Church Government
Actually
the Bible makes it clear that there is only supposed to be one form of
government in general, let alone of the church.
Benevolent
dictatorship is the Biblical model for government.
For
some people, “dictatorship” has some bad connotations, so let’s accept benevolent
monarch.
It
has the same idea. One person has absolute power, but they are benevolent.
They
genuinely have the best interests of everyone else in mind and they rule
accordingly.
This
is how God rules.
This
is how he wanted to rule Israel, but they wanted their own king like the
nations around them.
That
didn’t work out too well for them.
But what about the church?
It’s
the same really.
Jesus
rules the church as benevolent monarch.
The
Bible is very clear, that Jesus alone is
the head of the church.
If
only it was that easy.
The
Bible also talks about Elders and Deacons (and some other titles depending on
which English version you read).
But
basically, there are two roles.
Biblical
Elders are responsible for the spiritual oversight of the congregation (and of
themselves…).
They
are there to make sure we are taught correctly, and that we are safe and
growing to maturity as Christians.
They
are our examples and mentors. They care for our wellbeing.
But
they are not our kings, or
our lords.
Deacon
really just means servant. And Biblical Deacons are servants of the
congregation.
They
are there to make sure that all our physical needs are met.
To
make sure we have enough food. That we have chairs to sit on.
They
make sure our money is properly looked after and distributed fairly.
They
make sure that our buildings and properties (if we have any, or even if we rent
them) are cared for and looked after.
They
do all this practical stuff, so the Elders can focus on prayer and teaching.
They
too care for us and love us.
So
we end up with this kind of structure:
Jesus
is the head of the church.
The
Elders are following him and leading us.
The
Deacons are bringing up the rear. They are our support team.
This
is the Biblical model for church government and leadership.
So
how do Elders and Deacons get the job?
In
most churches they are elected.
But
democracy has no place in church.
It’s
not God’s model for government.
The
only thing close to a democratic election of leadership in the Bible seems to
be in Acts 1.
But
this was before they received the Holy Spirit, and honestly, I think they got
it wrong.
And
even so, they were elected by chance, not by anyone voting.
In
Acts 6 the Apostles (basically in the role of Elders), asked for the names of
some spiritually mature men that could effectively become Deacons.
They
would be responsible for the practical oversight of the church.
They
were not elected. Nobody voted. They were known to be spiritually mature.
And
the “Elders” approved of the choice and appointed them to the task.
After
that, Elders were appointed by the Apostles who started each local church. (or
by their representatives).
In
fact, there is a major problem with democracy in church.
If
the church is growing properly then there will be many more young Christians in
the church than there are mature Christians.
It
will look a bit like this:
The
number of people in the white triangle (the mature Christians) will be the same
as the number in the green part (the young Christians).
So,
in a democracy, the youngest Christians end up running the church.
I’m
not saying young Christians are stupid. But making these decisions requires
spiritual maturity that they simply do not have yet.
Paul
says you shouldn’t be an Elder unless your children are already grown up (and
turning out well).
He
also says that they shouldn’t be recent converts (because it’s too dangerous
for them).
The
youngest Christians just shouldn’t run the church.
Elders
have the responsibility to make the leadership decisions for the church. That’s
their job.
They
cannot abdicate this role to a vote from the congregation just because the
world does it that way.
Just
as a father has the responsibility to lead his family (while taking their needs
into consideration), so Elders have the responsibility to lead the church.
But
they do not have the authority to give that responsibility to someone else.
So,
Elders should make decisions themselves.
(Of
course they should listen to the congregation, young and mature, and take that
into consideration).
So
the current Elders should be choosing spiritually mature leaders from the
congregation to join them as they come along.
Deacons
also need to be spiritually mature Christians.
They
will often (but not always) also be teachers and mentors.
But
their main tasks in relation to the church will be about practical matters.
Deacons
should also be chosen by the Elders.
In
Acts 6 the men were proposed by the congregation, but the decision was ratified
by the Elders.
They
weren’t elected, they were simply put forward as men who were known to be
spiritually mature.
The
initiation of the whole process and the final decision was done by the Elders.
And
there is one more thing that I have seen done badly in so many churches.
A
Deacon is not an apprentice Elder.
Deacons
are men with gifts for managing practical things.
Elders
are men with gifts for teaching, pastoring
and spiritual leadership.
I
think it would be very rare to find someone who can do both.
A Deacon
is not a second class leader, they are very spiritual men who have different
gifts
to the Elders.
And
just because you are a good Deacon does not in any way mean you will be a good
Elder
(or vice versa).