Elders Rule! But Congregations Decide

I would say that most conservative evangelicals that lean towards elders, are more aligned with elder led than elder ruled. Maybe I am in left field, but of those I interact with, it is more predominately elder led. With that said, I think that most people ignore the fact that in churches without elders, there are a significant number that are deacon ruled. Much more than most baptist would like to admit. Sure on paper it is congregational in polity, but in reality (where the rubber meets the road), many deacons have reached well beyond a biblical role, and have deacon boards or other types of government institutions that are ruling the church in a myriad of ways.

Apparently research is simply a title in some employment capacities. Yet another word salad that failed to represent what he was arguing against. There is just so much wrong. The same errors were repeated. Saying something over and over is an attempt to make it true I suppose. After correcting the previous installments, I am afraid this is another case of why bother.

[James K]

Apparently research is simply a title in some employment capacities. Yet another word salad that failed to represent what he was arguing against. There is just so much wrong. The same errors were repeated. Saying something over and over is an attempt to make it true I suppose. After correcting the previous installments, I am afraid this is another case of why bother.

Suggestion: Promulgate your own view of church government. Start a thread. Thanks

Start a Discussion

[dgszweda]

I would say that most conservative evangelicals that lean towards elders, are more aligned with elder led than elder ruled. Maybe I am in left field, but of those I interact with, it is more predominately elder led. With that said, I think that most people ignore the fact that in churches without elders, there are a significant number that are deacon ruled. Much more than most baptist would like to admit. Sure on paper it is congregational in polity, but in reality (where the rubber meets the road), many deacons have reached well beyond a biblical role, and have deacon boards or other types of government institutions that are ruling the church in a myriad of ways.

This has been my observation as well. The deacons function as elders. Also of the elder led churches I have been a member of the congregation had as much (if not more) say in decisions than at the single elder/congregational church. I am sure there are many churches that this is not so. I am only talking about my experience.

I have struggled to understand the expectation of scripture that elders rule well. It seems like we are doing mental gymnastics here with the word rule in the article. Dave Doran recently wrote on the same topic and included this excerpt about the meaning of rule:

The word translated rule “is used here of one who has been placed before, or at the head of the church, and who has responsibility in that position both to ‘rule, lead, or direct’ and to ‘be concerned for and care for’ the church” (George W. Knight III, Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, NIGTC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992] , p. 232).

Notice the and in that definition, there is both authority and influence in the word rule. I think there must be some middle ground between a dictator and the powerless “influence” Dr. Bauder describes. One extreme eliminates the congregation altogether, but the other seems to eliminate any authority from the “rule” of the elder leaving the congregation essentially autonomous.

[josh p]

dgszweda wrote:

I would say that most conservative evangelicals that lean towards elders, are more aligned with elder led than elder ruled. Maybe I am in left field, but of those I interact with, it is more predominately elder led. With that said, I think that most people ignore the fact that in churches without elders, there are a significant number that are deacon ruled. Much more than most baptist would like to admit. Sure on paper it is congregational in polity, but in reality (where the rubber meets the road), many deacons have reached well beyond a biblical role, and have deacon boards or other types of government institutions that are ruling the church in a myriad of ways.

This has been my observation as well. The deacons function as elders. Also of the elder led churches I have been a member of the congregation had as much (if not more) say in decisions than at the single elder/congregational church. I am sure there are many churches that this is not so. I am only talking about my experience.

[Chip Van Emmerik]

I think there must be some middle ground between a dictator and the powerless “influence” Dr. Bauder describes.

Three pointed at the buzzer…swish!

“Deacon (or Board) led/ruled is a fact not often discussed in Baptist circles. It is not unusual to see deacons acting like elders and trustees acting like deacons. It is interesting to see what happens when some deacons hear a “Deacons have no authority in a local church” sermon. That kind of talk can get a pastor fired.

Hey brothers, long time. Trust you are richly blessed in the glorious Lord Jesus Christ - !
Remember years ago we argued this topic back and forth (http://sharperiron.org/article/congregational-voting-biblical)?

Problem for Kevin and all you brothers who believe in congregational decisionalism is what Chip mentions above: “I see scriptural support for pastoral and congregational authority at work in the corporate body of believers, but no other leadership entity in the church.” Given what you see, you’re right, Chip. Ultimately though, who submits to whom?

The New Testament gives many precepts and examples for eldership, but advocates of congregational rule can only point to examples, usually Acts 6 and Acts 15. Yet both texts are better explained, imo, apart from votes.

But for the sake of argument, let’s say Kevin is 100% correct in all he say and in his interpretation of all biblical texts. Let’s also agree 100% with Kevin, that eldership churches are oppressive and led by men who crave domination (see his use of 1 Peter 5:3, for example).
Still, even if Kevin is perfectly true, the right way to develop the New Testament’s own teachings is to examine its doctrines and practices that are clearly taught in both precept and example. That way we aren’t carried along with every wind of doctrine like speaking in tongues, head coverings, and snake handling.

And since congregationalism has no NT precept (like those three practices), it fails this humble test.

[Ted Bigelow]

And since congregationalism has no NT precept …

Please list the process steps explaining how you became the pastor of your church. Thanks (I may have some very practical follow on questions)

[Jim]

Ted Bigelow wrote:

And since congregationalism has no NT precept …

Please list the process steps explaining how you became the pastor of your church. Thanks (I may have some very practical follow on questions)

Jim - why? Just get to the questions. The New Testament is an open book.

[Ted Bigelow]

Jim wrote:

Ted Bigelow wrote:

And since congregationalism has no NT precept …

Please list the process steps explaining how you became the pastor of your church. Thanks (I may have some very practical follow on questions)

Jim - why? Just get to the questions. The New Testament is an open book.

OK .. who appointed you the Pastor?

In my case, it was sort of myself who “appointed” me. Then I, along with congregational testing and approval, appointed the other elders within several weeks. They have as much authority as I; I have no more than they.

As for my appointment, not a good way to do it, but a horribly sin-filled group of men and women caused it. We had about 100 people who left a church and no one was questioning me as to whether I was qualified. We had about 20 men who had been extensively trained to evaluate church leadership by 1 Tim. 3 and Titus 1. That in small part caused the split.

Here’s my position, though. If I had been less-than qualified my actions would have been high-handed sin against Jesus Christ. As for the other men who became elders, they were appointed by the qualification of Scripture. That process - how we did what we did - is probably what you want to evaluate/test for its merits. Good for you. May your tribe increase, Jim.

So too, when a congregation votes a man into pastorate/eldership/diaconate who is not qualified, it is the same high handed sin against Jesus Christ. The vote doesn’t qualify a man to serve Jesus Christ any more than watching a Superman movie qualifies a man to fly.

[Ted Bigelow]

In my case, it was sort of myself who “appointed” me.

Here’s my position, though. If I had been less-than qualified my actions would have been high-handed sin against Jesus Christ.

I ask this sincerely. How do you know you are not “less than qualified”?

[GregH]

Ted Bigelow wrote:

In my case, it was sort of myself who “appointed” me.

Here’s my position, though. If I had been less-than qualified my actions would have been high-handed sin against Jesus Christ.

I ask this sincerely. How do you know you are not “less than qualified”?

Greg - why do you ask?