“Democracy is the worst form of government, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” —Winston Churchill
In the exploration of church governance, Winston Churchill's reflection on democracy's imperfections resonates, drawing attention to the various problems experienced in the practical application of biblical church government. Delving into the diverse models practiced today presents a vital decision for those contemplating their church's structure. How is this going to work?
Churches today tend to organize in three main ways. The first is form of organization is called "episcopalian," where a special group called a priesthood makes decisions in various hierarchies of leadership, and the final authority is outside the local church. The second is a "presbyterian" form where elders have power not only in their own church but may share the final authority outside local church boundaries. But the third category namely, "congregational," is where the local church has the final say in decisions without outside intrusion—and this is the practice vividly seen in the New Testament as practiced by the early church.
Not discounting the voluntary cooperation we see between churches, This governance model is substantiated as a powerful relationship between the Elders and members within the congregation. Make note of congregational practice in the New Testament:
Deacon Selection was by the Entire Congregation:
The congregation actively participated in the selection of the first "deacons," as evidenced in Acts 6. This highlights the direct involvement of the entire body in matters of leadership and service roles.
Church Discipline was Entrusted to the Entire Church:
The responsibility of church discipline, as articulated in Matthew 18, I Corinthians 5, and II Corinthians 2, is a communal task. The entire church community is entrusted with the duty of maintaining the purity and integrity of the congregation.
Ordinances were Entrusted to the Entire Church:
The ordinances, such as baptism and the Lord's Supper, were committed to the entire church community. This inclusive approach aligns with the Great Commission in Matthew 28, the commission in Mark 16, and the guidance in I Corinthians 11.
Epistles were Addressed to Entire Congregations:
A significant number of Paul's letters were directed not solely to church leaders but to entire congregations. The epistles to the Romans, I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, I Thessalonians, and II Thessalonians underscore the collective responsibility and engagement of the entire body in understanding and applying doctrinal truths.
Congregational Selection of Representatives involved the whole congregation:
The congregation actively participated in selecting its representatives, as observed in Acts 15 where Paul and Barnabas were appointed and “sent on their way by the church”(15:3). This practice reinforces the autonomous, but participatory nature of the local church in decision-making processes.
In essence, the New Testament portrays a congregational model where key decisions, leadership selections, disciplinary actions, and the observance of ordinances are shared responsibilities of the entire church body. Grudem explains some of the practical ramifications:
“Congregational approval is already a biblical requirement for church discipline in Matthew 18:17 and for excommunication in 1 Corinthians 5:4. The principle of congregational election of elders would imply that the decision to call any pastor would also have to be approved by the congregation as a whole. Major new directions in the ministry of the church, which will require large-scale congregational support, may be brought to the church as a whole for approval. Finally, it would seem wise to require congregational approval on such large financial decisions as an annual budget, the decision to purchase property, or the decision to borrow money for the church (if that is ever done), simply because the church as a whole will be asked to give generously to pay for these commitments.”
The Installation of Elders
Creating a leadership structure within a congregational church utilizing elders is a significant task that requires careful thought, scriptural grounding, and community involvement. As John MacArthur instructed,
“The New Testament church is seen in transition. Patterns of church leadership developed as the first-century church matured. We can trace three steps in the process of ordaining leaders. Initially, it was the apostles who selected and ordained elders (Acts 14:23). After that, elders were appointed by those who were close to the apostles and involved in their ministry. For example, Paul specifically charged Titus with the ordaining of elders (Titus 1:5). In the third phase, the elders themselves ordained other elders (1 Timothy 4:14). Always, the ultimate responsibility for appointing elders was a part of the function of church leadership.”1
According to Mark Dever, In his Nine Marks of a Healthy Church, there are two factors that we are trying to reconcile:
“Because the current elders are entrusted with spiritually overseeing the church (1 Tim. 5:17), they have a responsibility to lead the church in selecting new elders.”
“Because the congregation is finally accountable for the teaching they choose to listen to (Gal. 1), elders should be appointed by the express consent of the congregation.”
He explained,
“How to balance these two principles is a matter of prudence. One way to recognize both biblical principles is (i) to have the elders nominate prospective elders and then (ii) to have the congregation vote to recognize them. That way the elders are the ones examining a man before putting him before the congregation, yet the congregation’s decision is decisive.”2
The Process of Selecting and Installing Elders
How then do we choose elders? What is the process that helps us find the right leadership and install them in a way that gives momentum and clarity to our government?
Nomination
Members of the congregation are not prohibited from nominating candidates for eldership but ultimately the recommendation should come from elders. (Initially, when a church is formed it would be from the recommendation of elders sending them out, or a recommendation made to the existing congregation as it officially constitutes). Nominations should be made of candidates based on the qualifications outlined in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9. Potential elders should be identified by the qualities listed in these passages, which detail their moral character, ability to teach, and the management of their household, among other qualifications. These are not qualities one aspires to in order to qualify himself, instead, it is the litmus test for candidates a church would consider at all.
Evaluation
A nominating committee of current elders (or with the help of the elders of a sponsoring church) reviews the nominations. As they prayerfully evaluate, candidates undergo a thorough vetting process. This includes interviews, background checks, and discussions to assess doctrinal beliefs, personal character, aptitude for the work, and the personal sense of calling as perceived by the candidate. In Acts 20:28: Elders are made overseers by the Holy Spirit, indicating a divine calling to the role. This calling has both an internal sense and an external confirmation that should be confirmed by the existing elders.
Preparation
While speaking about deacons, 1 Timothy 3:10, implies a period of testing for those who serve in the church, which is in the same vane of instruction for the pastor's office. Paul mentioned that we are to lay hands no man hastily (1 Timothy 5:22): Nominees may be called, but not yet competent in a range of areas. There may be a period of training where they are required to complete a training course or program designed to prepare them for the responsibilities of eldership. This training can include theological education, biblical leadership development, pastoral skills, personal skills, and mentorship by existing elders. Paul advises Timothy to entrust the teachings to faithful men who will be able to teach others also, implying a need for preparation in those who would lead. (2 Timothy 2:2)
Divine Direction
When candidates are recommended, the church will then set aside a period of prayer and fasting as they seek to discern the will of God concerning a candidate’s calling, qualifications, and competency for this role (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.” We see the role of prayer and fasting for decisions of this magnitude, and should not assume our judgment alone sufficient.
Confirmation
When the candidate and the church are adequately prepared, the church is given an opportunity to affirm the candidates, which should involve a period of public review where members can confirm for themselves the vetting of the candidates. After the review period, the congregation should vote to affirm the candidates during a church service or special meeting.3 Although not about elders specifically, Acts 6:3 gives insight into the congregational role in the process: "Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty." We also see the congregation affirming recommendations by the elders in the Jerusalem church in Acts 15.
Installation
Affirmed candidates are formally installed in a special service that includes prayer, laying on of hands, and a charge to serve faithfully by elders. The installation service is a memorable time of empowerment and commitment, with the congregation pledging to support and pray for the new elders. “Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophecy when the council of elders laid their hands on you.” (1 Timothy 4:14)
As we labor to fortify strong churches, the congregational model emerges not just as a historical artifact but as a solid foundation for elders, ensuring a meticulously biblical, and Spirit-driven process. The congregational model isn't merely a better choice among several, it is a divine blueprint that makes the heartbeat of God the collective heartbeat of His people.
Discussion/Study Questions:
In the congregational church governance model, the final authority for decisions lies outside the local church. (True/False)
In a congregational church, decisions about leadership, discipline, and ordinances are made by the _______ church. (Answer: entire/local)
The first "deacons" were selected by the congregation as stated in the book of _______ in the New Testament. (Answer: Acts)
How does the principle of church members actively participating in decision-making reflect the democratic values Winston Churchill spoke about? Discuss the importance of this involvement in a church's governance.
Reflect on the process of selecting and installing church elders. How does this process ensure that the leadership is both spiritually mature and aligned with the congregation's values? Discuss the balance between elder nomination and congregational approval.
Considering the scriptural references to congregational involvement (like in Acts 6 and Acts 15), how do you think this model of church governance impacts the spiritual life and unity of a church community? Discuss the benefits and challenges of this approach.
MacArthur https://www.gty.org/library/articles/451016/answering-the-key-questions-about-elders
https://www.9marks.org/answer/how-should-elders-be-selected/
There should only be a few things a church votes on as a whole:
Installing and removing church officers (Elders/Deacons).
Accepting and disciplining church members.
The adoption of changing of major doctrinal and organizational statements and documents.(Mission statement, bylaws, etc.)
Major Financial Decisions. Approving annual budget, and financial decisions that affect or call for giving outside the budget. (Ex. The acquisition and dissolving of real property.)