Power, Weakness, and Legitimacy in Apostolic Ministry
By Tim Catchim
Paul, as an apostle, had the challenge of finding language to describe his role as a leader in
relation to the gospel and the communities he founded. The leader-follower relationship, in and
of itself, is complex. Just look at the amount of ink that has been spilled in trying to describe it.
Adding the gospel to the leader-follower equation only adds another layer of complexity.
One of the ways to simplify complexity is to use a metaphor. Metaphors, as Aristotle says, point
out the similarities of dissimilarities - they help us bridge the world of the unknown to the
world of the known. In fact, one of the signs a movement is taking place is the emergence of
new metaphors. When a message crosses from one culture to another, it looks for a point of
reference to establish meaning within the new culture. Metaphors often provide that initial
point of reference.
As someone who crossed geographical and cultural boundaries with the gospel, Paul found it
necessary to engage in the art of metaphor making. This is especially true when it came to how
he described his apostolic vocation.
Legitimizing your Legitimacy
Paul’s legitimacy as a leader was up for constant debate. This is partly due to his refusal to
legitimize himself in traditional ways. There are essentially three ways to legitimize yourself as a
leader: leaders, letters and legacy. After Paul had a confrontation with Peter about table
fellowship with the Jews, he essentially broke ties with the Antioch church.1 This decision to
distance himself from a more institutionalized form of the church brought certain challenges
later on when Paul needed to establish himself as a legitimate leader.
in Corinth.2
Not only did the church in Jerusalem start to view him with suspicion, it also posed a significant
challenge when the “super-apostles” at Corinth challenged Paul’s right to call himself an
apostle. This may not sound all that important, but Paul’s decision to launch out on his own had
social and political consequences for his missional efforts. Without the Antioch or Jerusalem
church to vouch for his legitimacy, he found himself without any institutional legitimacy. In
short, he was lacking two the most effective resources to establish ones reputation: other
leaders vouching for you, and letters of recommendation from respected organizations.
At first, this was not that big of a problem. The nature of his message and the signs and
wonders of his ministry afforded him a level of legitimacy on the front end of his apostolic
endeavors that funded his initial leadership role in the communities he planted.
1
See Galatians 1 and 2.
2
See Galatians 1 and 2.
But Paul wasn’t always present in those communities. Eventually, Paul would move on, leaving
a power vacuum in his absence. This opened the door for other people to come into the
community and fill that void, often exploiting it for their own interests.
This is exactly what we see happening in Corinth. Other leaders, looking for a platform, entered
in behind Paul with their own agenda. But they didn’t introduce themselves like Paul did. They
arrived with letters from other churches (institutions) vouching for their legitimacy as apostles.
In other words, they had resumes with killer references. To top it off, they were eloquent
communicators, something highly prized in the Corinthian culture. These new leaders were
appealing and persuasive. In conventional terms, they were highly qualified, something they
were quick to use to their advantage.
In order to establish themselves as authorities in the Corinthian church, they had to somehow
de-legitimize Paul and his leadership. One of their main criticisms of Paul was that he has no
letters of recommendation. In other words, no one was willing to vouch for him. His speaking
skills were apparently found wanting as well, which is why he apparently didn’t charge for his
services. All in all, Paul’s opponents in Corinth said that he was incompetent in almost every
category of leadership that counts. He had no right to be their leader, or to go around claiming
he was an apostle. He’s just wasn’t qualified.
Agent or Agency?
Facing these kinds of accusations, Paul had a decision to make. How is he going to legitimize
himself to the Corinthians without playing the “super-apostles” game?3 In other words, is there
another source of legitimacy that can vouch for Paul’s leadership and style of ministry? The
beauty of 2 Corinthians is that we get a window into how Paul legitimized his apostleship
without the aid of institutional devices. In doing so, he provides a framework by which all
legitimate apostolic ministry and leadership is to be tested and weighed.
Jeffrey Crofton, in his book The Agency of the Apostle, helps us see the overriding issue Paul
was addressing in 2 Corinthians by making the careful distinction between the concepts of
agent and agency.
“An agent is one who acts; an agency is a means through which another acts. To name the
apostolic ministry through the role of agent is to direct attention to the apostles themselves as
actors; to name the apostolic ministry through the role of agency is to focus on the means by
which God works through the apostle. An agent orientation assumes that apostles are the
actors; that they are essentially in control as distinct entities. An agency orientation assumes
that God acts through the apostle, that God determines the parameters, the scope, the
purpose, the means of that ministry; it diverts attention away from the apostle as an individual
to apostle as channel, a vessel, a window upon the divine character.”4
3
This phrase comes from 2 Corinthians 11:5 where Paul calls his opponents in Corinth “super-apostles.”
Crofton, Jeffrey. Agency of the Apostle Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement , (Yorkshire:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1991 p. 61
4
©2015 Tim Catchim. The ideas and information in this document are the intellectual property of Tim Catchim and
are not to be shared, copied, sold, etc. with other parties without expressed, effective permission.
Crofton is pointing us to an insightful principle here. In genuine apostolic ministry, God is the
Agent, the source of power. Apostles are merely the channel (agency) through which the power
of God flows from giver to receiver.5
Content or Container?
In order to make this important distinction between the agent and agency, Paul strategically
uses several metaphors in 2 Corinthians, the most vivid being that of “clay pots.”
“For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for
Jesus’ sake. For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our
hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ. But we
have this treasure in jars of clay to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from
us.”6
By using the metaphor of treasure in clay pots, Paul is framing apostolic ministry and leadership
around two distinct, yet interdependent realities: content and container. The content of the
gospel, the power of God to create new life, is separate from the container, and yet it is that
very same fragile clay pot that provides the vehicle for the transformative power of the gospel
to be poured out and experienced by others. It is the contrast between the ordinary clay pot
and the extra-ordinary, transformative power of the gospel that Paul is drawing our attention
to. It’s kind of like a jeweler using a black felt background to display a diamond. The sharp
contrast intentionally draws attention to the splendor and beauty of the diamond. In the same
way, God uses the weak, fragile life of the apostle to display his ever extending power.
It is this role of being a vessel of power that causes the unique experience of feeling very weak
and inadequate, and yet somehow powerful at the same time. This could be why Paul sees
authentic apostolic ministry as being characterized not just by power, but by power in
weakness, life in death, and victory in defeat.7
Moses or Messiah?
Paul’s primary hang up with the super-apostles is their style of ministry and leadership.8 One of
the ways Paul attempts to de-legitimize their approach to ministry and leadership is by showing
it to be fundamentally inadequate to bring about lasting transformation. He does this,
surprisingly, by reaching back into the old covenant scriptures. Listen in:
“Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, like some people, letters of
recommendation to you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts,
known and read by everyone. You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our
5
This catalytic role of bringing giver and receiver together possibly explains why Paul describes the nature of his
ministry in priestly language. See Romans 15:14-16
6
2 Corinthians 4:5-7
7
See 2 Corinthians 4:8-12 For an in depth discussion on how Paul’s apostolic ministry mirrors the gospel, see
“Death in Us, Life in You: The Apostolic Medium by Steven” J. Kraftchick in Pauline Theology Vol. 2 1& 2
Corinthians p. 156-181
8
Paul is not primarily concerned with the “super-apostles” doctrine, per se. He is primarily concerned about how
their style of ministry and leadership inaccurately reflects the nature of the new covenant.
©2015 Tim Catchim. The ideas and information in this document are the intellectual property of Tim Catchim and
are not to be shared, copied, sold, etc. with other parties without expressed, effective permission.
ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on
tablets of human hearts.
Such confidence we have through Christ before God. Not that we are competent in ourselves to
claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God. He has made us competent
as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the
Spirit gives life.
Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with
glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its
glory, transitory though it was, will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? If the
ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that
brings righteousness! For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing
glory. And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which
lasts!
Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. We are not like Moses, who would put a
veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. But
their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is
read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when
Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken
away. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we
all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his
image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.”9
Contrary to conventional understanding, Paul is not giving us an introductory lesson on the
difference between the Old and New Covenants here, per se. Paul is equating Moses’ fading
glory at the giving of the law with the inevitably fading influence of the super-apostle’s style of
ministry on the Corinthians. At the giving of the law (written and engraved on stones) Moses’
face shined brightly from his encounter with God, but over time, that glory began to fade. In
order to hide this fading glory Moses put a veil over his face. Paul sees this fading glory on
Moses’ face as illustrating the limited capacity of the “written” law to bring about lasting
change and transformation.
9
2 Corinthians 3 NIV
©2015 Tim Catchim. The ideas and information in this document are the intellectual property of Tim Catchim and
are not to be shared, copied, sold, etc. with other parties without expressed, effective permission.
Paul says the super-apostles’ style of ministry, with their emphasis on written letters of
recommendation, shares in the same limitations as the ministry of the old covenant. By
focusing on their own “glorious” credentials, the super apostles end up standing in the way of
the community, obstructing their view and distracting them from the real source of
transformation: the glory of the Lord.
Secret Agent Man
By comparing the super-apostles style of ministry to Moses’ fading glory, Paul is pointing us to
the inadequacies in their posture of leadership. At first, their ego-centered style of ministry
appears to produce change. It even has an aura of life and vitality. It can gather a crowd,
impress people, and even generate movement. However, over time, as people get closer to the
leader, they will begin to notice that the leader has weaknesses and inadequacies. The “glory”
of the leader begins to fade. In the eyes of the follower, they become all too human and
mundane. In an “agent” style ministry, when you lose your glory, you lose your effectiveness.
Most leaders can detect when their followers begin to lose their fascination with them. In order
to compensate for their fading glory they put a “veil” over their face. In other words, they
covered up their weaknesses and focus exclusively on their strengths. It’s like the “secret agent
man” song that used to play at the beginning of James Bond movies: “be careful what you say,
you might give yourself away.”
Activating Agency
©2015 Tim Catchim. The ideas and information in this document are the intellectual property of Tim Catchim and
are not to be shared, copied, sold, etc. with other parties without expressed, effective permission.
Genuine apostolic ministry (an all new covenant ministry for that matter) aims to bring the
giver of power and receiver of power into a direct, unhindered relationship. 10 In order for this
to happen, apostles have to find ways of diverting attention away from ourselves, and onto the
transformative glory of the Lord.
The way Paul diverted attention away from himself and onto the transformative power of the
Lords glory was by being transparent about his weakness, sufferings and inadequacies. Instead
of “veiling” them, he brought them out into the open.
Diminishing Dependency
It is crucial to understand the role of transparency in apostolic leadership because starting new
communities from scratch throws us into group dynamics of power and authority. In the
formative phases of a newly founded community, those who are functioning in an apostolic role
can become idealized as they shoulder the responsibility of cultivating energy and meaning.
This makes the leader vulnerable to the often unspoken process of what some call
“transference” in which individuals unconsciously project onto a leader their hopes and
aspirations that often come with authority figures, particularly parents. 11 Like a Hollywood
actor, those functioning in apostolic ministry (or ministry in general) can unknowingly step into
roles that have been pre-scripted and transferred onto them by the newly formed group,
making them the repositories of unrealized hopes and expectations. 12 Not making good on
these expectations can create significant disappointment in the relationship.
These expectations, while making the leader-follower relationship somewhat precarious and
fragile in nature, also present a unique opportunity. Whenever a leader shows any promise of
coinciding with these latent expectations, it provides the spark for charismatic authority to
10
Ibid. 62
Putting a New Spin on Groups: The Science of Chaos by Bud A. McClure p. 96
12
Leadership Without Easy Answers by Ron Heifetz p. 247-488
11
©2015 Tim Catchim. The ideas and information in this document are the intellectual property of Tim Catchim and
are not to be shared, copied, sold, etc. with other parties without expressed, effective permission.
emerge.13 Without pre-existing organizational structures to fund the apostle’s legitimacy, it is
charisma that provides the initial currency for leadership to function.
Because charisma primarily stems from the perceptions of the follower, the leader is somewhat
limited as to when and how it emerges. Charisma neither exists in the follower or the leader,
but rather between them. It is relational in nature.
Charisma, although it can’t be possessed, it can be stewarded. And when it’s stewarded in the
way of Jesus, it can empower both leader and follower alike. However, if stewarded poorly, the
leader can end up exploiting the needs of the follower for their own selfish gains. As Heifitz
notes, “The pitfall of charisma, however, is unresolved dependency. People can fail to move on,
to discover their own ‘magic,’ their own capacity to flourish and lead. They may not realize their
capability for self-governance…For the charismatic it feels good to be idealized. For his
constituents, it feels good to have someone who assures deliverance in the long run, and in the
short run provides direction, protection, orientation, the control of conflict and clear norms.”14
Charisma brings certain points of leverage to the tasks of leadership, but in the long run, it
cannot generate a sustainable community or movement.
A founder(s) leadership will, initially, foster a certain level of dependency in the embryonic
phases of the communities’ development. This dependency is necessary and unavoidable.
However, this dependency should be strategically (and carefully) diminished over time.
When a leader is transparent about their weakness and suffering, in essence, they are refusing
to put a “veil” on. Unlike Moses who, when he perceived his glory was beginning to fade,
genuine apostolic ministry is characterized by a perpetual “unveiling” of the leader’s
weaknesses and inadequacies. This is why Paul says “We all with unveiled faces…” Paul includes
himself in the community as someone who, just like them, needs to look beyond himself to a
greater source of glory and transformative power.
13
On Fire: Charismatic Leadership and Levels of Analysis. Katherine J. Klein & Robert J House. Leadership Quarterly,
6(2), 183-198. 1995 JAI Press
14
Leadership Without Easy Answers by Ron Heifetz p. 247
©2015 Tim Catchim. The ideas and information in this document are the intellectual property of Tim Catchim and
are not to be shared, copied, sold, etc. with other parties without expressed, effective permission.