How Should the Church Be Run?

Actually, as a Bible-believing church, the title question should really be asked this way: “What does Scripture say about the polity, or organization, of the local church?” After all, right-thinking Christians know that Scripture is sufficient for their preaching and discipling, their spirituality and joy in following Christ, and their understanding of church growth and evangelism (2 Timothy 3:16-17). But is Scripture even meant to tell us how we are to organize our lives together as Christians in the church, or are we left simply to our own investigation of best practices?

Let me state the premise clearly here at the start. We believe that God has revealed in His Word all that we need to know in order to love and serve Him, and this includes what we need to know even about the organization of our churches! Indeed, we are speaking of “the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of truth” (1 Timothy 3:15). Additionally, because we believe this, our goal must be to look at the Bible, recognize the basic aspects of local church structure and organization that are taught there, and then organize our church accordingly

The pages of the New Testament are full of examples of how the early Christians structured their churches:

Clearly, God has given in His Word direction about many aspects of the structure of a church’s life together. And wonderfully, this confidence that God’s Word informs even the organization of our churches, frees us from the tyranny of the latest fashion. Looking into His eternal Word we find three components that make up a local church: the deacons, the elders and the congregation.

The Greek words diakonos, diakoneo and diankonia are all related to our word “deacon.” And though they are used in a variety of ways, in general the words all refer to service that supplies the needs of another person. In the NT the kinds of service spoken of by these words include serving food (John 2:5,9; Luke 4:39; 10:40; 17:8); general service (John 12:26; Romans 13:3-4); and, spiritual service (Romans 15:25; Acts 20:19; 2 Corinthians 8:3-4).

Actually, Jesus used the word in a very clear way. In John 12:26 He said, “Whoever deacons me must follow me; and where I am, my deacon also will be. My Father will honor the one who deacons me.” Again in Matthew 20:26 (cf. Mark 9:35) Jesus said, “Whoever wants to be great, must be your deacon.” And He said that “the greatest among you will be your deacon.” (Mt 23:11; Mk 10:43; Lk 22:26-27)

The first indication of the deacons’ ministry comes from Acts 6:1-7. If you read that account, you may quickly note three aspects of the initial deacons’ ministry. First, deacons were selected to care for the physical needs of the church. Some of the Christians “were being neglected in the daily distribution” of food. As the root of the word deacon means servant, the apostles characterized this service as “waiting on tables,” or literally “deaconing tables.” They were meeting physical needs. This is the first aspect of this kind of deacon ministry. And though the deacons in Acts 6 likely didn’t do all the deaconing themselves, these deacons likely organized other Christians in the church to ensure that the work would be done. They oversaw these things on behalf of those who were given to prayer and to the ministry of the Word.

Caring for people, especially for other Christians — and most especially for other members of our own congregation — is important for the physical well being of those concerned, for their spiritual well being, as an encouragement to them, and as a witness to those outside. The physical care presented in this passage demonstrates the kind of Christ-like love Jesus spoke of in John 13:35.

Of course, there is a purpose not just for those in need, but for the body as a whole. This is the second aspect of the kind of deacon ministry we see in Acts 6 — it is centered on the unity of the body.

The deacons in Acts 6 were working to make the food distribution among the widows more equitable. This was important because a possible physical neglect was causing a spiritual disunity in the body! One group of Christians was beginning to complain against another group. This seems to be what arrested the attention of the apostles. They were not merely trying to solve a problem in the benevolence ministry of the church. They were trying to stop the church’s unity from fracturing and being broken up. The office of deacon came about to help the elders head off disunity in the church.
Finally, these men were appointed to support the ministry of the Word. The apostles acknowledge that caring for physical needs was a responsibility of the church of which they were a part. However, they said that they would turn this responsibility over to another group within the church that they would oversee. (The congregation did not appoint the deacons, but they did vouch for their testimonies.) In that sense, the deacons were not only helping the body as a whole, but by so doing, they were helping to support the apostles/elders, whose main obligations were in prayer and preaching. What an important function this office has!

What becomes clear is that the deacons were not a separate power block in the church. They were not like a second house of the legislature, through which bills needed to be passed. They were servants who served the church as a whole by helping with the responsibilities that the main teachers could not perform. Deacons supported the teachers of the Word in their ministry. They were encouragers and supporters of the ministry of the elders.

Thus, biblical deacons who serve this way help unify the local church through various “physical” ministries, helping individuals and the body, while glorifying God in it all. So deacons may supervise a ministry of hospitality, or coordinate ministry through the radio or website and so on. Certainly a local body could regularly retire positions that no longer seem to need coordination, or even create new positions as needs and opportunities become apparent. But the ministry stays the same at its core!

In I Timothy 3:8-13 we are told what deacons should be like. The qualifications for deacons can be divided into two categories: personal character and spiritual character. Combining the characteristics listed there with the qualities of those selected in Acts 6, we can assert that those who serve the church as deacons should be known as men who live their lives led by the Holy Spirit (because though concerned with physical things, theirs is certainly a spiritual ministry).

By the way, that deacons are commanded to be the “husband of one wife” does not preclude the service of women in diaconal positions. The example of Phoebe in Romans 16:1, and the use of the deacon words elsewhere of women in the Scriptures, has led biblically informed churches to happily embrace the ministry of women serving in these roles.

Yet because of I Timothy 2 and of the larger biblical picture of male headship, churches might be discouraged from recognizing women as deacons if their office was confused with that of the elders. However, it is our clarity about the distinct role of elders, and the fact that those elders must be males, that enables us to encourage freely the service of our sisters as deacons or deaconesses recognized by the church.

At this point we should note Philippians 1:1. Here Paul addresses the saints at Philippi “with the overseers and deacons.” Thus, a twofold division of leadership in that local body is clearly seen.

What we will find is that in the church there is a plurality of godly men — the elders — who oversee the work of those who serve the Lord. They are assisted in their work by deacons. The basic offices of the church do not need to be more sophisticated than that! The biblical emphasis is not on the organization, but on the purity and spiritual depth of these leaders.

Of course, the Word of God maintains a distinction between the ministry of deacons and the ministry of elders. Establishing the particular ministry of these groups is important because a failure to do so can result in these two types of serving — of the Word (elders) and of tables (deacons) — being confused with one another, and both of them thus handled poorly. Churches should neglect neither the preaching of the Word, nor the practical care for the members that helps to foster unity and that fills out our duties to love one another. Both of these aspects of a church’s life and ministry are important.

Under God’s ordained plan for the church, leadership is a position of humble, loving service. (Matt. 20:26; 23:11; Mark 10:43) Those who would lead God‘s people are to exemplify purity, diligence and devotion. And with the responsibility inherent in leading the flock of God comes potential for either great blessing or great judgment (James 3:1).

The New Testament church was initially Jewish, so it would be natural that the concept of elders who rule was easily understood for use in the early church. As early in the biblical narrative as Acts 14, we see that one of the key steps in establishing a new church was to identify and appoint elders for church leadership (Acts 14:23).

Nearly every church mentioned in the New Testament is said to have had elders. For example, Acts 20:17 says, “And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church.” Peter wrote to the believers in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, “I exhort the elders among you… shepherd the flock of God” (1 Peter 5:1-2). These places were not cities, but rather territories. Thus, Peter was writing to a number of churches scattered all over Asia. And all of them had elders.

It helps if we understand that pastors and overseers (called “bishops” in some translations) are not distinct from elders; the terms are simply different ways of identifying the same person. First Peter 5:1-2 brings all three terms together. Peter instructs the elders to be good bishops as they pastor: “So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd [the word for pastor] the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly.”

Acts 20 shows the apostle Paul also using all three terms interchangeably. In verse 17, Paul assembles all the elders of the church to give them his farewell message. In verse 28, he says, “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care [the pastor word again] for the church of God.”

Biblically, when we observe the context of the many verses that use these words, and the meaning of the words themselves, we come to the following understanding. The term elder seems to emphasize who the man is. Bishop speaks of what he does. And pastor deals with how he cares. All three terms are used of the same church leader.

In 1 Timothy 3:5, Paul says that this man’s work is to “care for God’s church.” The clear implication is that his primary responsibility is that of being caretaker for the church. Perhaps the most obvious way this is done is the function of overseeing the affairs of the local church. The Greek word translated “rule” is used to speak of the elders’ responsibilities four times in 1 Timothy (3:4, 5, 12; 5:17), once in 1 Thessalonians 5:12 (where it is translated, “are over you”), and once in Romans 12:8, where ruling is listed as a spiritual gift. Of course, we are reminded that their authority over the church is not by force or dictatorial power, but by precept and example (Hebrews 13:7).

Nor are the elders to operate by majority rule or vote. If the same Holy Spirit guides all the elders and all have the mind of Christ, there should be unanimity in the decisions they make (1 Corinthians 1:10; Ephesians 4:3; Philippians 1:27; 2:2). If there is division, all the elders should study, pray and seek the will of God together until consensus is achieved. Unity and harmony in the church begin with this principle being followed among its leadership!

Interestingly, 1 Timothy 3:2-7, listing the spiritual qualifications of the overseer, gives only one qualification that relates to a specific function: he must be “able to teach.” All the other qualifications are personal character qualities.

Involved in the concept of shepherding are the twin responsibilities of feeding and protecting the flock. Acts 20:28-30 makes clear the fact that the protecting ministry of the overseer is essential to counter the threat of false teachers. And though the elder acts as a caring and loving and protecting shepherd over the flock, never is it spoken of as “his flock,” or “your flock.” It is the “flock of God” (1 Peter 5:2), and he is merely a caretaker for the possession of God!

Throughout the NT, elders, as the overseers of the church, determine policy (Acts 15:22); care for the church (Acts 20:28); ordain other elders (1 Timothy 4:14); rule, teach and preach (1 Timothy 5:17); exhort and refute (Titus 1:9); and act as shepherds, setting an example for all (1 Peter 5:1-3). Such duties put elders at the core of the work of the church.

Therefore, it is understandable that in 1 Timothy 3, the single, overarching elder qualification of which the rest are supportive is that he is to be “above reproach.” All the other qualifications, except perhaps teaching and leadership skills, only amplify that idea.

Even in this aspect, the overseer is to be above reproach “as God’s steward” (Titus 1:6-7). The implication is that he has demonstrated ability in some forms of ministry already. In addition to that, he needs skill in handling the Word of God so that he can both “give instruction in sound doctrine” and “rebuke those who contradict” it.

It should not be missed that those who would be elders must desire to serve in this capacity. First Timothy 3:1 says, “If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.” The starting point in identifying a potential elder is the desire to serve. As Peter said, elders should be “exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you.”

In other words, the church is not to make a campaign out of recruiting men to become elders. One who is called to be an elder will be eager to give his time and gifts to the ministry of the Word of God and the supervision of the flock of God, without any thought of personal gain. He will desire the office, pursue being set apart, and devote himself to the Word of God. No one will have to talk him into it; it is his heart’s passion.

If a man has this desire, feels that he is called, can demonstrate that he is so gifted, and has all the qualifications, one thing is still necessary—those who are elders must together seek God’s will and affirm that He is in the decision.

Some elders have been paid by the church for their labor since early in church history (1 Timothy 5:17-18). But, if an elder chooses to gain income in another way, that is within the latitude of Scripture. Elders may choose to support themselves by working outside the church, as did Paul, for a number of reasons. In a church with a plurality of elders, it is likely that some will support themselves, and the church will support others. An elder’s subsidy is optional; his spiritual qualifications are not.

It is important to note here that every ministry we see in the New Testament is a team effort. Paul seems continually to commend the people who worked with him. And at least one reason for this is the prevention of the independent, non-accountable, self-styled leader from dominating (e.g. Diotrophes, 3 John 9). The picture in the New Testament is that there is normally within the local church a body of elders, not simply one elder. (Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23; 16:4; 20:17, 28; 21:18; Phil 1:1; 1 Tim 5:17; Titus 1:5; James 5:14; 1 Peter 5:1-2)

Practical reasons for multiple eldership are at least twofold: (1) mutual accountability is necessary if leaders are to avoid falling into sin; and (2) a church takes on the personality of its leader[s]: if there is just one leader, the church will inevitably take on that man‘s personality, including his quirks and faults. But if more than one person leads the church, there is the greater chance that the church will be balanced.

This does not eliminate the unique role of a special leader. Within the framework of elders’ ministries there will be great diversity as each exercises his unique gifts (and some are given to the church as a “pastor-teacher”, Eph. 4:12). But such a position of leadership does not imply spiritual superiority.

It must be remembered, however, that the preacher, or pastor, of a local church is also one of the elders of that congregation. The service of other elders along side of him will have immense benefits. It should aid a church by rounding out the pastor’s gifts, making up for some of his shortcomings, supplementing his judgment, and creating support in the congregation, leaving leaders less exposed to unjust criticism. Such a plurality also makes leadership more rooted and permanent, and allows for more mature continuity. In fact, should a pastor die or be moved by God, the church ought to look among its elders for the man God has in mind to step in as pastor-teacher.

The leadership of the elders is meant to work for the benefit not only of the lead pastor, but for the entire congregation. After all, the local church is primarily a regular assembly of people who profess and give evidence that they have been saved by God’s grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone. This is what a church is; it is not a building. Therefore, the relationship of godly leaders and a biblically informed congregation ought to be marked by evidences of godly character and mutual dependence on God. This may be exemplified by several characteristics of such a relationship:
1) Clear Recognition. The church should recognize elders as gifts from God for the good of the church. The church should therefore recognize their duties of teaching and leading the church. Those duties are only to be revoked when it is clear that the elders are acting in a way that is contrary to the Scriptures.

2) Genuine Trust. The church should trust, protect, respect and honor its elders (1 Timothy 5:17). The elders should direct the affairs of the church with a concern for the good of the body (Philippians 2:3), and the church should submit to their leadership so that all are benefited eternally (Hebrews 13:17).

3) Evident Godliness. The emphasis in Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus is on the elders being “above reproach.” The elder, then, must be willing to have a life and home that is open to inspection as it actively enfolds others into its sphere of influence.

4) Sincere Carefulness. The elders’ use of authority must show that they understand the church belongs not to them, but to Christ. Christ has purchased the church with His own blood, and therefore it should be cherished, treated carefully and gently, led faithfully and purely, for the glory of God in the good of the church. The elders will give an account for their work.

5) Beneficial Results. When elders rightly rule with the submission of the congregation for the good of the congregation, the congregation will benefit as God builds His church through the teachers He gives to His church. Satan’s lie — that authority is never to be trusted because it is always tyrannical and oppressive — will be subverted by the practice of and recognition of the elders’ biblical authority.

When Christians gather as a congregation, it is not merely as individual consumers who happen, by temporarily shared tastes, to be in the same room. They actually assemble as a living institution, a viable organism, and one body. And for that assembly to have godly authority modeled and practiced for its benefit is a great gift! To reject authority, as so many in our day do, is shortsighted and self-destructive. A world without authority would be like desires with no restraints, a car with no controls, an intersection with no traffic lights, a game with no rules, a home with no parents, a world without God.

Despite the tendency of our day to ignore it, godly leadership and biblical church structure is necessary in a church that glorifies God. The exercise and reception of leadership in the church relates to God’s nature and character. And this is demonstrated in the relationship of the congregation and its leadership. May God grant that we will be a church constantly seeking to align more completely with God’s Word.

Posted on August 8th, 2007 by Pastor Larry
Filed under: Pastor's Occasional Papers

« Previous: Next: »