"Immanuel - God with us."

Church Leadership - The Views of a “Liberal Literalist”

First, a liberal literalist is an inerrantist (the original writers wrote the Scripture without errors) who believes the Bible is God's word revealed to humanity and that the Bible to be taken factually. At the same time the liberal literalist freely and lovingly allows others to believe something other than what he believes the Bible says, and even allows others not to believe the Bible is the Word of God at all.

A liberal literalist, however, believes that everyone can agree on the text of the Bible, that the Bible says what it says. And further, a liberal literalist insists that we read exactly what the Bible says without adding our conclusions, deductions, inferences, inculcations or any other "opinions".

The church and individual Christians are subject to the sovereignty of Christ and His authority as it is expressed in the New Testament Scriptures. These Scriptures are the writings of the apostles and prophets as the Holy Spirit guided them. (Ephesians 2:20-22) The Scripture is quite clear. No one and no group of individuals have the right to amend the Scriptures without incurring the wrath of God. (Revelation 22: 18-19)

The New Testament Scriptures provide us with some instructions and a patchwork pattern for church government. The Scriptures give us several "qualifications" (our word, not a Biblical word) for church leaders but very little instruction for the actual method of selecting (or electing) its leaders.

In the Scriptures each congregation emerges independent; first under the authority of Christ, and then under the authority of the apostles and prophets, and lastly, and to this present day, under the authority of the elders.

The English translation of the words in the New Testament that identify an elder are: "elder" (presbuteros); "overseer" (episkopos); "bishop" (episkopos): "pastor" or "shepherd" (poimen). (Vines Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words) These words are used interchangeably in Acts 20 when the apostle Paul met with the elders of the church at Ephesus. In this discussion I will use the word "elder" to identify these leaders.

Congregations today adopt one of three forms of church government - congregational, episcopal, or presbyterian.

1) A "congregational" church is one in which the local congregation is its own final authority.

2) An "episcopal" congregation is a church in which one person - a priest, or bishop, or archbishop or, in some instances, a pastor - is the final authority. Often a pyramiding denominational superstructure accompanies the episcopal government, or the church is totally independent under the authority of "the pastor".

3) A "presbyterian" church is one in which groups of individuals, generally elders or a board, are the final authority. Sometimes these groups of presbyters form a pyramiding authority over local congregations.

The congregational and the episcopal forms of church government evolved from the New Testament pattern of a group of elders with no denominational authority above them, superintending the affairs of the local congregation. Today those management teams, which are over both the local and national churches, are variously known as a board of elders, church board, conference, synod, convention, general assembly, region, convocation, etc.

Now we will look at the pattern of church government in the New Testament. First, I will discuss the qualifications for elders, second, the work of elders, and then the role of the preacher (pastor or minister or reverend).

The primary passages that give the qualifications for elders are 1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9, and 1 Peter 5:1-4. These qualifications hold up such a high standard of Christian virtue and behavior that it is impossible for anyone to fully qualify.

In fact, the very first qualification in 1 Timothy 3:2 ["blameless" (KJV) or "above reproach" (NIV)] disqualifies every Christian. The word "blameless" refers to someone who cannot be accused of sin, who cannot be accused of breaking any of the laws of Christ. And since everyone has broken and continues to break the commands of Christ and the apostles doctrine, no one qualifies to be an elder, not even you.

The apostle John, writing to Christians, said, "If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8) Then John underscored the fact that no one is "above reproach" in verse 10: "If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives."

So immediately everyone, male and female, is disqualified to serve as an elder of the church! What are we to do? Are we to ignore the qualifications? Are we to have no elders because no one can qualify? Or are we to use these qualifications as guidelines to find mature believers to fill the roles of leadership? I prefer using these passages as guides to direct the church to its leaders.

If one is going to ignore any of these qualifications, perhaps a listing of these "lesser" qualifications would be in order. Then everyone will know which qualifications will be enforced and which qualifications will be ignored. It seems to me that we ignore the first one, "blameless", but place great emphasis on the deduction that "husband of one wife" requires a male who is married, only once, and who has had sexual intercourse with only one woman in his entire life.

Many forget about all the sexual encounters the man had before his marriage and before his conversion. Many even ignore his sexual encounters after his marriage and conversion. Just so he is still married to the first woman he married. Does that sound legalistic? It should because it is legalistic, or dare I say, pharisaical.

The three words used to identify the leaders of the church are translated elder, overseer and pastor. (All three of these words are used to identify the same group of leaders of the church at Ephesus in Acts 20:17 and Acts 20:28.) These three words themselves give us insight as we choose the persons who should superintend and lead and care for the church.

By definition, "elders" are mature in their faith in Christ and have matured through life experiences. "Overseers" are managers. There are very many good, mature Christian people within the church but not all people have the ability to manage the church. And "pastors", or better, "shepherds", are those who love and care about people. The pastors, like the Good Shepherd, love their sheep and will lay down their lives for the sheep.

But as one reads the Scriptures the qualifications are quite specific: above reproach, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine, not argumentative, gentle, not contentious, not a lover of money, husband of one wife, manages his own family with children under control, not a new convert, of good reputation outside the church, having children who are believers, not self-willed, not quick tempered, a lover of what is good, just, devout, self-controlled, holding fast to the Scriptures, eager to serve, not lording authority over others, and an example for others to follow.

The underlining is mine.  I underscored the qualifications usually ignored when elders are selected just so you will know that there are more qualifications than a man who is married and does not drink alcoholic beverages.

All conscientious Christians can readily see that they are not qualified to serve as leaders of the church, especially if all of these qualifications are absolutes and must be met. There is no person who measures up to all these qualifications all the time. And anyone who says they do, the apostle John says, is a liar.

But churches have to have leaders. Realizing we live in an imperfect world with imperfect Christians, we choose the best we have to be elders; just like we chose the best person we interviewed to be our preacher.

Are women qualified to be elders? After all, Paul wrote that an elder is to be the "husband of one wife" (literally, "a one woman man") and "to manage his own household well". Does this disqualify women from being elders in the church?

My answer is, Yes, women are disqualified to serve as elders, on condition that we are taking these qualifications as absolutes. Women are disqualified as long as no man dare to claim to be qualified. If the first qualification, being "blameless", is held to be an absolute like "being the husband of one wife", then no one meets the qualifications for the eldership. And the question of women elders is not worth discussing because no one, male or female, qualifies to be an elder.

According to "Vines Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words" the word translated "must" (dei) in 1 Timothy 3:2 is translated in other passages as "should", "ought to", "it is needful", "it behooves", "meet" or "had to", etc. Again we see that the context of a word determines the translation. And when a student of the Scripture couples the context of a word with the judgment and prejudices of translators and commentators and preachers, then the wise person realizes that the translation we have always accepted may not convey the complete, or even the correct, meaning of the Greek text.

If a person, or eldership, or congregation, do not insist that a particular version of the Bible is the only absolutely and totally correct translation of the Scripture, then every individual and every church is free to select the translation of the word "must" that suits their prejudices and their judgment. And any church is free to select as elders the most mature and most compassionate and most respected managers from within the church - male or female.

Honestly, if the church spent as much energy carrying out the mission of Christ (remember? - seeking and saving the lost and serving others) as it does on the issue of the role of women in the church, the church would "turn the world upside down", again! My opinion is this: let every church settle the issue of its leadership for itself and get on with the business of Christ's church - evangelism and service.

Spending time debating the issue of women's role in the church reminds me of the leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church in St. Petersburg, Russia. In 1917 the patriarchs of the Russian Church hotly debated what colors their robes and shawls should be, while down the street the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, were plotting the Russian revolution. It wasn't too long before the leaders of the church did not have to worry about the color of their robes because their church buildings were turned into museums of atheism!

The church needs every soldier and every leader it can recruit for the battle against Satan. When Paul said, "put on the whole armor of God" he was speaking to both men and women. It is time, as one of my preacher friends likes to say, to "major on the majors". People are going to hell and the church is debating whether or not a woman can serve as an elder. God help us!

What is the work of an elder? Again the three words used to describe an elder are useful.

1) Because an "elder" is one who is mature in the faith, the elder is one who can offer both wisdom and experience to the congregation.

2) Because an elder is an "overseer" (bishop) the elder, working with the other overseers, serves as a manager of the affairs of the congregation. There are very many decisions to be made for the vitality of a congregation and the overseers have the responsibility and the authority to make those decisions.

One congregation I know of emphasizes this aspect of the elders work and leaves the work of pastoring (#3 below) to the small groups which make up the congregation.  This is a most effective way of managing a church.

3) And because an elder is a "shepherd" or "pastor", the cares and concerns of the congregation fall to the elders. Perhaps the best description of the work of an elder is Psalm 23. There David compared the Lord to a shepherd who takes care of and defends his sheep. Elders would do well to make this Psalm the directive for their work as leaders of the church.

There are several different ways of selecting elders. Some do it by congregational vote, which is very often a formality of "rubber stamping" the decision of a nominating committee or of the existing elders.

In some churches the existing elders select elders. The result of this method of selection is a self-perpetuating eldership, similar to boards of trustees or directors in parachurch organizations who select each other, or their friends, or large contributors, to be trustees and directors.

There is some indication in the New Testament that Timothy and Titus selected the elders. In Titus 1:5 Paul told Titus, "The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you." If Titus was a preacher, as preachers today, (that's certainly an inference!) this means the preacher is to select the elders. But, to be realistic, allowing preachers to select elders is not going to happen in a church with a congregational form of government.

In a perfect world I think the leaders and those who are mature in their faith ought to select the elders. Usually when the congregation votes for its leaders all the members, from the one who has been a member of the church for one day, to the old-timer who has been a member of the church for sixty years, to twelve or sixteen year olds, have equal votes. But in effective churches (i.e., growing churches) the elders are selected by a small group of leaders (the preacher, the elders, and other mature believers) and approved by the congregation. No nominations are taken at a congregational meeting.

You will notice that deacons have not been included in this discussion of leadership. The words "deacon", "deaconess", "servant" and "minister" are four English words that are translations of one word (both masculine and feminine forms) in Greek (diakonos). The diaconate is composed of people who are the designated servants of the church. Both men and women (Romans 16:1) are diakonos - deacons, deaconesses, servants or ministers of the church. Deacons do not fill leadership positions in the church unless the elders delegate responsibility and authority to them.

Church boards, where elders and deacons and trustees and others, come together to make decisions is not a practice found in the Bible. Church boards are a hopeless mixture of the Bible, tradition, boards of corporations and American civil government. In a discussion of the Scripture and leadership, church boards simply don't fit.

And now I want to say a word about preachers. The words we use for "preachers" (I call them "preachers" because preaching is their primary work) are "ministers", "reverends", "pastors", and "evangelists". Technically, however, in the New Testament the words minister and pastor are descriptions of deacons and elders. I have no idea why any preacher wants to be known as a "Reverend". It certainly is not in the Bible.

Paul told Timothy to do the work of an evangelist (2 Timothy 4:5). Paul made a distinction between the work of apostles and prophets and the work of an evangelist. (Ephesians 4:11) Philip is called an evangelist. (Acts 21:8) An evangelist is one who preaches the good news, the gospel.

In the First Century most evangelists were traveling preachers. As the church settled into its routines, evangelists settled into the churches and gradually became associated with only one church or group of churches in a limited locality. The practice of a "located minister" is still with us today. Those who are preachers in churches have taken titles like, "pastor", "minister", "reverend", "parson", or "preacher". I really prefer to call preachers by their first names, like Paul, Philip, Stephen, Timothy, etc.

The preacher is at one and the same time the most influential and the most vulnerable person in the church. The preacher is influential because of high visibility and, often, administrative work with the church. Preachers are vulnerable because in many churches the congregation or elders or board can terminate the preacher with a simple vote.

Are women allowed to preach?

Prophesy means "speaking forth the mind and counsel of God" (Vines Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words). Philip had four daughters who prophesied (Acts 21:8-9). The apostle Paul wrote that when women prayed and prophesied in the church they were to have their heads covered. (I Corinthians 11:5). Priscilla, along with her husband Aquilla, taught Apollos, the preacher, the way of the Lord (Acts 18:24-26).

But then the scriptures say that women are not to teach or have authority over a man, to remain silent in the church (I'd like to see that one enforced) and if they have any questions they are to ask their husbands (Christian husband not specified) at home. (I Timothy 2:11-12)

It looks to me that either the New Testament contradicts itself because there were some women prophesying and teaching men in the New Testament; or Paul's letters to the Corinthians and his letter to Timothy addressed different situations that were unique to those who received the letters.

That there were similar situations addressed differently was certainly the case as Paul seemingly contradicted himself when he circumcised Timothy and refused to circumcise Titus. Paul circumcised Timothy in order to more easily gain access to Jewish synagogues. But when Paul refused to circumcise Titus the issue was different. With Titus Paul was defending and maintaining the message of salvation by the grace of God through our faith in Christ. (Acts 15:3 and Galatians 2:1-5)

And just a side note: if Philip had had four "sons" (instead of four "daughters") who prophesied, I have no doubt that those who do not like the idea of women preachers would be teaching that Philip had four sons preaching the gospel.

In all of this discussion you can see that one cannot simply turn to a passage of Scripture are read a description of how to organize a church. It behooves each individual and each congregation to examine the Scriptures carefully through glasses that are not colored by tradition and interpretation and prejudices. We may be surprised to find that on the "straight and narrow pathway" we do not have to walk single file following in the footsteps of theologians and preachers.

When the scriptures are silent, and when there is no specific instruction or pattern, and when there is a seeming inconsistency, there is room on the straight and narrow for everyone. 

Our enemy is not those who disagree with us concerning the organization of the church and who can fill the positions of leadership.  Our work as the church is to win people to the Lord and we need every laborer we can muster.