautiful expression of the delicacy of the feeling of the apostle; they had left him a long while, or he says so, and then adds, "but ye lacked opportunity." If things were right in an assembly, all this would be done happily. In many places there are collections at times for brothers at work at home and abroad, which is all very right too. I did not mean that the assembly should not together assist, but that it should not have a control of the preacher in any way; he is responsible to the Lord, and not the assembly's servant. On the other hand, if they knew any reason for not sending to him, they would be bound not to help him.

If a preacher gives up his trade for the Lord's sake, of course he may "live of the gospel" by being maintained and fed, getting food, raiment, and what he wanted. He may, if he have energy, work like Paul all night, and so support his house as to prevent selfish people, like some at Corinth, from saying, He is doing it for his pay. Not many have energy enough to do the two things, and do them well. If you have a man preaching, supply him while he preaches; he that ploughs should plough in the hope of getting the fruit of his ploughing; so Paul tells Timothy in 2 Timothy 2 that he must work, or else he will not get his wages. There is a question of translation whether it is "first labouring," or "first partaking." It is a mere comparison like the other; if a man strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned unless he strive lawfully. Only he must first labour to be a partaker. The verses before shew that he is to endure hardness as a good soldier, and he is not to entangle himself with the affairs of this life. We have something of the same kind in verse 24 of our chapter: "know ye not that they which run in a race, run all, but one receiveth the prize?" Even what Christ has sent me, I do not take up, for His sake. I glory in this that I have given up everything I had a title too, for the gospel's sake. It is a very strong expression, Better for me to die than for me to do anything that would hinder the gospel. He was ashamed of the Corinthians.

Another fact in solving a principle of deep practical moment comes out in verse 3: 'And because he was one of the same trade, he abode with them and wrought; for by their occupation they were tent-makers.'1 God was pleased so to order things that the great apostle, in the wealthiest and most luxurious city of Greece, should carry on an honest occupation for necessary wants. What a death-blow to clericalism on the one hand, and to worldliness on the other! Yet, in the circumstances of both Paul himself and Corinth, it was just the course which was worthy of the gospel of the grace which sent it out. It is unreasonable to suppose that this blessed servant of the Lord failed in ordinary foresight for his missionary journey, or that the assemblies of the saints were lacking in care for him or in zeal for the work, especially in the regions beyond those where the faithful were already gathered together to Christ's name. {1 It is known that among the Jews of that day it was usual for a son to learn a trade. Some, if not all, of the greatest Rabbis exercised a handicraft. Indeed in the Talmud Rabbi Juda says, He that does not teach his son a trade, virtually teaches him to be a thief; and Rabban Gamaliel compares a man with a trade to a vineyard that is fenced.}

But you say, The servants of the Lord must be supported. Certainly. Look at this dear man of God, and see how he was supported. To every one who would have given to him, he could say, I do not want your support. To the Philippians he wrote when they had sent him help: "Not because I desire a gift: but I desire fruit that may abound to your account" (Phil. 4:17). At that time he was a prisoner, but before then he supported himself by making tents, and I guarantee they were the best tents in the market (Acts 18:3). He would not give any man a chance of saying, Paul was paid for it; or, I have made Paul rich. He kept himself; and I think the man that earns his bread by some honest trade, and then gives himself to the work of the Lord, is the happiest and the freest man, because he is perfectly independent of any man but his Master. Paul would not take a penny from the Corinthians (see 1 Cor. 9:15, 18; 2 Cor. 11:7-9), though he laid down the rule that the servant should be supported. He laid it down for others and flung it up for himself. He laboured and supported himself, ministered the truth, but kept the things of God far apart from "filthy, lucre" as he himself terms it (Titus 1:7).

A pattern generally found in the Scriptures as well as in present-day experience is that of busy people pursuing their occupations and serving the Lord in their spare time – lunch hours, evenings, weekends, vacations, etc. As the Lord blesses and enlarges their sphere of service, they become so engrossed in His interests that they no longer have time for secular employment.

There is another thing that you will have to consider, that is, that true work is not like ordination to an office where a routine is to be gone through, and, if blessing comes, it is all well. There are exercises of soul; there is, even when we have the truest desire to serve, so much in us that has to be exercised to fit us for service. You might say, did not Paul preach at once? Yes; but he was then set aside for some years till Barnabas went to seek him. Moses was forty years thus set aside. Now I do not say that every one is thus, as to the form of it, set aside; but as to the flesh - making nothing of us - it is true. It may be by, as to men, a little valued exercise as to ministry, so as to be cast on the Lord, and our motives purified; or, where more-exercised gifts are, so that, though we may work with blessing in less conspicuous spheres, notice is elsewhere. This is not a question of gift exactly, but that maturing of the vessel which connects gift with the state of soul, so as to give on the one hand subjection, earnestness, and seriousness; and enables the labourer to connect truth with the souls of his hearers. Now when the Lord calls us and exercises us thus, we may often be occupied partially with other occupations, as not having our time filled. I should not feel happy at the thought of seeking one's mere livelihood, if called to serve the Lord, through anything like a want of faith. It mars faith for the work itself, just as mere worldly occupation or attention to men, however amiable. We are not our own; "occupy till I come" is the word. All I look for in the last case I have put is where work does not call. It is healthful not to charge the church. It is not healthful to neglect work where it does call, not healthful even to our own souls. Our heavenly Father knows we have need of all these things. We have also to consider the difference of gift. All is not public speaking; visits, reading meetings are as important in their own way as public discourses, sometimes work when other work cannot be done. …

My earnest hope would be that the Lord has called you to work. But suppose (I do not in the least judge so, or the contrary) the Lord had given you more of a pastor's and teacher's work than an evangelist's, this naturally requires more maturity even for the teaching, still more for pastorship. During the process we might, in a measure, spare the burden to the church: if it dragged us out of the exercise of the gift or the service which matured for us, it would be a great pity. In a certain sense I believe I was put into official ministry immaturely; but I know God makes all things work together for good to those who love Him. You are perhaps as happily placed for growing up into ministry as may be. If anything which leaves you free you could do, as I said in my last, it would be so far a testimony. Elders (Acts 20), though counted worthy of double honour, are exhorted to labour for their temporal wants. A moving evangelist would find it very hard unless he had a Paul's energy. If brethren are scattered, not having a home is an advantage: one does not waste just half one's strength in returning to it. It greatly facilitates the work. I have largely worked in this way. If the work is local, save occasional visits to a distance, where one may stay a night, it is better to have one, a gîte of some sort.

p6 [Sydney Smith] MY DEAR BROTHER, - I am anxious about a rumour I heard of your becoming a doctor, and I am sure you will forgive my anxiety for the Lord's sake and yours. … I look to the principle. Christ has ordained that they that preach the gospel should live of the gospel, and it is the clear duty of the church of God to aid those who are given up to the work. If a man can give himself wholly up to the work, and as an extra support himself by a trade he has already all well. I have known a brother, an evangelist much blessed, who so lived, when at a certain period of the year the people (from work) could not get on weekdays to meetings and he being a good watchmaker, mended all the watches in the country the rest of the year was helped by brethren. This is all well. … But when I set about to learn a profession or trade, it is not merely the time, but Christ, and Christ's work, is put in a second place, and faith is set aside as to that, and the church encouraged in want of devotedness. All this seems to me evil. If you were not working for the Lord, your setting to do something would be perfectly right; but you are at the work, and it is saying, I fear – not in your heart perhaps, but as testimony – "I have put my hand to the plough," etc. I have never known but one case where a brother actually wanted: it was not known to brethren: a devoted pioneer, who pushed into unbroken ground in France. He fed on nettle tops, which they use much as spinach, not to give up an open door. The same man has been three times in prison. That was a bright testimony. I doubt you are quite there yet, and have been pinched, but so was Paul, and the Lord has very soon come in to help them. It may seem easy for me who want for nothing to press this on others, but I honestly began by giving up everything, though in point of fact my faith was never tried in that way, as an uncle left me something before I was run out, or very soon after.

But I dread settling the principle, when a man is a labourer, that the church is not to take care that those who labour shall be honoured by being temporally cared for: no salary. A man is a servant, but free under Christ in his ministry, and the privilege of the church, as those at Philippi, to be partakers in the grace by helping him who labours in it. It blocks up the path of simple, humble faith. A poor man has no difficulty: and it seems as if an educated person could take this blessed and honoured place of service to Christ: working when we can, and are not occupied in the work – all well, as I said. But taking up a profession is really saying I have laid down that of working for the Lord, trusting to Him who knows that we have need of these things.