Why Elder Rule? (Part 2)
November 13th, 2007
(Continued from Yesterday’s Post)
The Qualifications of Elders
The character and effectiveness of any church is directly related to the quality of its leadership. That’s why Scripture stresses the importance of qualified church leadership and delineates specific standards for evaluating those who would serve in that sacred position.
The qualifications for elders are found in 1 Timothy 3:2-7 and Titus 1:6-8. According to these passages, an elder must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, gentle, uncontentious, free from the love of money, not fond of sordid gain, a good manager of his household, one who has his children under control with dignity, not a new convert, one who has a good reputation outside the church, self-controlled, sensible, able to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict, above reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, loving what is good, just, and devout.
The single, overarching qualification of which the rest are supportive is that he is to be “above reproach.” That is, he must be a leader who cannot be accused of anything sinful because he has a sustained reputation for blamelessness. An elder is to be above reproach in his marital life, his social life, his business life, and his spiritual life. In this way, he is to be a model of godliness so he can legitimately call the congregation to follow his example (Phil. 3:17). All the other qualifications, except perhaps teaching and management skills, only amplify that idea.
In addition, the office of elder is limited to men. First Timothy 2:11-12 says, “Let a woman quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.” In the church, women are to be under the authority of the elders, excluded from teaching men or holding positions of authority over them.
The Functions of Elders
As the apostolic era came to a close, the office of elder emerged as the highest level of local church leadership. Thus, it carried a great amount of responsibility. There was no higher court of appeal and no greater resource to understand the mind and heart of God (as revealed in the Scriptures) with regard to issues in the church.
The primary responsibility of an elder is to serve as a manager and caretaker of the church (1 Tim. 3:5). That involves a number of specific duties. As spiritual overseers of the flock, elders are to determine church policy (Acts 15:22); oversee the church (Acts 20:28); ordain others (1 Tim. 4:4); rule, teach, and preach (1 Tim. 5:17; cf. 1 Thess. 5:12; 1 Tim. 3:2); exhort and refute (Titus 1:9); and act as shepherds, setting an example for all (1 Pet. 5:1-3). Those responsibilities put elders at the core of the New Testament church’s work.
Because of its heritage of democratic values and its long history of congregational church government, modern American evangelicalism often views the concept of elder rule with suspicion. The clear teaching of Scripture, however, demonstrates that the biblical norm for church leadership is a plurality of God-ordained elders, and only by following this biblical pattern will the church maximize its fruitfulness to the glory of God.
“The biblical norm for church leadership is a plurality of God-ordained elders:”
Does the role of the plurality of God-ordained elders mean they all work together rather than the senior pastor making all the decisions and the other elders carry out his plans?
Too often the senior pastors want to made the decisions that the other elders are required to carry out. I don’t see that in scripture, but a plurality means they work together.
Charles
Above reproach men, who work together for the Gospel to be proclaimed, through the ministry of the church.
Amen.
Unity of the elders is essential. Not that they can’t disagree on non-essentails, but in the essentails they must agree. And they must love one another for this is Christ’s command first and foremost. If you don’t love one another it will fall apart.
Also, I agrre that a group of elders are to rule as one, with the senior pastor being a chief elder. I think a gruop of elders will need a Moses, or a Peter, but this leader will also bow to the majority rule. He doesn’t call the shots, but he leads. Sort of like a quarterback leads the team, but you need all 11 players to move forward.
What would be a good policy of the number of elders for pastors who are elders and those who are lay men who are not paid to serve as elders?
Would you have a man to serve as a elder who would be qualified but has a job on Sunday and would be unable to attend any of the churche services?
Charles
I have a question based on two statements made (one in this post and one in the previous post):
“Simply stated, this is the only pattern for church leadership given in the New Testament. Nowhere in Scripture does one find a local assembly ruled by majority opinion or by a single pastor.”
“Because of its heritage of democratic values and its long history of congregational church government, modern American evangelicalism often views the concept of elder rule with suspicion.”
I agree with elder leadership for sure (as do others who believe in “congregational rule” like Mark Dever or John Piper or D. A. Carson). The changing of terms from “led” or “leadership” to “rule” needs to be nuanced I think. I’m still thinking through the biblical teaching on the final court of decision whether it be the elders or the church as a whole, but I do agree with elder leadership (as does the others mentioned above).
Here’s my question: do you know of an essay or book that argues against elder-led, cogregational rule, the kind Mark Dever espouses? I’d like to read it as I think through this issue.
Thanks for the post brothers, keep up the good, God-exalting, biblically-faithful work.
How would you direct me, a woman, who has been teaching Sunday School to men and women? I also was asked by my pastor to take the service Sunday when he is on vacation. Help me make peace with I Timothy 2:11-12. I want to honor God and His Word.
Are the qualifications for Elder the same as Deacon, except for the “apt to teach” part?
My church has too few Elders because there aren’t enough qualified men, yet we have a number of Deacons. I’m wondering if these Deacons would be qualified to be Elders if they had the gift of teaching.
Thanks!
Sandy,
If you have a gift to teach, then it’s fine that you teach. As far as teaching men, that’s the problem isn’t it. I would suggest you talk it over with your pastor. Share your convictions, and tell him you want to be obedient to the Lord and His Word more than man. He should honor that, and understand.
The decision is between you and Lord. I’ll pray that the Lord would help you with this, and that His wisdom would fill you and your pastor. Amen.
Dear Sandy,
Paul’s command is clear in I Tim. 2:11-12. There is no exception clause in that text which allows the Pastor to overrule the command.
There must be a man who can teach that Sunday School class. If you have the gift of teaching and the biblical understanding to do so, then you should disciple other women (Titus 2:3-5).
Also, I assume from your comments that the Pastor has asked you to preach on Sunday to the whole assembly. If that is so, your pastor obviously does not agree that Paul actually means what I Tim. 2:11-12 clearly says!
Regardless, you should obey God’s Word. Simply decline to request.
Blessings to you.
Steve Lamm
Charles,
Among the responsibilities of an elder is watching over the spiritual well-being of God’s people. Thus if a man is not able to regularly be present when the body meets, then he shouldn’t be in the role of overseer – he is not there to oversee.
For a time we had a similar case at our church, and many people were wondering who “that elder” was. They did not know him, and he did not know the people. Not an ideal situation.
Sandy,
I appreciate your desire to understand God’s Word on this.
I suggest MacArthur’s series: “God’s High Calling for Women.” You can find the transcripts and study guides here: http://biblebb.com/brefindex/1ti.htm
Just to actually answer your question, though, about how one might direct you, a woman teaching men and women, I’d tell you to stop, based on 1Tim 2 and other passages.
Thank you to those who have responded to me. I appreciate the compassion that was present in your responses. I must admit that as I read them, the tears fell from my eyes and a knot welled up in my throat. I have been taught (and yes, this includes my pastor) that Paul’s instructions were cultural and did not apply to today, yet I feel now that the Holy Spirit is convicting me. I have even been contemplating going to seminary to become a minister. I am trying not to feel ashamed, but my heart is broken. Thank God for lovingly correcting His children. What is there to do but repent? Mike, I will read the link you suggested. Thanks. I was seeking wisdom. Pray for the men of my small church. We ARE obviously out of order.
…still struggling…
Should men not read Christian material written by women? Should women not be publishing texts? Should women not respond here? Some posts made by women are “teaching” in nature. A new insight into Scripture does turn your world up-side-down!
Hello Sandy,
You present good questions above. Women do have spiritual insight and understanding. Yes, there is a prohibition that they should not teach and/or exercise authority over a man (in the church). In addition, there is instruction that women should be silent in the church. I think that perhaps the idea here is that they should not be questioning/challenging the male teachers. If they have questions, they should ask their husbands who are their spiritual leaders. This also ensures the husband takes an active role in the spiritual care of his wife.
However, I don’t think it is wrong for a woman when there is a discussion to ask questions or to submit inputs, as in this format. I don’t think that it is wrong even for a man to read a commentary by a woman. Even though I tried it, it didn’t work for me.
Women communicate differently.
Sandy,
I am reading Elizabeth Elliot’s “These Strange Ashes”, and it’s an incredible book. She is a true servant of the Lord the whole Body of Christ could learn from.
I also love to listen to Joni Erickson every day on her 5 minute program. She always humbles me with her love for Christ, and her humility.
As for when the people of Lord gather for worship and the Word, I believe the Lord has called men to preach and teach His Word as elders to the flock, along with tending the flock as well. And to lead and protect the Body of Christ from all the wolves in sheepsclothing is another calling the elders have, especially today.
The Lord bless you and fill you with His wisdom and peace and joy. You sound like you are an exceptional servant to the Lord. Keep on my sister.
Your responses continue to bless me. The tears and self-condemnation have ended, and the desire to commit this all to prayer has taken their place. The truths in God’s Word are powerful for the breaking down of strongholds. I have a clear prayer focus for my church and for the paths in which God would have me serve Him in my giftings. His design is perfect. I am already reading the on-line material Mike suggested earlier. I know that someone prayed for this situation because no one “attacked” me for teaching or preaching, nor did I get angry at the implication that these are men’s tasks. I just received the truth…in brotherly love… testament to the power of the Holy Spirit’s work in a situation…especially the illumination of the scriptures. This could have been a stumbling block in my walk. Think of how many Christians fortify the lies they’ve been taught…when the Truth is so simple. May His Word, shared in love, continue to break down strongholds to His glory.
Sandy,
This has been so extremely encouraging to read. I am so grateful for your desire for instruction, even at the cost to your ego and pride. This is the kind of attitude that Solomon spoke about when we talked about loving discipline and reproof, about buying wisdom and understanding and not selling them. I thank God for your acceptance of these things. It’s so blatantly obvious that His Truth is doing what it does (Is. 55:8-9, Heb 4:12ff, Ps. 19:7ff).
Truth be told, there is a TON of great stuff on this topic. I know the above link will take you a while, but there’s plenty more where that came from. If you’d like, you can email me at your leisure with inquiries for more resources as well as questions (mriccardi23@yahoo.com). May I also recommend the guys who run this blog (Jesse Johnson, Nathan Busenitz, et al.) as good guys to ask questions of.
This stuff hits close to home. My girlfriend and other young women in our church (Twenty-Somethings) don’t have a lot of older women willing and able to teach them (a la Titus 2), and so they’ve been meeting together for many months now, just considering what God’s role for them is. They’ve studied Proverbs 31, 1 Timothy 2, Titus 2, and other passages. They’ve also listened to the series I gave you, as well as relevant sermons by John Piper and Albert Martin. They’ve learned a lot and have had a lot of practical questions, similar to the ones you’re asking about the publishing of texts.
So again, please don’t hesitate to contact me. There’s nothing more joyful for me than to serve people who really want to learn by giving them God’s Truth. Praise God for His sovereign grace!
Sorry.. some corrections…
“…Solomon spoke when HE…” not ‘we.’
Isaiah 55:10-11, although 8 and 9 are good too.
PJ:
I, likewise, have been seriously thinking through the same issue, asking the question: where is the final locus of human authority in the local church – the elders or the congregation as a whole?
I have not found one elder-ruled argument that interacts specifically with the congregational model. But, Strauch’s book on elders seems to point in the edler-rule direction. Although, he never does deal with congregationalist arguments.
Nevertheless, having spoken with several congregationalist theologians and having read congregationalist books, I have come to the conclusion that democratic voting in churches is simply an application of congregationalism and not a necessary component of congregationalism. In other words, congregationalism can be applied without voting on issues at business meetings. The Bible never tells us to vote on anything.
That being said, the elders can make the final decision on issues, so long as they bring elder & deacon ordination, serious doctrinal controversies, and disciplinary issues to the congregation so that the congregation can assist in determining the leadership of the Holy Spirit as well as evaluating qualifications of candidates for church leadership. However, after listening to the congregation, the elders (as the overseers) have the responsibility to interpret the lead of the Spirit as they take all things into consideration. Thus, after listening to the congregation, the final call is still with the elders who are charged to guard, protect, and be stewards the Church of God.
Those are my thoughts. If anyone has anything to add, I’d certainly appreciate it.
Jacob,
Thanks for the comment and reply. I read Strauch’s book and he does argue for elder rule though, as you’ve said, he doesn’t really tackle the arguments of congregationalism.
It was helpful to hear you say that voting is an application of congregationalism and not an essential element of the teaching.
Given your final thoughts, you appear to be saying that you believe in elder rule. Thanks for your input. If you want to see a good article that dislodged my thinking at the moment regarding congregationalism, see Kostenberger’s article on church government found here:
http://www.biblicalfoundations.org/?p=129
PJ:
Thanks for the article. I found it helpful. I do see that Scripture gives more authority to elders than to the congregation. Nevertheless, as is usually the case, excesses exist in both camps.
In my opinion, the congregation needs to be involved somehow in (1) selection of elders and deacons, (2) disciplinary issues, and (3) changes to the official doctrinal confession of the church. At the same time, the elders need enough authority and freedom to lead, guard, and oversee the congregation without interferance. How that plays out is up to the local church.
I have a friend whose church recently spent 45 minutes at a business meeting discussing whether or not to install a new telephone line! That is obviously an abuse of congregational involvement.
Jacob,
I so, have to agree with you, (and disagree with Strauch) in that “the congregation needs to be involved in (1) selection of elders and deacons”.
The democratic process of voting in leadership is not something the Church has taken from the culture, but quite the contrary, our Western culture got it from the Church. The Jewish synagogues from which the NT Church took it’s model was democratic in nature, and the NT model shows in Acts 6:3-5 the democratic process taking place.
Also, the Young’s Literal Translation translates Acts 14;23 and 2 Cor 8:19 as “appointed by vote”. Because he believes that the word ‘cheirotoneo’ means as Strong’s agrees, “to be a hand reacher or voter (by raising the hand)”. Yes, I understand that the etymology of a word does not necessarily determine it’s meaning, but in this case the Greek word is consistent with a Greek culture that practiced voting.
We had for a short time a very challenging pastor who was intent on making the church a Willow Creek associate, was reading Emergent authors and was, through lack of discernment, enabling the Church to fall into the hands of the New Apostolic Reformation proponents. (We’ve seen it all). He also was promoting Strauch’s idea that the elders should be appointed NOT voted. Could you imagine what his appointing elders for our church would have done?
Ultimately of course, whether the sheep get to vote or not, they ARE going to vote! albeit, with their feet.
The congregational/elder-led balance I believe represents the Biblical model. Like so many things in the Christian life (eg. wives submitting to their husbands) the congregational/elder-led balance is going to look a little different in each church (as the degrees and areas of submission does in each home), but it is going to be there if it’s Biblical
Vince
It is NOT a given that women communicate differntly. Perhaps, one could say that ‘usually’ or ‘most’ women communicate different than men. But, I have been fooled myself. Before I learned to consider the author before reading a book, I had read a good portion of a rather lengthy book before deciding to look at the author’s name and recall being quite surprised to find that it was a woman, because I too was sure that I would have immediately recognized a woman author. I too would be less interested in reading a book if I knew the author was female. But, it is for that very reason that I will often sign a comment with an initial in place of my first name, because I don’t want to be written off merely because of my gender. And I have to chuckle when people respond to my comments assuming I am male.
Rose:
Thanks for the reply. I, however, disagree with you. Yes, I do believe the congregation needs to be involved in the selection of deacons and elders. By involvement, I did not mean democratic involvement. I have no problem with an elders’ team that appoints the leadership so long as the congregation is given oppertunity to scripturally examine the recommended leadership prior to the actual appointment.
With regards to Acts 6, the apostles had the final say (v.6), not the congregation. It is interesting that it is not the congregation that appoints in both Titus 1:5 and Acts 14:23.
Rose:
Also, Coenen’s article in the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (“Bishop” in vol. 1, esp. p.196) seems to contradict your view of the role of elders in the first century synagogues. His comments on elders’ roles in the ANE, Greco-Roman culture, and the OT are also very telling. I am curious to know from what source you got your background information.
The semantical range of cheirotoneo is broader than simply “appointed by vote” (Bauer, 1083), regardless of how Young translates it.
Sorry to hear your church has had such a hard time with pastors.
I am not fighting for the democratic process or casting ballets that is so besides the point. I am advocating that the people have the right to not have leadership that they don’t agree with imposed upon them. This is the model of respect that every tenor of the New Testament ressonates with. (The apostles in so many different areas showed a respect for the people in the way that they handled issues, a couple quick examples would be the 1 Peter 5:1 as a fellow elder Peter appeals to them rather than as an apostle he demands, Paul in 2 Cor. 2:8 tenderly urges the people to reafirm their love for a disciplined brother.)
Based on what you said, “By involvement, I did not mean democratic involvement. I have no problem with an elders’ team that appoints the leadership so long as the congregation is given oppertunity to scripturally examine the recommended leadership prior to the actual appointment”. I would believe that we are essentially in agreement.
But seriously, if you don’t have a show of hands how do you know if the congregation approves? Or, are you not suggesting that it receive their approval but that it is a mere formality, they intend to impose their elder on the people regardless of their concerns.
In Acts 6 it doesn’t say that the apostles had the final say it merely says the apostles prayed and laid their hands on them (thereby acknowledging the people’s choice).
In Titus 1:5 just because Paul instucted Titus to put elders in place and gave him the information with which to do so, does not have to mean that Titus did this in complete disregard of the people. As Robertson’s, Barnes, Gill, and the People’s New Testament commentaries note.
And for Act 14:23 as you mentioned the semantic range of “cheirotoneo” is broader than simply “appointed by vote”. I would agree it also includes “to appoint with the approval of an assembly that chooses”. (New Testament Word Pictures)
As to voting in the Greek culture, The NIV Theo Dict. for 5936 Cherotoneo -to vote or elect by a show of hands, as was regularly done in the Athenian assembly.
Writing into a Church constitution that the elders appoint elders and that without the agreement of the congregation is a recipe for disaster. It may work wonderfully for some years or even for a few generations in a healthy church like Grace Community but the Biblical recognized understanding that power has a corrupting tendency will eventually be realized.
The current Elders get a mistaken idea into their heads and then only appoint elders who agree with their idea. And thereby hijack the church. Even if the congregtion gets a final say, if the elders never put forward someone who opposes their idea the church is still hijacked. The church should be in on the process from the start and be able to recommed eldership appointees.
Again, ultimately the people will have the say as to who their eldership is. They may have to vote with their feet, and this is not to be looked at as a bad thing if the Church is going apostate. Because of this people often get the leadership they deserve whether good or bad.
Rose:
You are obviously quoting from J.I Packer’s article in New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (“cheirotoneo” vol. 1, p. 478). Your quote does not do justice to the semantical range that Packer presents: “From this the verb came to mean appoint,” and, “In Acts 14:23 it refers to the appointment by Barnabas and Paul of elders in the Galatian churches; from whence, apparently, it became the standard term for ordination.” The verb’s pro-compound appears in Acts 10:41, and it “signifies God’s appointment of the apostles, prior to Jesus’ resurrection, to be witnesses of that event.” I don’t think God appoints “with the approval of an assembly that chooses” (your quote).
All that is to say that its semantical range is greater than simply “vote” or “appoint by vote” or “show of hands.” As both Bauer and Packer indicate, it can mean a few other things, all dependent on context, not etymology.
In Acts 6, the men were brought before the apostles for approval after the congregation selected them. Regardless, this text does not prescribe how we select elders – the men selected are administrative servants (who may have been the forerunners to deacons), not elders.
The quote, “to appoint with the approval of an assembly that chooses”. Was taken from Robertson, A. T., Word Pictures in the New Testament, Baker Book House, 1930., Vol. 5, pp. 216-217).
I do agree that cheirotoneo has come to take on several different meanings over time. And, that one of those meanings is “to appoint with the approval of an assembly that chooses”. I am not standing alone in this, as I listed in my previous comment others before me have said likewise,
As for Acts 6, where does it say the word “approval” in the text? Bless you brother but that is isogetic.
As we don’t live in the days of the apostles, apostolic appointments are not an option. What we are left with to guide us is their example. Which is exemplified in Acts 6, and in every verse of Scripture where they show this same condescending to the people.
1 Cor 16:3 When I arrive, whomever you may approve, I will send them with letters to carry your gift to Jerusalem;
2 Cor 4:5 ourselves as your bondservants,
2 Cor 8:8 I am not speaking this as a command,
1 Cor 7:6 this I say by way of concession not command,
Phil 1:8,9 Therefore, though I have enough confidence in Christ to order you to do what is proper, yet for love’s sake I rather appeal to you-
1Thes 2:6 nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others, even though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authority.
It is pride that would say, “We the superior know what is best for you”. Paul was not that sort. Even though it certainly was true of him that he was superior in wisdom and grace (as is also true of godly elders today) yet by respecting the people, letting them choose, he edified them. (I’m not talking self-esteem nonsense) it actualy forced them to mature or to take ownership of their own maturing.
Yes, it is of utmost importance that leadership know how to put their foot down when it’s necessary, but beyond that it is a Biblical principle of leadership, exemplified in the Apostles, that of respecting the people and not lording it over them.
Just a side comment comming from a 60 year vetran in the Evangelical Free Church of Canada. We have prided ourselves in “congregational rule” better know a ‘managment by the flock’.