Shepherds determine the food that their sheep will consume. When succulent grass is at hand, not too many sheep will stray. However, we should not expect hungry sheep to remain committed to their shepherds if those shepherds are not committed to the needs of the sheep. The interests of the flock are best served when it is well-fed (Ezek. 34; Jn. 21:15-17; Ac. 20:25-31).
Ideally, elders or other able men in the local fellowship will do much of the feeding. These must be “apt to teach” (1 Tim. 3:2; 2 Tim. 2:24). Other teachers may be invited to assist from time to time, but only under the watchful eyes of godly overseers who are students of Scripture and able to discern the difference between good food and bad. This can present a problem. Struggling assemblies sometimes attempt to compensate for a lack of local gift by regularly importing speakers from outside, but it is unlikely that an assembly will continue over a length of time if there is not profitable resident ministry from men able to address foreseen dangers and regularly provide nourishing teaching. This promotes satisfaction and inspires confidence.
It is unscriptural for a congregation to be under the teaching of only one gifted individual, but many people obviously consider it better than an absence of good food (witness the exodus to other evangelical fellowships going on in many areas these days). This points up the folly of thinking an assembly can be considered “established” if it is largely dependent on imported ministry. If a local church is not self-sustaining in the way we have described, there is not much hope for its continuance.
Even assemblies we may consider established (because of their size, age, or location) are writing their obituary if they do not subscribe to the consistent use of local gift. By “gift”, we mean the genuine and proven ability to communicate spiritual truth to a congregation. Once in a while, elders may take the risk of asking a beginner to minister the Word, but generally the pulpit is not a place to experiment. Too much ministry by novices or ungifted men will produce discontent. The test that shepherds must apply to all teaching is “Does it feed the flock?” Only a well-nourished flock will satisfy the Chief Shepherd.
When it comes to seeking out and cultivating local teachers, we ought not to be swayed by the desire of some to speak publicly if their ministry proves to be mediocre. It is not a godly thing to deceive a person into thinking he has ability by patting him on the back and saying, “That was a good word, brother”, if the opposite is really the case. We ought to speak the truth in love, for anything less is flattery and therefore harmful (Prov. 29:5). We must also guard against giving opportunity to brethren to share a word for political reasons—because they are related to someone of influence or because they may be offended if we leave them out. The needs of the flock must always guide the elders, nothing less. It is better if at least two men decide who will be given time to preach. The choosing of speakers is too heavy a burden for one to bear alone, for they are bound to face criticism.
Admittedly this calls for strength of character. But what else would you think is to be expected of us as overseers?