Pastor's Blog

Grace Life Baptist Church Blog

"Plurality of Elders": The Preeminent Structure for Church Leadership

In the previous article "Elder": The Preeminent Term for Church Leaders," we learned that the term "elder" is by far the most frequently used term for church leaders in the New Testament.  As was previously noted, this doesn't mean that we should no longer call church leaders "pastor/shepherd" or bishop/overseer." But I did suggest that the preeminence of the term "elder" might affect our understanding of how decision-making ought to happen in the local church.  I said this because the contexts in which the term "elder" occur reveals a lot about the leadership structure of the early church.

Today I will be noting the three main church leadership structures that have been employed over the last two thousand years and try to determine which one gives Christ the most preeminence, especially as it obeys Scripture the closest.

1.  Episcopal:  The Episcopal form of leadership has been the most used form since at least Ignatius of Antioch and was practically undisputed until the Reformation.  This remains the form of church leadership in the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, and Anglican/Episcopalian churches.

2.  Presbyterian:  The Presbyterian form of leadership has been common in Presbyterian and Reformed churches and is commonly described as elder-rule.  A plurality of elders are elected by the congregation or the drawing of lots.  These elders also serve as leaders in the regional body of churches (classis), and the classis will send a chosen few to a broader body of leadership known as a Synod.  These broader bodies do not have a higher authority except only in so far as authority has been delegated to them.

3.  Congregational:  The Congregational form of leadership is founded on the principle of each local congregation being an independent, self-governing body of Christ.  Congregational churches may be involved in associations of other local churches and conventions of churches across a wide geographical area, but congregational churches remain autonomous—that is self-regulated.  If you have been a long-time Baptist then you will understand this form of leadership the best.  But you might be surprised to learn that there are two main forms of Congregationalism:

a)  Single elder-led/Congregational-rule:  This is when the congregation elects a single man to serve as the elder of the church.  While the elder is sought for council and leadership, the congregation makes nearly all of the decisions.

b)  Plural elder-led/Congregational-rule:  This is when the congregation elects a body of elders to serve as a plurality of leadership.  They will not all be paid staff of the church but they all will be responsible for shepherding, teaching, equipping, and being examples to the congregation.  Usually there will be a “first-among-equals” that does the majority of the public teaching and may be the only paid staff.

In some cases, the elders are sought for council and leadership, yet the congregation makes nearly all of the decisions.  In other cases, the congregation is free to take opinions or concerns to the elders, yet the majority of decisions are made by the elder body.  Usually the only decisions that the congregation actually vote on include an annual budget, appointment of elders or deacons, major building programs, or the admission/dismissal of a member.  The congregation elects the elders and trust that they will shepherd the flock faithfully.  If they have issues with any of the elders’ decisions or an elder himself, then they simply talk with the elders about it.

It is my conviction from Scripture that a plural elder-led/ congregational-rule best reflects the New Testament evidence of what local church leadership ought to look like.

a.  Evidence of a plurality of elder-led leadership:  There is ample evidence in the New Testament of a plurality of elder-led leadership.

Acts 11:29-30—So the disciples determined, everyone according to his ability, to send relief to the brothers living in Judea.  30 And they  did so, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul.

Acts 14:23—And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they had believed.

Acts 15:22-23—Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas.  They sent Judas called Barsabbas and Silas, leading men among the brothers,

Acts 20:17, 28—Now from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the church to come to him. . . . Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God.

Philippians 1:1—Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, to all the saints of Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons.

1 Thessalonians 5:12—We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love because of their work.  Be at peace among yourselves.

James 5:14—Is anyone among you sick?  Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.

Hebrews 13:7, 17—Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God.  Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith. . . .  Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account.  Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.

b.  Strengths of a plurality of elder-led leadership:  Not only is there biblical evidence for a plurality of elder-led leadership, but there are lots of common sense reasons why it is a better system.  The following seven strengths are drawn from Mark Dever's The Deliberate Church.

1)  It curbs the exaltation of one man above others

2)  It balances the strengths and weaknesses of the leaders (1 Cor. 12:27-30)

3)  It gives greater pastoral wisdom (assurance in knowing and doing God’s will; Acts 6; 15:25; Matt. 18:18-20)

4)  It indigenizes leadership

5)  It enables corrective discipline

6)  It reduces congregation criticism

7)  It reduces “us vs. him” thinking

c.  Weaknesses of a single elder-led leadership:  There are also lots of common sense reasons that a single elder-led, congregational-rule system is quite weaker.

1)  It is easier for a few influential people to manipulate a congregation than it is to manipulate a plurality of elders.

2)  It is easier for a congregation to bulldoze a single pastor than a plurality of elders.

3)  It is easier for a congregation to idolize a single pastor to the point that he becomes an autocratic leader that is “above the law.”

4)  It is easier for dissension to grow in the congregation because everyone considers himself a decision maker in the church.

5)  Most single elder-led congregations have adopted an elder-led structure by default:  We see this in congregations where the body of deacons is looked to as the decision makers in the church.  While the deacons must have the congre-gation’s vote to make it official, everyone knows that it is mainly a formality.  The problem with this system is that deacons are not qualified to serve as elders.  Therefore, it would be best to simply adopt the most biblically sound leadership structure—a plurality of elders that are entrusted to lead the congregation.

While there is certainly some room for debate on the issue of church leadership structures, it  seems that the weight of New Testament evidence points to a plurality of elders who lead the local congregation.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Jeremy Vanatta
Continue reading
  865 Hits
865 Hits

The Ephesians 4 Project: Article VI

Article VI:  The Church
A New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes. In such a congregation each member is responsible and accountable to Christ as Lord. Its scriptural officers are pastors and deacons. While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.
The New Testament speaks also of the church as the Body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.

Unifying Principles from Article VI
Historically, Baptist have been strong on their view of the local church, and the statement made in the Baptist Faith & Message confirms this for Southern Baptists.  The unifying principles abound from article VI.  We all agree that the church is founded upon the New Covenant in the Lord Jesus Christ.  We all agree that the church is an “autonomous local congregation of baptized believers.”  We all agree the membership in the church is “by covenant in faith and fellowship in the gospel.”  We all agree that there are only two ordinances (baptism and communion).  We all agree that the church is to be operated “under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes.”  We all agree that the two “scriptural offices are pastors and deacons,” though we’ll need to address this one further.  And we all agree that the office of pastor is to be “limited to men as qualified by Scripture.”

There are, however two areas in which we need to clarify the doctrine of the church.  In the area of local church autonomy, we must remember that this means that local churches “have the inherent right to draw up for themselves and publish to the world a confession of their faith whenever they may think it advisable to do so.” (BF &M, The Preamble).  Therefore, the SBC has a right to hold the local churches accountable on doctrine and practice only so far as the BF & M demands.  This means that local churches will be similar in many ways, but not uniform.  So, we must be careful not to confuse the denomination with the local church, which leads to a second area in need of clarification.

While we all agree that the scriptural offices of the church are pastors and deacons, we must give the local church some freedom to work out their understandings of Scripture.  Please note that the biblical terms of elder/overseer/pastor each refer to one office and that the term elder is used far more than the others in the New Testament.  I have chosen to use the more familiar words to Baptists of pastor and elder.  The following models must be given a hearing in the SBC because each one is firmly congregational, even though we may disagree on the biblical accuracy of one or more (this is not necessarily an exhaustive lists since a number of variations of these can play out in a local church):

  1. Pastor/Elder-ruled:  Some churches have chosen this model in which the pastor/elder is held accountable by the congregation, but he makes the majority of decisions on behalf of the church.

  2. Pastor/Elder-led:  Some churches have chosen this model in which the pastor makes some independent decisions but is held accountable by the congregation, which has ultimate decision-making responsibilities.

  3. Pastor & Deacon-led:  Some churches have chosen this model in which the pastor/elder is held accountable directly by the deacons, and both the pastor/elder and deacons make some independent decisions but are held accountable by the congregation, which has ultimate decision-making responsibilities.  This appears to be the dominant model in the SBC at this time.

  4. Pastors/Elders-led:  Some churches have chosen this model in which a plurality of pastors/elders make some independent decisions but are held accountable by the congregation, which has ultimate decision-making responsibilities.

Out of these three, it is my understanding of Scripture that only models 2 and 4 are biblically validated, but within the boundaries laid out by the BF & M, each of these is permissible at the local church level.  Notice that I have excluded the elder-ruled model because accountability to the congregation is lessened to such a degree that one would be hard-pressed to prove that it is Baptistic as opposed to Presbyterian.

Despite what some Southern Baptists are saying, each of these models maintains congregational-rule, and we pray each of them is ultimately Christ-ruled.  No matter the model of congregational church polity adopted, there is no reason that we cannot be unified as Southern Baptists.

For His Glory,
Jeremy Vanatta
Continue reading
  664 Hits
Recent Comments
Guest — Ben Simpson
Jeremy, concerning the leadership structure of the church, here is where we must weigh tradition with Scripture. It is clear that... Read More
Tuesday, 31 May 2011 10:44
Guest — jeremyvanatta
I believe Menikoff is right on target. Turning from Scripture to the culture for guidance on church polity will be a nightmare at... Read More
Thursday, 02 June 2011 09:44
Guest — Ben Simpson
Also, some are trying to equate elder-led with elder-ruled. Are they the same? If not, what are the differences?
Tuesday, 31 May 2011 10:47
664 Hits