Recently I posted about Biblical Submission, drawing upon our past history as a denomination and my thoughts on this matter since then.
The post struck a chord with many; I have never received as much positive feedback as I have from that post. It would seem that many are being exercised over this.

In that post I referred to Heb 13:17, which is rendered in various ways.
Most modern translations have something like:

• ESV: “Obey your leaders and submit to them…”

Other translations given are:

• BDAG Lexicon (as an alternative to “obey”): “Follow the heads of your Christian congregation and submit to them…”
• Abbott-Smith Lexicon (as an alternative to “obey”) “Listen to your leaders and submit to them…”
• NIV: “Have confidence in your leaders and submit to their authority…”

And, as I and some commentators have noted, “obey” here is literally “be persuaded”.

The BDAG Lexicon observes that some passages, with an identical construction to that used in Heb 13:17 (middle/passive+dative) can be translated in various ways: “be persuaded by someone, take someone’s advice or obey, follow someone”.

In the end I am not so much concerned as to how the word is translated, but how it is understood.
What I particularly wanted to convey was that the “obedience” which we as leaders look for in members should not be construed as “obedience without question” such as masters look for in slaves (Tit 2:9).
As one commentator (The Message of Hebrews) put it:

Naturally, the writer is not inculcating blind, unthinking obedience to everything a Christian teacher says, otherwise there would be little point in issuing the warning he has just given about ‘diverse and strange’ doctrines. In New Testament teaching there is clear recognition that discernment is obviously necessary and also that obedience to the revealed word of God is essential.

Rather, the relationship of leaders to members is more akin to that other authority-submission relationship between adult Christian equals, i.e. the relationship between a husband and wife.
Obedience like that operates in the context of consultation and persuasion.

The word [in Heb 13:17] translated “obey” is peithesthe. In the active the word means to persuade or prevail upon, and in the passive or middle voice, to be persuaded, to listen to or obey. Thus, this is not blind obedience to which our teacher refers, but obedience after thoughtful consideration that results in persuasion – all the stronger base for obedience.
Those of us who demand obedience without reason, although that is necessary at times of childhood or emergency, are likely to get chameleon Christians who change orientation every time some golden-mouthed authoritarian happens along. (The Preacher’s Commentary)

Since I wrote my post, one leader expressed his fear that this would give members open slather to ignore their leaders and do whatever they want: “You didn’t persuade me, so I don’t have to obey.”
This is a fair point. And though logically a command (that is read literally as): “be persuaded” hardly allows one to be “not persuaded”, yet I would not want to be misunderstood.
There needs to be a good balance; as Bob Utley puts it:

This word of encouragement to submit to Christian leaders is much needed in our day of disrespect for authority of any kind, and an overemphasis on the rights and powers of the individual. God has placed some as leaders among His people. We honour them because of their call, training, commitment, and service.
However, there is an opposite “ditch.” God’s calling has been abused by some authoritarian personalities. There must be a balance, a mutual respect, a co-operative spirit between God’s people and God’s leaders. All believers are called to be subject to one another out of respect for Christ (cf. Eph. 5:21).

In the interests of maintaining a good balance, I thought it would be useful to work through some examples of how this kind of authority-submission should work in practice.

For the sake of convenience I will weave this around the different translations in various sources of the word rendered “obey” in Heb 13:17, i.e. “obey/ be persuaded by/ follow/ listen to/ have confidence in” .
But I want to emphasise I am not particularly reading anything into the different words themselves.
They all speak of how members are to relate to their leaders, and in the end it comes down to how you understand and apply the command, not so much to the word used.

How we apply that command depends upon the circumstances.

1. Obey your leaders where there is a clear Biblical command

John Owen explains Heb 13:17 as follows:

It is [members’] duty so to obey whilst [their leaders] teach the things which the Lord Christ hath appointed them to teach; for unto them is their commission limited, Matthew 28:20: and to submit unto their rule whilst it is exercised in the name of Christ, according to his institution, and by the rule of the word, and not otherwise. When they depart from these, there is neither obedience nor submission due unto them.

For example, suppose a young woman, a member of the church, moves in to live with her boyfriend. The leaders of the church have a responsibility to seek to persuade her she is doing what is wrong.
I mean “persuade”; not just tell her to stop and leave it at that.
The degree of persuasion will vary: If she has had a good grounding in the Bible over many years, and must know she is doing the wrong thing, persuasion will take the form of reasoning with her on the basis of what she already knows.
On the other hand, if she is a new Christian, with little understanding of how a Christian should conduct herself, persuasion will take longer and will go into much more detail, “precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little, there a little.”

But what if, after it all that, she simply refuses, saying: “You haven’t persuaded me, so I don’t have to obey.”
The leaders have faithfully told her what the Word of God plainly teaches. To say she is “not persuaded” is no excuse.
If, after patiently waiting for her to repent, she refuses to do so, the leaders should then inform the members, and explain why what she is doing is wrong, so that the members understand and have opportunity to plead with her too.
If then, all this is still to no avail, the leaders (the church with them), would have to remove her from fellowship – usually in the greater (1 Cor 5) or lesser way (2 Thes 3)  depending on her background and how much they believed she understood.

2. Be persuaded by your leaders where there is a Biblical principle at stake

Sometimes there is not a clear command, but an important Biblical principle is at stake.
For example, while worship in observance of the Lord’s day is commanded, the time when we come together to worship is not.
Most believers want to meet for worship as early as possible (Psa 63:1), though even that may not always be possible (Acts 20:7).
But wise leadership will consult the members to hear what constraints lie in anyone’s way that make certain times difficult – I mean legitimate constraints of “necessity and mercy” (eg. a farmer having to milk his cows, a nurse having to be on duty), not selfish, frivolous ones (“Sunday mornings are when I like to get down the beach”).
Having consulted and determined the time that suits most people, the leadership would then explain to the members why this was a good time to meet, and the members should be persuaded.

If someone says, without good reason, “I don’t like that time; you haven’t persuaded me; I’m not going to meet with you then” – again, that is unacceptable.
There is a Biblical principle involved here. While there is no command as to when to meet, there is a clear command that we are to meet: “Let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.” (Heb 10:24-25)

The authority-submission relationship between leaders and members has many similarities to that between a husband and wife, but the one difference is that the wife is one, while the members are many. The leaders have to take into consideration the interests of the many.
If the leaders have consulted, and have genuinely made a good decision in the interests of as many as possible, then all should be persuaded, and all should comply – except for any one of the many that is legitimately unable to do so.

3. Follow your leaders in a thoughtful change of practice

Sometimes the leadership may need to change a time-honoured practice in the congregation.
The leadership should go into this carefully, consulting any who are particularly invested in the practice, and seek to understand any concerns before making a decision.
If, after carefully weighing everything up, they come to a thoughtful decision to change the practice, a wise leadership will then seek to persuade all to follow; and the members should follow.

As an example, 40 years ago our denomination examined our practice in the Lord’s Supper.
At the time, as in many Protestant churches for the last 100 to 150 years, we remained seated in our pews and received the elements in little individual cups and as small cut up pieces of bread. This was a time-honoured practice.
But our denomination looked into Scripture, as well as church practice for more than 1800 years, and were persuaded that some symbolism of the Lord’s Supper was being lost – so we determined to go back to the traditional church practice of sitting around one table, and sharing a common cup and a common loaf.
We were not saying the way many Protestant churches had been celebrating the Lord’s Supper, in the last 100 years or so, nullified the sacrament; just that this was a better way to go about it.
Also, while ever those partaking remained in their pews, disciplining the “table” had become impossible.

We then sought to persuade our church members of the change; and mostly the change was accepted well.
But when some expressed concerns regarding a common cup on the grounds of hygiene, we listened: while still passing around a common cup, we allowed members to pour from it into an individual glass in front of them.

The whole thing was a worthwhile exercise in leaders leading, but listening; and members following.

4. Listen to your leaders when they give you advice

At times leaders are called upon to give advice to individual members on matters of individual practice.
Where it is advice, it is wise for members to listen, but also for leaders to leave it up to the individual to decide. There may be Biblical reasons for leaning towards one course of action or another, but no clear Biblical direction that compels one to go one way or the other.

For example, a person may decide to take his family away in order to take a job overseas.
The leaders may be concerned that his departure would leave a hole in the congregation. And does he really know what churches are like in the area he is going to? What about the effect on his wife and children?
The person concerned might see this as an opportunity to support his family after struggling to do so at home for so long, as well as an opportunity to support the  outreach of the gospel overseas.
All Biblical reasons.

It is at this point it can become tricky. It is human nature to overstate one’s case to prove a point.
When the leaders sense their advice is being resisted, they will be tempted to come on heavy and turn their Biblical reasons into Biblical commands.
The person concerned will be tempted to present his case more strongly, and accuse his advisers of resisting what is “obviously” the leading of the Lord.
No one wins when this happens.
Best for leaders to recognise their advice is only advice and leave it up to the individual – even if what he proposes may seem to them to be less than wise; and for the person concerned to listen to the advice of his leaders and weigh up carefully what they have to say.

5. Have confidence in your leaders, but be persuaded by your individual conscience in matters indifferent

Some practices we are free to observe or not observe.
Paul continued to practise circumcision where appropriate (Acts 16:3), but would not do so if it would imply necessity (Gal 2:3).
Likewise, while observance of the Lord’s day is enshrined in the Ten Commandments, observance of other holy days is not (Rom 14:5).

If the leaders were to introduce having a special Christmas service (on other than the Lord’s day), no one should despise them for doing so; but neither should any be made to feel obliged to join in.
The leaders are free to seek to persuade others (“it’s a wonderful evangelistic opportunity”), but in the end decisions like this should be left to the individual’s conscience.

Conclusion

Members are to “obey/ be persuaded by/ follow/ listen to/ have confidence in” their leaders.
What that will mean in practice will depend upon the context.

Both leaders and members have a responsibility to maintain a good relationship with each other.
Both leaders and members have temptations peculiar to their status that could sabotage that relationship.

Let us all – leaders and members – work to see it work, “endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.”