Introduction
I’m working through forming language and an overall vision for church leadership, governance, activity, and responsibility. In this post, I’m going to start wrestling with the role of the elder. It’s part of a larger series that starts with the very succinctly titled Towards Church Leadership; Elder/Deacon/Congregational Organizational Distinctions – an Overview. I will update this article as I add to my understanding, shift or change my understanding through reading or discussion, and complete other posts that more fully nuance or clarify certain positions. This post represents my specific beliefs at the time it was written; hopefully I’ve updated it if my beliefs have shifted, but please talk to me or comment if you have a tension, clarifier, addition, or question.
The Responsibility of Elders
Scripturally, the fundamental leadership component of the church – and a component that I believe contributes to a local church being a church – is properly appointed elders providing leadership over the body. This leadership team’s primary role is to hear from God – to take directional cues from God – in order to maintain Jesus’ headship over the church. The main qualifications of elders are not, therefore, leadership, experience, training, influence, or networking (as might be the qualifications for a secular leadership board), but rather holiness, righteousness, character, discernment, and Christlikeness.
As such, elders have two primary roles – to discern God’s will and leading for the local community as a whole, and to provide limits, boundaries, and necessary discipline or correction for the congregation when those limits are breached.
The first role – to discern God’s direction – preserves the church as Christ’s body, with Jesus as the head. It is the church’s responsibility to be about the work God desires the church be about, and her (the church’s) direction and decisions must be submissive to God’s will and intention in moments in time. Discerning God’s will is the primary role of the elder board. In order to do such, the elders must be steeped in Scripture (see Apostolic Succession, below) and bathed in prayer. There is no greater responsibility of the elders than to study and pray (see my comments on Acts 6, below).
In regards to the righteousness and unity of the body, elders should know the purpose of the church, the ministries of the church, and they should seek to know as many people in the congregation – both men and women – as faithfully as they can. Elders should not be ‘hidden’ or ‘private’ – they should not be merely behind the scenes, but should be approachable, accessible, known, and active. It is their responsibility to guide and guard the vision of the church and to be open to divine leading. In order to lead a congregation well, they should know the congregation well.
The second role – necessary discipline for the congregation – is exclusively the responsibility of elders. I stand on Matthew 18:15-18; when Jesus says that one is to take a concern regarding an unrepentant brother or sister “before the church,” I believe this means, before the elders. They are the leadership of the church and they represent Christ’s leadership of the church. Therefore, elders are responsible for excommunication (Matthew 19:17, 1 Cor 5:11-13) and general church discipline. They are the “buck stops here” leaders in this regard.
Passages and Comments
Passages that I lean towards as I consider elders:
1 Timothy 3 – Perhaps the most clear passage in Scripture regarding elders, I view this list as establishing two things.
First, it establishes the value and weight of eldership (or overseership; bishopship). “If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.” It is noble and weighty and good and right to be called into this role, and it is worth aspiring towards. I also think it is unquestionably worthy of financial renumeration. While this gets complicated at a local church level with taxes and accounting, it is more than worth working through the complexity. Elders are worthy of double honor (1 Timothy 5:17), and worth their wages (1 Timothy 5:18).
Second, it is a role that one needs to be qualified for. Like most lists in the New Testament, I take this as a descriptive, incomplete, encompassing list (I should write more on this elsewhere). That is, it is describing the type of person who makes an ideal elder – and in this case it differs little from being prescriptive as well; it does not seek to be exhaustive – there are additional requirements or expectations that one should have on an elder than those listed here, such as being trustworthy; finally, the ideal elder should be no less than all of what’s included in this list – it encompasses the whole of an elder. No word in this list is trivial or should be done away with – they all bear weight.
It’s worth noting that all of the criteria in this list are subjective; I think it’s the role of the elders to evaluate someone according to these criteria. That is, what does it mean that an overseer must be a husband of one wife? Does that mean a man can be remarried? It certainly doesn’t mean he can be an adulterer, but that would have been included under “above reproach.” Remarried as a widower? What about a repentant, now forgiven former adulterer? What about divorced as a non-believer, but remarried since and a faithful, devoted, model husband? There is space for interpretation. But, precisely, the criteria upon which a candidate should be judged is whether one is, “the husband of one wife,” not merely, “a good person.”
It’s also interesting that none of the criteria explicitly has to do with wisdom or success (perhaps, except for, “manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive”). There is no, “Has a certain level of business schooling,” “has shown skills in conflict management,” “is an exceptional vision setter” or, “displays wisdom in resource allocation.” God needs none of these skills to speak through a person. Rather, the role of the overseer is to model Godly characteristics and to allow God to speak through the overseer, in the leadership of the local church.
Titus 1 – In different words, with different emphasis, Paul repeats the list he gave to Timothy on the qualifications for elders to Titus. This is partially why I view these lists as descriptive and encompassing, rather than as prescriptive and complete. There are iterations, and those are worth noting.
Most of the charges remain the same, and give the distinct sense of having different interpretive facets, each reflecting similar beautiful meaning.
Poignantly, verse 9 speaks to the purpose of the elder: “so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.” This speaks to the twin role of the elder – to guide and to guard. The elder leads the church towards a healthy, robust understanding of God and God’s Will, and defends the church from those who would lead it astray or pollute it.
1 Peter 5:1-5 – A clear passage about the role of elders, Peter (not Paul) charges “his fellow elders” (note that while he accepts the term elders, he also distinguishes himself as ‘a witness of the suffering of Christ.’ I believe Peter is distinguishing between two roles he may have had over the course of his time in Jerusalem – that of elder and apostle. See Apostolic Succession, below).
His charge is to “shepherd the flock of God… exercising oversight… being examples to the flock.” They are to do this as Christ would (v 4). The example of shepherd clearly lays out the two roles of an elder. First, they are to guide the flock – moving it towards streams and fresh grass, discerning truth and lies for the safety of the congregation. Secondly, they’re to protect the flock – being on guard for wolves and predators, and disciplining where needed.
Acts 6 – This a more implicit interpretation, but I view Acts 6 as setting a distinction in a local church between elders and deacons. Deacons then become those who administrate the ministries of the church and elders are those who, importantly, “devote [themselves] to prayer the ministry of the word” (Acts 6:4). The ‘ministry of the word’ seems analogous to ‘preaching the word of God’ in verse 2.
The twelve (including Matthias – perhaps the only allusion to him outside of Acts 1?) are set apart from the appointed deacons (verse 6), equating the role of elders closely to that of apostles.
Acts 20 – The picture here of friendship, affinity, love, and care amidst this group of elders is rich and deep. Paul admonishes the elder of Ephesus – elders he appointed, trained, and ordained – that they should primarily “pay careful attention to [themselves] and to all the flock (the congregation).” Because, “after [I leave] fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and form among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after there. Therefore be alert…” The role of these elders is the guard the church, protecting it from apostates and deceivers. They are to be vigilant, careful, and precise in their judgements.
Numbers 11 – It’s striking to me that Moses delegating authority to others is recorded no less than three times in the Pentateuch – Genesis 18, Number 11, and Deuteronomy 1. That’s a remarkable level of repetition. I’ll focus in on Numbers 11.
This is another implicit interpretation – like Acts 8 – but I believe Number 11 foreshadows the appointment of elders. Moses is told by God to divest the leadership onto other “elders of Israel.” Specifically, God says he will come and speak with Moses in their presence while they take their stand with Moses. They are accepting an intermediary role in hearing God’s leading and proclaiming it to the people. Furthermore, when God’s Spirit falls on them, they prophecy, and there’s an interesting exchange with Joshua and Moses where the latter asks, “Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the Lords’ people were prophets!” This is remarkably reminiscent of Paul’s words, “Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy,” in I Corinthians 14:5. In conjunction with Acts 20, this carries the weight of Moses empowering leaders to carry on his role in his absence. This is the role of elders.
And what was the role of the elders in Numbers 11? To ‘bear the burden of the people’ (Numbers 11:17). They were to carry the weight of the people’s complaints, tensions, struggles, disobedience, and pains. They were to prophesy (because this is what they did), speaking truth into the people’s brokenness. In short, they were to guard and to guide God’s people; to exercise leadership over the local community.
1 Timothy 5:17: I list this passage because, even though it’s short, it clearly states that while some elders preach and teach, it is not a defining characteristic of elders. That is, not all elders teach or preach, and therefore “teaching and preaching” does not define the primary or exclusive task of an elder. What an elder does must be different that merely teaching and preaching.
Beyond giving that clarifier, though, this passage also begins to give a definition of the work of an elder: one who ‘directs the affairs of the church.’ They lead the church.
Leadership of What?!
And so what do elders lead?
Elders lead local churches, and exercise authority in their local church context. They are not “super Christians” or endowed with any unique gifts and abilities other than to provide direction and discipline for their local church context (though they are faithful Christians).
Issues the elders should be concerned with are issues that God is concerned with – that is, anything that affect the health of the church. This will have to do with the righteousness of the congregation and the unity of the body, on either a small scale (individual concerns and discernment), or on a large scale (vision, values, and priorities, including the budget and staff administration).
That isn’t to say that there aren’t issues within the church that God isn’t concerned with, but there is weight to certain issues over others.
Apostolic Succession
This is a conviction I hold that pulls together a number of other thoughts, which I’ll expand on later in additional posts. In essence:
I believe elders effectively contextualize and exercise apostolic authority through the faithful interpretation of Scripture.
Elders are not apostles, but they are to discern God’s leading through the writing in Scripture, which is itself inherently apostolic. As a result, they are to effectively extend the authority and responsibility of the apostles into every church, across all continents, for all time. And then in turn, any responsibility given to the apostles is also given to the elders and the local church: every promise is given and every warning extended.
Apostleship in Scription seems to be a specific role in the church universal that accorded unique authority to 13 men (11 original disciples, Matthias, and Paul) to shape the nature and nuances of the church, and was restricted to those who had been eyewitness of Jesus and were specifically appointed by God.
During their ministry, they shaped the theological foundation, organization, structure, belief, and purpose of the church by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and through their personal, physical, relationship with the incarnate Jesus. This is a role that is absolutely closed today.
That specific shaping was codified into the canon of Scripture, whereby we, today, can understand God’s Will in order to follow Jesus. I believe God uniquely speaks through His Word to His elders, especially in times where specific discernment is needed, so that the elders can lead their local church in the area of direction and discipline. In this way, elders step in the footprints of the apostles through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Just as the apostles were called to lead the church universal for all time, elders are called to listen to that leading and in turn lead their local church for the time in which they are. In this they walk in the authority of the apostles, and in turn, the Lord Jesus.
This is not crystal clear in Scripture, but is instead both systematically decided upon and mildly derived and assumptive. Still, there is Scriptural precedence: first, apostles and elders are clearly different roles. Throughout Acts 15 and 16 there is a clear distinction made between the apostles (the “12,” including Matthias, but not James, since he had been martyred, or Paul, since he’s independently included in the narrative) and the elders (likely the ruling group in the local church in Jerusalem). This distinction is important, because throughout Romans 15 and 16 there is a consistent delineation between the two roles but not between the two’s responsibility. In this passage regarding important decision making in both a universal and local church context, every mention of the apostles is followed by “and the elders.“ They have the same responsibility, but different roles: one exercising authority for the local church, one for the universal church.
A second important text is Acts 20 (dealt with also, above). Paul commissions, prays, and pleads with the elders of the local church in Ephesus. And what does he say? Verses 31 and 32a: “Be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to admonish every one with tears. And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace…” He commissions them to his teaching, example, and leadership, in order to follow God.” Paul the Apostle says to the Ephesian elders, “Remember! Do what I did.” Of course, this passage is descriptive rather than prescriptive, and no elder today has had a three year relationship with an apostle… still, I think it likely that just as the apostles had three-year relationships with Jesus, and as such are expected to faithfully represent Jesus, so the elders are supposed to faithfully represent the apostles, as they too represent Jesus (1 Cor 11:1).
Is the role of elder restricted to men?
Turing toward a divisive question, can a woman be an elder? No.
The text simply doesn’t support it. 1 Timothy 3 creates male-only criteria for eldership. And, lest one attempt to wave a “cultural context magic wand” over the issue, Titus 1 reiterates the same criteria, in an entirely different context. I think it’s also worth noting that Jesus chose 12 men as his disciples – men who could have arguably met these criteria (though this is entirely assumptive – and perhaps not clearly).
And so, a woman can’t be an elder. But to be clear, most men also cannot be elders. In fact, I think the question, “Can a woman be an elder?” is poorly phrased and unfair. It’s not the “womanhood” that invalidates a candidate, it’s the lack of fatherly and husbandly experience. 1 Timothy 3 doesn’t even say an overseer must be an man. It says the overseer must be the ‘husband of one wife,’ and ‘manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive.’ The implication is that an overseer must be a married man who has a family of multiple children (and I would go so far as to say that those multiple children should be of an age to rebel). If the savviest, wisest, most caring man doesn’t meet those criteria, I don’t think he’s an ideal candidate for elder (strikingly, if a small, young church has no one who meets the full set of criteria for eldership, my personal opinion is that ‘manage household well’ should be the first compromise, and ‘husband of one wife’ the second. That is, if there is no clear candidates who match all the criteria, an elder should be elected to term who matches most of the criteria – and if it’s a woman, then praise God for that righteous woman.)
Interestingly, speaking of those men who could not be elders according to Scriptural criteria: neither Jesus nor Paul seem to qualify.
Why these criteria?!
God owes us no explanation. But, ‘faith seeks understanding,’ and in this area, I have some thoughts.
First, I maintain a fierce distinction between gifting and role. Elder is a specific role, and has nothing to do with gifting. The criteria for elder has no gifting requirement, and gifts are never restricted to gender. That’s striking.
Second, God’s role as husband to one wife and with dignity, keeping His children submissive is throughout Scripture. Again and again, God identifies as a husband and Father to His church or His people. This is not inconsequential and should not be overlooked. Whatever complementarian means, it means something, and God’s role completements and meshes with the role of the church. He sacrifices for and leads His bride, the Church.
In fact, I believe it’s God’s example in these two areas that might help us further understand what’s meant. That is, God should never be accused of being an irresponsible Father – and yet His children have been far from obedient. But, to their obedience, God has responded with perfect patience, presence, and discipline. His children have against and again returned to Him. He has kept them submissive, despite seasons of their rebellion. We should expect our elders to do the same: their children might rebel – but how are they working to keep them submissive? Similarly, God has been a faithful husband of one wife – despite His wife’s rebellion and adultery. So too should our elders be husbands of one wife.
I do not fully grasp all that means, but I have a hunch that God’s role towards His church throughout Scripture is somehow reflected in those He chooses to speak to and through in the leadership of His local church – for His glory and our good.
Team vs. Group vs. Board vs. What? vs. When?
An interesting follow up to these thoughts is the simple question (not actually simple): then what is the structure of an elder board? We’ve talked a lot about what an elder board/team/group/individual does – their function – but what’s the form of faithful eldership? How many elders should there be? How often should they meet? How do they meet? How are they structured?
Many of these questions are unaddressed in Scripture, and so are left to wisdom. Here are points I think are inescapable:
- The Bible speaks of elders as a group or office – in plural – and as such I think there should be multiple elders.
- If God is speaking and leading, elders overseeing a local church should agree with one another. Some can struggle to hear or follow God, and so disagreement among the group is to not be surprising, but when a group of elders disagrees, they should work towards consensus.
- There is biblical precedent for the removal of a wicked elder (1 Tim 5:19-20). It should be faithfully followed where necessary – and a local church shouldn’t the surprised that it is necessary: it was anticipated in Scripture.
- Elders can take different positions than other elders from other churches. If the role of elder is contextualized to a specific location, and they are seeking discernment in an area not specifically or clearly addressed in the Bible for the Church Universal, they can come to different contextualized positions from one another.
- Elders must meet to talk, discuses, and pray together. They should meet at a time that is practical, and meet at a rate that is effective. I can imagine meeting once a month to be the bare minimum rate, and would expect that an active and faithful board would meet more often.
- There is no biblical minimum for the number of elders (though wisdom says three is a good bare minimum) or for term lengths, size of the team, or how the team/board/group is to be organized. It merely speaks of “elders,” and gives criteria for who should fill that role. The rest is left to wisdom; but elders in local churches should discern those boundaries. I don’t think term lengths are important, but I do think an annual review of the group, complete with renewals and appointments, is wise. It would seem – considering elders can fail to hear God’s leading – that having three elders on a team risks giving a misguided elder undue weight, and having more than 12 risks factions, cliques, and multiple elders failing to hear God’s leading. 5-9 seems to be a wise and sustainable number for many churches, though some may need to do with fewer.
- Elders should exercise authority in reality, which means they should make decisions that actually affect the congregation’s lives.
- There is no biblical necessity or precedent for uneven authority or overweighted value placed on any individual elder. That is, elder teams might elect presidents or secretaires, but no elder is more important than another. A paid senior pastor or a full-time staff might sit on a board, but God will not speak more clearly to him than to the others. That said, it is helpful for the elder most familiar with a topic to lead the discussion on that topic. There is no use swimming blind. Since most (all) senior pastors should sit on the elder board, and the senior pastor is the most likely to have advanced biblical and theological training, it is likely that he is the best candidate to lead the conversation. But, even though he might be leading, his voice should not be viewed as the most important, nor the ‘final say.’ It is healthy for the senior pastor to readily and consistently acknowledge that.
Conclusion
The main leadership of the local church are the elders. They are to seek God’s leading, and as such preserve the church as Christ’s body. They are primarily concerned with the direction and discipline of the local church, and exercise apostolic authority through the interpretation of Scripture and through prayerful dependence. At the same time, we don’t expect elders to be perfect or beyond reproach. We are careful.
And we trust God to lead his church, for His glory, forever and ever.
Questions and Follow-up:
Content for future posts:
Are lists in Scripture exhaustive? How do we determine list by list?
Talk about congregationalism vs. presbyterianism as a governance model for the local church. What is the biblical support, and the pros and cons?
What are Scriptural roles? What are Scriptural gifts? Are their more gifts and/or roles that the ones listed in the Bible?
Parse out, “husband of one wife.”
What is an apostle; should the term be used today? What criteria are there for apostleship? And how should we interpret the use of the title in the New Testament?
How does wisdom complement Scriptural Revelation? How do we move wisely through questions that are essential in a local church context, but simply not addressed in the Bible?