Church Government

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.
Acts 14:23

The Power of the Church

A Spiritual Power

When the power of the Church is called a spiritual power, this does not mean that it is altogether internal and
invisible, since Christ rules both body and soul, His Word and sacraments address the whole man, and the
ministry of the diaconate even has special references to physical needs.

It is a spiritual power:

Because it is given by the Spirit of God, Acts 20:28,

Can only be exercised in the name of Christ and by the power of the Holy Spirit, John 20:22,23; I Cor.
5:4,

Pertains exclusively to believers, I Cor. 5:12,

And can only be exercised in a moral and spiritual way, II Cor. 10:4.

The State represents the government of God over the outward and temporal estate of man, while the Church
represents His government of man's inward and spiritual estate.

The former aims at assuring its subjects of the possession and enjoyment of their external and civil
rights, and is often constrained to exercise coercive power over against human violence.

The latter is founded in opposition to an evil spirit and for the purpose of delivering men from spiritual
bondage by imparting to them the knowledge of the truth, by cultivating in them spiritual graces, and
by leading them to a life of obedience to the divine precepts.

Since the power of the Church is exclusively spiritual, it does not resort to force or civil power. Luke 12:13 ff.;
Matt. 20:25-28; John 18:36,37.

A Ministerial Power

It is abundantly evident from Scripture that the power of the Church is

No independent and sovereign power, Matt. 20:25,26; 23:8,10; II Cor. 10:4,5; I Pet. 5:3,

But a diakonia leitourgia, a ministerial power, Acts 4:29,30; 20:24; Rom. 1:1,

Derived from Christ and subordinate to His sovereign authority over the Church, Matt. 28:18.

290 | P a g e
It must be exercised in harmony with the Word of God and under the direction of the Holy Spirit, through both
of which Christ governs His Church, and in the name of Christ Himself as the King of the Church, Rom.
10:14,15; Eph. 5:23; I Cor. 5:4.

Yet it is a very real and comprehensive power, consisting in the:

Administration of the Word and the sacraments, Matt. 28:19,

The determination of what is and what is not permitted in the Kingdom of God, Matt. 16:19,

The forgiving and retaining of sin, John 20:23,

And the exercise of discipline in the Church, Matt. 16:18; 18:17; I Cor. 5:4; Tit. 3:10; Heb. 12:15-17.

Church Leaders
Ordinary Officers

THE ELDERS: (Pastor, Overseer or Bishop) Plural Elders: The Pattern in All New Testament Churches:

Although some have argued that different forms of church government are evident in the New Testament a
survey of the relevant texts shows the opposite to be true: there is quite a consistent pattern of plural elders as
the main governing group in New Testament churches. Acts 14:23, Acts 20:17, Titus 1:5, 1 Tim. 4:14, James 5:14,
1 Peter 5:1–2, Acts 11:30; 15:2

Other Names for Elders: Pastors, Overseers, Bishops:

Elders are also called “pastors” or “bishops” or “overseers” in the New Testament.

The least commonly used word (at least in the noun form) is pastor (Gk. poimēn)

It may be surprising to us to find that this word, which has become so common in English, only occurs
once in the New Testament when speaking about a church officer. Ephesians 4:11

Although the noun pastor (poimēn) is not used of church officers elsewhere in the New Testament the
related verb which means “to act as a shepherd” or “to act as a pastor” (Gk. poimainō) is applied to
elders in Paul’s address to the Ephesian elders. Acts 20:28, 1 Peter 5:2

Then two verses later Jesus is called the chief pastor or “chief shepherd” (Gk. archipoimēn), implying
quite clearly that Peter also viewed the elders as shepherds or “pastors” in the church. 1 Peter 5:4

Therefore, although the noun pastor is only used once to refer to elders, the related verb is used twice in
passages that explicitly identify the task of shepherding with the office of elder.

Another term used for elders in the New Testament is a Greek word episkopos, which is variously translated as
“overseer” or “bishop,” depending on the individual passage and the English translation.

291 | P a g e
 But this word also seems quite clearly to be another term for elders in New Testament usage. Acts 20:17,
Acts 20:28.

Paul quite readily refers to these Ephesian elders as “overseers” (or “bishops”).

The “bishop” or “overseer” is simply another term for “elder,” since these “bishops” fulfill the same
function as elders quite clearly do elsewhere. Acts 20:17–38, 1 Timothy 5:17, 1 Timothy 3:1–2, 1 Tim.
3:4–5, Philippians 1:1

The Functions of Elders:

One of the major roles of elders in the New Testament is to govern the New Testament churches. 1 Timothy
5:17, 1 Peter 5:2–5, Hebrews 13:17

In addition to governing responsibility, elders also seem to have had some teaching responsibilities in the New
Testament churches. Ephesians 4:11, 1 Timothy 5:17, Titus 1:9

Elders, then, had responsibility to govern and to teach in New Testament churches.

Qualifications for Elders:

When Paul lists the qualifications for elders, it is significant that he combines requirements concerning character
traits and heart attitudes with requirements that cannot be fulfilled in a short time but will only become evident
over a period of several years of faithful Christian living. 1 Tim. 3:2–7, Titus 1:6–9

1 Timothy 3:2-7 Titus 1:6-9 1 Peter 5:1-3

1. Above reproach
2. The husband of one wife
1. Not under compulsion, but
1. Above reproach
voluntary
2. Not for sordid gain, but with
2. The husband of one wife
eagerness

3. Nor yet as lording it over...but

3. Temperate 3. Having children who believe
proving to be example

4. Prudent 4. Not self-willed

5. Respectable 5. Not quick-tempered

6. Hospitable 6. Not addicted to wine

7. Able to teach 7. Not pugnacious

8. Not addicted to wine 8. Not fond of sordid gain

9. Not pugnacious 9. Hospitable

10. Gentle 10. Lover of what is good

292 | P a g e
 11. Uncontentious 11. Sensible

12. Free from the love of money 12. Just

13. Manages his household well 13. Devout

14. Not a new convert 14. Self-controlled
15. A good reputation with 15. Holds fast the faithful Word—
those outside the church both to exhort and to refute

Those who are choosing elders in churches today would do well to look carefully at candidates in the light of
these qualifications, and to look for these character traits and patterns of godly living rather than worldly
achievement, fame, or success.

What Is the Meaning of “Husband of One Wife”?

The qualification “the husband of one wife” (1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:6) has been understood in different ways.

Some people have thought that it excludes from the office of elder men who have been divorced and have then
married someone else, since they have then been the husband of two wives.

But this does not seem to be a correct understanding of these verses.

A better interpretation is that Paul was prohibiting a polygamist (a man who presently has more than one wife)
from being an elder.

Polygamy was possible in the first century. Although it was not common, polygamy was practiced, especially
among the Jews, The Jewish historian Josephus says, “For it is an ancestral custom of ours to have several wives
at the same time.

All the other qualifications listed by Paul refer to a man’s present status, not his entire past life.
1 Timothy 3:1–7

If we made these qualifications apply to one’s entire past life, then we would exclude from office almost
everyone who became a Christian as an adult, for it is doubtful that any non-Christian could meet these
qualifications.

Paul could have said “having been married only once” if he had wanted to, but he did not.

Therefore it is best to understand “the husband of one wife” to prohibit a polygamist from holding the office of
elder and not prevent a man who has been remarried.

The Public Installation of Elders:

Paul says, “Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands”; the preceding context deals entirely with elders setting
someone apart to the office of elder. 1 Tim. 5:22, 5:17–21

293 | P a g e
Although Paul did ordain elders quite soon after the establishment of each church, here he cautions that such
appointment should not be rushed, lest a mistake be made. Acts 14:23

And in the entire process, the entire church must be careful not to judge as the world judges, for “man looks on
the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart”. 1 Sam. 16:7; 2 Cor. 5:16

We should also note that the appointment of elders in Paul’s early churches was accompanied by “prayer and
fasting,” perhaps in connection with the process of selection of the elders. Luke 6:12–13

THE DEACONS:

The word deacon is a translation of the Greek word diakonos, which is the ordinary word for “servant” when it
is used in contexts not dealing with church officers. Philippians 1:1, 1 Timothy 3:8–13

The Qualifications of Deacons:

Like the elders, Paul combines requirements concerning character traits and heart attitudes with requirements
that cannot be fulfilled in a short time but will only become evident over a period of several years of faithful
Christian living. 1 Tim. 3:8–13

The only difference between the qualification of an elder and a deacon is that deacons are not required to
possess the ability to teach.

The Function of Deacons:

The Diaconal Office Could Include:

Administrative responsibilities in meeting every need of the Church that does not involve the responsibilities
of the Elders because they were required to manage their children and their households well. Acts 6:1-7, 1 Tim
3:12

Responsibility in caring for the Church finances since they had to be people who were “not greedy for gain”. 1
Tim 3:8

Responsibility to make house to house visitations since 1 Timothy 3:11 speaks of their wives are to be “no
slanderers.” It would do no good for deacons if their wives, who would no doubt also be involved in prayer
and counseling with the deacons, spread confidential matters around the church.

Facilitate outreach programs in the community since they are required to gain a good standing for themselves.
1 Tim 3:13

How Should Church Officers Be Chosen?

In the history of the church there have been two major types of process for the selection of church officers—
selection by a higher authority, or selection by the local congregation.

(1) In the New Testament, there are several examples where church officers were apparently chosen by the
whole congregation. Acts 6:3, Acts 1:15, Acts 1:23, Acts 15:22; 25, 2 Cor. 8:19

294 | P a g e
(2) Another reason for congregational participation in the selection of church officers is that in the New
Testament generally, final governing authority seems to rest not with any group outside the church or any group
within the church, but with the church as a whole. Matt. 18:17, 1 Cor. 5:4,Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1, 2 Cor.
1:13; Col. 4:16; 1 Tim. 4:13

(3) If the entire congregation selects the officers of the church, there is more accountability to the congregation.
1 Tim. 5:19

(4) Government works best when it has the consent of those governed (cf., in the Old Testament, Ex. 4:29–31;
1 Sam. 7:5–6; 10:24; 2 Sam. 2:4; 1 Kings 1:39–40; and note the mistake of Rehoboam in 1 Kings 12:1, 15).

These factors combine to indicate that although Scripture does not explicitly command one specific system of
choosing church officers, it would seem most wise to have a system whereby the entire church has a significant
role in the selection and recognition of the officers of the church—perhaps through a congregational vote, or
through some other process whereby congregational recognition is required before church officers can assume
office.

Are Women Called in the Office of Eldership?

There are two primary viewpoints on the question of whether women can serve as elders in the church.

The Egalitarian view holds that women can serve as elders as long as they fulfill the requirements as
outlined in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9.

The Complementarian view affirms the opposite and states that women are not allowed to serve in the
capacity of elder within the church of Jesus Christ.

Let’s look at 1 Timothy 3:1-7:

"The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.
Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-
controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not
quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity
keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household,
how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with
conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders,
so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil."

The first thing to notice in this passage is the number of masculine pronouns (“he” and “his”). The pronouns
"he," "his," and "him" occur 10 times in 1 Timothy 3:1-7.

As a result, just a cursory reading of this passage would lead the average person to conclude that the
role of an elder/overseer must be filled by a man.

The phrase “husband of one wife” also indicates that the office of elder is assumed/intended to be
fulfilled by men.

The same points are also made in the parallel passage of Titus 1:5-9.
295 | P a g e
 The passages that describe the qualifications and duties of elders/overseers do not open the door for
women to serve as elders.

In fact, the consistent use of male pronouns and terminology argue strongly for the office of
elder/overseer being restricted to men only.

As with other issues in this debate, the question of women serving as elders is not a matter of
chauvinism. In no sense is this a matter of men being superior to women.

Rather, God restricts the office of elder to men only because that is how He has structured the church
to function.

Godly men are to serve as leadership, with women serving in the crucially important supporting roles.

Are Women Called in the Office of Deaconship?

Scripture is not completely clear whether or not a woman can serve as a deacon.

The statement that deacons are to be “men worthy of respect” and the qualification “the husband of
but one wife” would seem to disqualify women from serving as deacons. 1 Timothy 3:8, 12

However, some interpret 1 Timothy 3:11 as referring to women deacons because the Greek word
translated “wives” can also be translated “women.”

According to this interpretation, Paul is referring not to deacons’ wives, but to women who serve as
deacons.

The use of the word likewise in verse 8 could suggest a third group of leaders in addition to elders and
deacons.

Also supporting this interpretation is the fact that Paul gives no requirements for elders’ wives when
outlining the qualifications for eldership.

Why would he list qualifications for deacons’ wives but not for elders' wives?

Elders hold a more prominent position in the church, yet Paul places no demands on their wives.

Arguing against interpreting "deacon's wives" as "female deacons" is the fact that it would be unusual
for Paul to give qualifications for deacons in verses 8-10 and 12-13, with qualifications for deaconesses
in between.

Romans 16:1 refers to Phoebe with the same word Paul uses in 1 Timothy 3:12.

It is unclear, though, whether Paul is saying Phoebe is a deacon or whether he is just saying she is a
servant. In the early church, women servants cared for sick believers, the poor, strangers, and those in
prison.

They instructed women and children. Titus 2:3-5

296 | P a g e
 Phoebe may not have had the official designation of “deacon” but Paul thought enough of her to
entrust her with the tremendous responsibility of delivering the epistle to the Romans to the church in
Rome Romans 16:1-2)

Clearly, he saw her not as inferior or less capable, but as a trusted and valued member of the body of
Christ.

Scripture does not give much support to the idea of women serving as deacons, but it does not necessarily
disqualify them, either.

Some churches have instituted the office of deaconess, but most differentiate it from the office of deacon.

If a church does institute the position of deaconess, the church leadership should ensure that the deaconess is
in submission to the restrictions Paul places on the ministry of women in other passages such as 1 Timothy
2:11-12, just as all leadership is to be in submission to the church authority structure and ultimately to our
supreme authority, Christ Jesus.

Extraordinary Officers

THE APOSTLES

Strictly speaking, this name is applicable only to the Twelve chosen by Jesus and to Paul; but it is also applied
to certain apostolic men, who assisted Paul in his work, and who were endowed with apostolic gifts and
graces, Acts 14:4,14; I Cor. 9:5,6; II Cor. 8:23; Gal. 1:19

The apostles had the special task of laying the foundation for the Church of all ages.

It is only through their word that believers of all following ages have communion with Jesus Christ.

Hence they are the apostles of the Church in the present day as well as they were the apostles of the primitive
Church.

They had certain special qualifications.

(a) They received their commission directly from God or from Jesus Christ, Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13; Gal. 1:1;

(b) They were witnesses of the life of Christ and especially of His resurrection, John 15:27; Acts 1:21,22; I Cor.
9:1;

(c) They were conscious of being inspired by the Spirit of God in all their teaching, both oral and written, Acts
15:28; I Cor. 2:13; I Thess. 4:8; I John 5:9-12;

(d) They had the power to perform miracles and used this on several occasions to ratify their message, II Cor.
12:12; Heb. 2:4; and

(e) They were richly blessed in their work as a sign of the divine approval of their labors, I Cor. 9:1,2; II Cor.
3:2,3; Gal. 2:8.

297 | P a g e
THE PROPHETS

The New Testament also speaks of prophets, Acts 11:28; 13:1,2; 15:32; I Cor. 12:10; 13:2; 14:3; Eph. 2:20; 3:5;
4:11; I Tim. 1:18; 4:14; Rev. 11:6.

Evidently the gift of speaking for the edification of the Church was highly developed in these prophets, and
they were occasionally instrumental in revealing mysteries and predicting future events.

The first part of this gift is permanent in the Christian Church, and was distinctly recognized by the Reformed
Churches (prophesyings), but the last part of it was of a charismatic and temporary character.

They differed from ordinary ministers in that they spoke under special inspiration.

THE EVANGELIST

In addition to apostles and prophets, evangelists are mentioned in the Bible, Acts 21:8; Eph. 4:11; II Tim. 4:5.

Philip, Mark, Timothy, and Titus belonged to this class. Little is known about these evangelists.

They accompanied and assisted the apostles, and were sometimes sent out by these on special missions.

Their work was to preach and baptize, but also to ordain elders, Tit. 1:5

The office of the Evangelist will be needed until the church reaches the maturity of Christ. Ephesians 4:13

What are the Five Fold Ministry Gifts?

The concept of the five-fold ministry comes from Ephesians 4:11, "It was he who gave some to be:

(1) Apostles, some to be (2) Prophets, some to be (3) Evangelists, and some to be (4) Pastors and (5)
Teachers."

Primarily as a result of this verse, some believe God has restored, or is restoring, the offices of apostle
and prophet in the church today.

Ephesians 4:12-13 tells us that the purpose of the five-fold ministry is, "to prepare God's people for
works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in
the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness
of Christ.

" So, since the body of Christ definitely is not built up to unity in the faith and has not attained to the
whole measure of the fullness of Christ, the thinking goes, the offices of apostle and prophet must still
be in effect.

However, Ephesians 2:20 informs us that the church is "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets,
with Christ Jesus Himself as the chief cornerstone."

298 | P a g e
 If the apostles and prophets were the foundation of the church, are we still building the
foundation? Hebrews 6:1-3 encourages us to move on from the foundation.

Although Jesus Christ is most definitely active in the church today, His role as the cornerstone of the
church was completed with His death, burial, resurrection, and ascension.

If the work of the cornerstone is, in that sense, complete, so must the work of the apostles and
prophets, who were the foundation, be complete.

What was the role of the apostles and prophets? It was to proclaim God's revelation, to teach the new truth
the church would need to grow and thrive.

The apostles and prophets completed this mission. How?

By giving us the Word of God; the completed revelation of God.

The Bible contains everything the church needs to know to grow, thrive, and fulfill God's mission. 2 Timothy
3:15-16.

The cornerstone work of the apostles and prophets is complete.

The ongoing work of the apostles and prophets is manifested in the Holy Spirit speaking through and teaching
us God's Word.

Forms of Church Government

In discussing forms of church government there is some overlap with the previous section on the method of
choosing church officers, for the selection of officers is one very important aspect of authority in the church.

Different philosophies of church government will be reflected in different methods used for selecting officers of
the church, as explained above.

This is evident in the fact that forms of church government can be broken down into three large categories,
which we may term “episcopalian,” “presbyterian,” and “congregational.”

The episcopalian forms have a government by a distinct category of church officers known as a priesthood, and
final authority for decision-making is found outside the local church.

The Episcopal Church system is the primary representative among Protestants of this form of government.

The presbyterian forms have a government by elders, some of whom have authority not only over their local
congregation, but also, through the presbytery and the general assembly, over all the churches in a region and
then in the denomination as a whole.

The congregational forms of church government all have final governing authority resting with the local
congregation, although various degrees of self-rule are given up through denominational affiliation, and the
actual form of local church government may vary considerably. We shall examine each of these forms of
government in the following discussion.
299 | P a g e
EPISCOPALIAN:

In this system:

An archbishop has authority over many bishops.

They in turn have authority over a “diocese,” which simply means the churches under the jurisdiction of
a bishop.

The officer in charge of a local parish is a rector (or sometimes a vicar, who is an “assistant” or one who
substitutes for the rector).

Archbishops, bishops, and rectors are all priests, since they have all at one time been ordained to the
episcopalian priesthood (but in practice the rector is most often called the priest)

The argument for the episcopalian system is not that it is found in the New Testament, but that it is a natural
outgrowth of the development of the church which began in the New Testament, and it is not forbidden by the
New Testament.

According to Episcopalians: “The Apostles are the first link in the chain, and there is no reason why a succession,
as regards to the external commission, should not proceed from age to age, the existing body of ministers
handing down the official authority to their successors, and these latter in turn to theirs.”

But there are arguments that may be given on the other side of this question.

(1) It is significant that the office of “bishop” is not a distinct office in the New Testament, but is simply a
synonym for the name “elder.

There is no single bishop in the New Testament, but bishops (or overseers) are always plural in number.

This should not be seen merely as an incidental fact, for even among the apostles Jesus did not leave
one with superior authority over the others, but left a group of twelve who were equal in governing
authority (and to whom others were later added, such as Paul).

300 | P a g e
 Though some apostles, such as Peter, James, and Paul, had prominence among the group, they did not
have any greater authority than the others, and even Peter was rebuked by Paul in Antioch. Gal. 2:11

Just as Jesus left a plurality of apostles to have ultimate (human) authority in the early church, so the
apostles always appointed a plurality of elders in every church, never leaving only one person with
governing authority.

This may well reflect the wisdom of Christ in guarding against the abuse of power that inevitably comes
when any one human being has too much power without sufficient checks and balances from others.

(2) The theory of a group of bishops established to replace the apostles is not taught in the New Testament, nor
is there an implication of a need for physical continuity of ordination through the laying on of hands by those
who have been ordained in an unbroken chain of succession from the apostles.

For example, in Acts 14:3, it was not the Jerusalem apostles who ordained Paul and Barnabas, but people
in the church at Antioch who laid hands on them and sent them out.

Timothy apparently was ordained not simply by Paul but also by a “council of elders”, though this may
well have included Paul as well.1 Tim. 4:142 Tim. 1:6

More importantly, ordaining is ultimately from the Lord himself, and there is nothing in the nature of
“ordaining” that requires that it be done only by those previously ordained in physical descent from the
apostles. Acts 20:28; 1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11

In addition, if one is convinced that the local church should elect elders, then it would seem appropriate
that the church that elected the elder—not an external bishop—should be the group to confer the
outward recognition at election by installing the person in office or ordaining the pastor.

(3) While it may be argued that the development of an episcopalian system with single bishops in authority over
several churches was a beneficial development in the early church, one may also argue that it was a deviation
from New Testament standards and a result of human dissatisfaction with the system of elected local elders
that had been established by the apostles and that had apparently worked very well from A.D. 30 to 100
throughout all of the New Testament church.

PRESBYTERIAN:

In this system:

Each local church elects elders to a session.

The pastor of the church will be one of the elders in the session, equal in authority to the other elders.

This session has governing authority over the local church.

However, the members of the session (the elders) are also members of a presbytery, which has authority
over several churches in a region.

301 | P a g e
 This presbytery consists of some or all of the elders in the local churches over which it has authority.

Moreover, some of the members of the presbytery are members of the “general assembly” which usually
will have authority over all the presbyterian churches in a nation or region.

The arguments in favor of this presbyterian system are:

(1) that those who have wisdom and gifts for eldership should be called on to use their wisdom to govern more
than just one local church, and

(2) a national (or even worldwide) government of the church shows the unity of the body of Christ. Moreover

(3) such a system is able to prevent an individual congregation from falling into doctrinal error much more
effectively than any voluntary association of churches.41

The presbyterian system outlined above has many adherents among evangelical Christians today, and it
certainly works effectively in many cases.

However, some objections can be brought against this system:

(1) Nowhere in Scripture do elders have regularly established authority over more than their own local church.

(2) This system, in practice, results in much formal litigation, where doctrinal disputes are pursued year after
year all the way to the level of the general assembly.

(3) The effective power in church government seems, in practice, to be too removed from the final control of
the lay people in the church.

(4) Although in some cases it is true that a doctrinally sound denomination with a presbyterian system of
government can keep a local church from going astray in its doctrine, in actuality very frequently the opposite
has been true: the national leadership of a presbyterian denomination has adopted false doctrine and has put
great pressure on local churches to conform to it.

302 | P a g e
CONGREGATIONAL:

a. Single Elder (or Single Pastor):

We can now look at five varieties of congregational government for the church.

The first one, which is currently the most common among churches, is the “single elder” form of government.

In this kind of government the pastor is seen as the only elder in the church, and there is an elected board of
deacons who serve under his authority and give support to him.

In this system,

The congregation elects the pastor and also elects the deacons.

The amount of authority the pastor has varies greatly from church to church, and will generally increase
the longer a pastor remains in a church.

The authority of the deacon board is often thought to be merely an advisory authority.

In the way this system ordinarily functions, especially in smaller churches, many decisions must be
brought before the congregation as a whole.

The arguments in favor of this system are clearly presented in A. H. Strong’s Systematic Theology, a text that
has been widely used in Baptist circles, Strong gives the following arguments:

(1) The New Testament does not require a plurality of elders, but the pattern of plural elders seen in the New
Testament was only due to the size of the churches at that time. He says:

(2) Strong adds that “James was the pastor or president of the church at Jerusalem,” and cites Acts 12:17; 21:18;
and Galatians 2:12 to show that this leadership by James was a pattern which could then be imitated by other
churches.

(3) Strong notes that some passages have “bishop” in the singular but “deacons” in the plural, hinting at
something similar to this common Baptist form of government. 1 Tim. 3:2, Titus 1:7, 1 Tim. 3:8

303 | P a g e
(4) Finally, the “angel of the church” in Revelation 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14, according to Strong, “is best
interpreted as meaning the pastor of the church; and, if this be correct, it is clear that each church had, not
many pastors, but one.”48

(5) Another argument, not made by Strong, is found in recent literature on church growth. The argument is that
churches need a strong single pastor in order to grow rapidly.

Once again it must be said that this single elder form of government has also worked very successfully in many
evangelical churches. However, there can be objections to the case presented by Strong and others.

(1) It seems inconsistent to argue that the New Testament falls short of giving a clear command that all churches
should have a plurality of elders when New Testament passages shows us that no church was seen to have a
single elder (“in every church,” Acts 14:23; “in every town,” Titus 1:5; “let him call for the elders,” James 5:14;
“I exhort the elders among you,” 1 Peter 5:1)

(2) James may well have acted as moderator or presiding officer in the church in Jerusalem, for all churches will
have some kind of designated leader like this in order to conduct meetings. Acts 15:2

(3) In 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:7, the Greek definite article modifying “bishop” simply shows that Paul is
speaking of general qualifications as they applied to any one example.

(4) The word “angel” used in the address to the seven churches in Revelation 2–3 may simply designate a special
messenger to each church, perhaps even the human messenger who would take what John wrote to each
church, or it may represent “the prevailing spirit of the church” rather than the ruling official of the
congregation, or may even simply refer to an angel who was given special care over each congregation.

(5) We should not reject a pattern supported in Scripture and adopt a different one just because people tell us
that the church growth study patterns that seems to work well in producing large churches.

(6) A common practical problem with a “single elder” system is either an excessive concentration of power in
one person or excessive demands laid upon him.

Finally, it should be noted that in actual practice the “single elder” system can change and function more like a
“plural elders” government, only those who function as elders are instead called “deacons.”

This would happen if the deacons share the actual governing authority with the pastor, and the pastor and other
deacons see themselves as accountable to the deacon board as a whole.

304 | P a g e
The problem with this arrangement is that it does not use biblical terminology to apply to the functions that
people are carrying out, for “deacons” in the New Testament never had governing or teaching authority in the
church.

The result in such a situation is that people in the church (both the deacons and the other church members) will
fail to read and apply scriptural passages on elders to those who are in fact functioning as elders in their church.

Therefore these passages lose the direct relevance that they should have in the church. In this case however,
the problem could be solved by changing the name “deacon” to “elder,” and considering the pastor an elder
along with the others.

b. Plural Local Elders:

Is there any kind of church government that preserves the pattern of plural elders found in the New Testament
and that avoids the expansion of elders’ authority beyond the local congregation?

Although such a system is not distinctive of any denomination today, it is found in many individual
congregations.

Using the conclusions reached to this point on the New Testament data, I would suggest the figure below as a
possible pattern.

Within such a system:

The elders govern the church and have authority to rule over it, authority which has been conferred by
Christ himself, the head of the church, and by the Holy Spirit, Acts 20:28; Heb. 13:17

In this system of government, there is always more than one elder, a fact which distinguishes this form
of government from the “single elder system” discussed above.

In a contemporary congregation, the “pastor” (or “senior pastor”) would be one among the elders in this
system.

He does not have authority over them, nor does he work for them as an employee.

He has a somewhat distinct role in that he is engaged in the full-time work of “preaching and teaching”
and derives part or all of his income from that work. 1 Tim. 5:17-18

305 | P a g e
 He also may frequently assume a leadership role among the elders, which would fit with his leadership
role among the congregation, but such a leadership role among the elders would not be necessary to
the system.

In addition, the pastor will ordinarily have considerable authority to make decisions and provide
leadership in many areas of responsibility that have been delegated to him by the elder board as a whole.

Such a system would allow a pastor to exercise strong leadership in the church while still having equal
governing authority with the other elders.

The strength of this system of government is seen in the fact that the pastor does not have authority on his own
over the congregation, but that authority belongs collectively to the entire group of elders.

Moreover, the pastor himself, like every other elder, is subject to the authority of the elder board as a whole.

This can be a great benefit in keeping a pastor from making mistakes, and in supporting him in adversity and
protecting him from attacks and opposition

In such a system, are there limitations that should be placed on the authority of the elders?

In the section above on the manner of choosing church officers, several reasons were given to have some
“checks and balances” that would put restrictions on the authority of the officers of a church.

Those arguments are also helpful here in indicating that, though elders have substantial governing authority
over the church, it should not be unlimited authority. Examples of such limitations might be suggested, such as:

(1) They may be elected rather than self-perpetuating;

(2) They may have specific terms with a mandatory year off the board (except for the pastor, whose continuing
leadership responsibilities require continuous participation as an elder);

(3) Some large decisions may be required to be brought to the whole church for approval.

Regarding this third point, 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.

306 | P a g e
I have labeled this system one of “plural local elders” in order to distinguish it from a presbyterian system where
elders, when gathered on the level of the presbytery or general assembly, have authority over more than their
own local congregations.

But in such a system of elected local elders, can there be any wider associations with churches beyond the local
congregation? Yes, certainly.

While churches with this system may choose to remain entirely independent, most will enter into voluntary
associations with other churches of similar convictions in order to facilitate fellowship, pooling of resources for
mission activity (and perhaps for other things such as Christian camps, publications, theological education, etc.).

However, the only authority these larger associations would have over the local congregation would be the
authority to exclude an individual church from the association, not the authority to govern its individual affairs.

c. Corporate Board:

The remaining three forms of congregational church government are not commonly used, but are sometimes
found in evangelical churches.

The first one is patterned after the example of a modern corporation, where the board of directors hires an
executive officer who then has authority to run the business as he sees fit.

This form of government could also be called the “you-work-for-us” structure.

In favor of this structure it might be argued that this system in fact works well in contemporary businesses.

However, there is no New Testament precedent or support for such a form of church government.

It is simply the result of trying to run the church like a modern business, and it sees the pastor not as a spiritual
leader, but merely as a paid employee.

Further objections to this structure are the fact that it deprives the pastor of sharing in the ruling authority that
must be his if he is to carry out his eldership responsibilities effectively.

d. Pure Democracy:

This view, which takes congregational church government to its logical extreme, can be represented as in figure
47.7.

307 | P a g e
In this system everything must come to the congregational meeting.

The result is that decisions are often argued endlessly, and, as the church grows, decision-making reaches a
point of near paralysis.

While this structure does attempt to do justice to some of the passages cited above regarding the need for final
governing authority to rest with the congregation as a whole, it is unfaithful to the New Testament pattern of
recognized and designated elders who have actual authority to rule the church in most situations.

e. “No Government but the Holy Spirit”:

Some churches, particularly very new churches with more mystical or extremely pietistic tendencies, function
with a church government that looks something like the figure below:

In this case, the church would deny that any form of government is needed, it would depend on all the members
of the congregation being sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit in their own lives, and decisions would
generally be made by consensus.

This form of government never lasts very long.

Not only is it unfaithful to the New Testament pattern of designated elders with governing authority in the
church, but it is also subject to much abuse, because subjective feelings rather than wisdom and reason prevail
in the decision-making process.

Church Discipline
The Biblical Basis for Church Discipline

What typically occurs in a church is formative discipline.

308 | P a g e
 Formative discipline takes place in the ongoing ministry of the church, in the regular discipleship and
care of every member.

All members are disciplined or discipled through teaching, encouragement, correction, exhortations, and
reproof, which are given through the loving care of fellow believers.

Such formative discipline is the lifeblood of the church, and yet this chapter examines what the Scriptures
say when discipline has reached the corrective stage, when radical surgery or radical repentance is
needed.

But in this chapter the focus is on church discipline that has reached the critical stage where expulsion and public
rebuke may be necessary.

Church discipline, according to the popular perception, is practiced by narrow-minded, psychologically

stunted zealots who find joy in rebuking those who are enjoying life and to intervene in matters that are
none of their business.

But for those who understand the biblical witness, the motive for church discipline is invariably love, and
the goal is the restoration of the one who has fallen.

Church discipline is practiced so that members will escape the judgment to come, so that they will enjoy
forever the life of the coming age.

Jesus' Instructions on Church Discipline

The foundational text for corrective church discipline is Matt 18:15–20, for here our Lord Himself instructs His
disciples on the matter.

In particular Jesus spells out the process which should be followed when discipline is necessary.

Modern readers are prone to see the instructions as harsh, but the wider context breathes an atmosphere of
love.

The goal of discipline is not the humiliation or public rebuke of those straying., rather, the design is to restore
them to the fellowship of the redeemed community.

The Process of Church Discipline:

The passage in Matthew 18 lists three steps for church discipline

Step 1: The sinner is first to be corrected privately by the one who was offended.

If he repents, then the process is discipline is successful or “you have gained your brother”.

But if he refuses to repent step two must be taken.

Step 2: The sinner is to be corrected again with witnesses this time.

This ensures that the accuser in the first step is not at fault or bringing slanderous charges.
309 | P a g e
 If he still fail to repent then step three must be taken.

Step 3: The sinner is to be brought before the entire community of believers.

Should this fail, the church is to cease communion with the offender.

Binding and Loosing

Excommunication is the most extreme disciplinary measure of the church.

It entails excluding the unrepentant sinner from communion with the faithful.

The doctrine derives from Jesus’ teaching on binding and loosing. Matthew 16:19; 18:15-20; John
20:23

It should be noted that excommunication is never to be performed with a sense of retribution.

The entire process, up to and including excommunication, is a form of discipline designed to bring the
unrepentant person back into the fold.

At the point of excommunication, the guilty party is handed over to the devil. 1 Corinthians 5:5

The intent is not to punish but to awaken the guilty party to his sin.

John Calvin held that church discipline is the “best help” to sound doctrine, order, and unity.(Institutes
4.2.12)

The Westminster Confession enumerates five purposes for excommunication:

Church censures are necessary, for the reclaiming and gaining of offending brethren, for deterring of
others from like offenses, for purging out of that leaven which might infect the whole lump, for
vindicating the honor of Christ, and the holy profession of the Gospel, and for preventing the wrath of
God, which might justly fall upon the Church, if they should suffer His covenant, and the seals thereof,
to be profaned by notorious and obstinate offenders. (30:3)

This list could perhaps be accurately reduced to two primary reasons: concern for the soul of the sinner and
concern for the health of the church.

For Where Two or Three Are Gathered In My Name, There Am I Among Them

These verses should be taken in the larger context as still dealing with church discipline.

Jewish tradition requires at least ten men to constitute a synagogue or even hold public prayer.

Here Christ promises to be present in the midst of an even smaller flock, “two or three witnesses” gathered in
His name for the purpose of discipline.

Jesus is present among His people in a special way when the unity and purity of His family are at stake and
when the church takes up the duty of discipline.

310 | P a g e
 Nouthetic Counseling
Nouthetic counseling is biblical counselling, it gets its name from the Greek work noutheteo which is usually
translated “admonish” Romans 15:14, It means “to confront as a friend” and was the normal method of
counseling before modernists invented secular psychology in the early 1900s.

A study of older dictionaries shows that it took until 1973 for the word “counseling” to change from “giving
advice” to “psychology” with its modern testing, processes, and therapies.

That change gradually came about as the secular psychology influence changed our idea of counseling
from that given by a pastor to that given by a secular psychologist.

During the mid-20th century, many Christians thought they could integrate secular theory into their
counseling programs, mixing the Bible with psychology.

That practice called “Christian” counselling, was based on the false assumption that man can discover
God’s truth apart from the Bible.

In the late 1960s, a number of godly pastors saw the need to reject this practice with such damaging
influences.

Dr. Jay Adams, led the way in bringing biblical counseling back into pastoral ministry.

While psychology is based on evolution and secular philosophy, biblical counseling is based strictly on
biblical principles.

For counseling to be biblical, it must be Bible-based, Christ-centered, and local church-oriented.

Nouthetic counseling accepts the premise that the Bible is God’s Word and that it is totally sufficient
for meeting all our needs. 2 Timothy 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:3-4

Instead of focusing on the problem and expecting years of therapy, nouthetic counseling focuses on
the biblical solution and expects the counselee to change—by the power of the Holy Spirit—
conforming to the biblical model presented Romans 8:28-29.

Nouthetic counseling is effective for believers and begins with the evangelism of those who are not
believers because biblical counselors understand that only believers can understand the deep truths of
God 1 Corinthians 2:14.

Since all believers have the Holy Spirit and God’s Word to change them, biblical nouthetic counseling
depends on the Holy Spirit to change the believer, using God’s Word as it was intended—to teach,
rebuke, correct and train in righteousness, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11; Galatians 5:16, 2 Timothy 3:16

There are few colleges and seminaries that teach nouthetic counseling today, but the list is growing, as more
and more Christians are seeing the weakness and error in trying to integrate secular thought with the Bible.

311 | P a g e
 Colossians 2:8 says, “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to
the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ” (NKJV).

That is the reason for the dividing line between biblical (nouthetic) counseling, Christian counseling,
and secular psychology.

For further study on Nouthetic Counseling: A Theology of Christian Counseling, Competent to Counsel, The
Christian Counselors Manual by Dr. Jay Adams.

Ministerial Ethics
PASTOR’S / ELDERS CODE

[Includes basic obligations for all ministers]

Preamble

As a minister of Jesus Christ, called by God to proclaim the gospel and gifted by the Spirit to pastor the church,
I dedicate myself to conduct my ministry according to the ethical guidelines and principles set forth in this code
of ethics, in order that my ministry may be acceptable to God, my service beneficial to the Christian community,
and my life a witness to the world.

Responsibilities to Self

1. I will maintain my physical and emotional health through regular exercise, good eating habits, and the proper
care of my body.

2. I will nurture my devotional life through a regular time of prayer, reading of Scripture, and meditation.

3. I will continue to grow intellectually through personal study, comprehensive reading, and attending growth
conferences.

4. I will manage my time well by properly balancing personal obligations, church duties, and family
responsibilities, and by observing a weekly day off and an annual vacation.

5. I will be honest and responsible in my finances by paying all debts on time, never seeking special gratuities or
privileges, giving generously to worthwhile causes, and living a Christian lifestyle.

6. I will be truthful in my speech, never plagiarizing another’s work, exaggerating the facts, misusing personal
experiences, or communicating gossip.

7. I will seek to be Christlike in attitude and action toward all persons regardless of race, social class, religious
beliefs, or position of influence within the church and community.

Responsibilities to Family

1. I will be fair to every member of my family, giving them the time, love, and consideration they need.
312 | P a g e
2. I will understand the unique role of my spouse, recognizing that his or her primary responsibility is as marital
partner and parent to the children and secondarily as church worker and assistant to the pastor.

3. I will regard my children as a gift from God and seek to meet their individual needs without imposing undue
expectations upon them.

Responsibilities to the Congregation

1. I will seek to be a servant-minister of the church by following the example of Christ in faith, love, wisdom,
courage, and integrity.

2. I will faithfully discharge my time and energies as pastor, teacher, preacher, and administrator through proper
work habits and reasonable schedules.

3. In my administrative and pastoral duties, I will be impartial and fair to all members.

4. In my preaching responsibilities, I will give adequate time to prayer and preparation so that my presentation
will be biblically based, theologically correct, and clearly communicated.

5. In my pastoral counseling, I will maintain strict confidentiality, except in cases in which disclosure is necessary
to prevent harm to persons and/or is required by law.

6. In my evangelistic responsibilities, I will seek to lead persons to salvation and to church membership without
manipulating converts, proselytizing members of other churches, or demeaning other religious faiths.

7. In my visitation and counseling practices, I will never be alone with a person of another sex unless another
church member is present nearby.

8. I will not charge fees to church members for weddings or funerals; for nonmembers I will establish policies
based on ministry opportunities, time constraints, and theological beliefs.

9. As a full-time minister, I will not accept any other remunerative work without the expressed consent of the
church.

10. In leaving a congregation, I will seek to strengthen the church through proper timing, verbal affirmation, and
an appropriate closure of my ministry.

Responsibilities to Colleagues

1. I will endeavor to relate to all ministers, especially those with whom I serve in my church, as partners in the
work of God, respecting their ministry and cooperating with them.

2. I will seek to serve my minister colleagues and their families with counsel, support, and personal assistance.

3. I will refuse to treat other ministers as competition in order to gain a church, receive an honor, or achieve
statistical success.

313 | P a g e
4. I will refrain from speaking disparagingly about the person or work of any other minister, especially my
predecessor or successor.

5. I will enhance the ministry of my successor by refusing to interfere in any way with the church I formerly
served.

6. I will return to a former church field for professional services, such as weddings and funerals, only if invited
by the resident pastor.

7. I will treat with respect and courtesy any predecessor who returns to my church field.

8. I will be thoughtful and respectful of all retired ministers and, upon my retirement, I will support and love my
pastor.

9. I will be honest and kind in my recommendations of other ministers to church positions or other inquiries.

10. If aware of serious misconduct by a minister, I will contact responsible officials of that minister’s church body
and inform them of the incident.

Responsibilities to the Community

1. I will consider my primary responsibility to be pastor of my congregation and will never neglect ministerial
duties in order to serve in the community.

2. I will accept reasonable responsibilities for community service, recognizing that the minister has a public
ministry.

3. I will support public morality in the community through responsible prophetic witness and social action.

4. I will obey the laws of my government unless they require my disobedience to the law of God.

5. I will practice Christian citizenship without engaging in partisan politics or political activities that are unethical,
unbiblical, or unwise.

Responsibilities to My Denomination

1. I will love, support, and cooperate with the faith community of which I am a part, recognizing the debt I owe
to my denomination for its contribution to my life, my ministry, and my church.

2. I will work to improve my denomination in its efforts to expand and extend the kingdom of God.

PASTORAL COUNSELOR CODE

I will have a pastor/counselor to whom I can turn for counseling and advice.

I will be aware of my own needs and vulnerabilities, never seeking to meet my personal needs through my
counselees.

314 | P a g e
I will recognize the power I hold over counselees and never take advantage of their vulnerability through
exploitation or manipulation.

I will never become sexually or romantically involved with a client or engage in any form of erotic or romantic
contact.

I will demonstrate unconditional acceptance and love toward all counselees, regardless of their standards,
beliefs, attitudes, or actions.

If I am unable to benefit a client, I will refer him or her to another professional who can provide appropriate
therapy.

I will maintain good relationships with other counselors and therapists, informing them and conferring with
them about mutual concerns.

I will keep confidential all matters discussed in a counseling setting unless the information is hazardous for the
client or another person or by law must be disclosed.

I will offer my assistance and services to fellow ministers and their families whenever needed.

I will support and contribute to the ministry of my church through personal counseling, seminars, lectures,
workshops, and group therapy.

I will seek to support the policies and beliefs of my church without unduly imposing them on any counselee.3

MILITARY CHAPLAIN CODE

I will be an ethical example of a Christian lifestyle in a military setting.

I will perform my service duties according to the military codes of conduct, recognizing that my ultimate
allegiance is to God.

I will be truthful in my reports to my senior officers without divulging unnecessary confidential information.

The highest honor in the church is not government but service.

John Calvin

315 | P a g e