Common Misconceptions Regarding Biblical Eldership

by Ruling Elder Todd Cobb

The reader should keep in mind that this article is not intended to be an exegetical argument for the biblical requirement for eldership as a form of government for Christ’s Church. The writer presupposes that eldership is a biblical principle. If the reader is interested in further investigation on the biblical principles of governance by Eldership, I recommend Samuel Miller’s book titled “The Ruling Elder” which can be found on amazon.com.

Historically, there have not been too many theologians who have written on the subject of Eldership. A quick survey of the writings and sermons of the greatest theologians, past and present, will easily sustain this proposition. For example, monergism.com is considered one of the largest data bases containing the finest articles and resources of historical orthodoxy. A simple search on the web site would give you 35 links to articles past and present on the subject of eldership. By way of comparison, searches for “covenant theology” would provide you with 312 links, “election” would obtain 293 links, and “Jesus Christ” would provide 492. Suffice it to say, there has not been much written in this area in the history of the church. This, I believe, has led to many misconceptions of the office, duties, and responsibilities of elders in the Christian church today. Through my studies on this subject, I have corrected my own personal misconceptions and have begun to develop a proper understanding of the function and significance of elders within the church. In the next few pages, I will attempt to capture some of the misconceptions about eldership that I encountered during my study and the principles that contributed to a more extensive understanding of biblical eldership and how it should be applied in Christ’s church today.

In the area of ecclesiology, it is important to identify the delineation of responsibilities between the congregant and the elder.I found that A.A. Hodge’s definition found in his commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith best represents, in context and uniformity, the biblical definition of an elder. It says,

Ruling elders are properly the representatives of the people chosen by them for the purpose of exercising government and discipline in conjunction with pastors or ministers.” “The powers, therefore, exercised by our ruling elders are powers which belong to the lay members of the Church.” “They are chosen by them to act in their name in the government of the Church. A representative is one chosen by others to do in their name what they are entitled to do in their own persons; or rather to exercise the powers which radically inhere in those for whom they act. The members of a State Legislature or of Congress, for example, can exercise only those powers which are inherent in the people. [1]

In defining ruling elders in relation to the confession, Hodge states that ruling elders are representatives of the people chosen by them for the purpose of exercising government. Further, these representatives exercise powers which belong to the lay members of the church, and that they are chosen by [lay members] to act in their name in the government of the Church. I would like here to underscore a significant misconception of the relationship between the congregation and the elder. It is often thought that the congregation gives up some formal powers of administration to elders to act on their behalf, thus absolving themselves of certain congregational responsibilities. But according to this definition, the congregant does not relinquish any form of power inherently theirs, given by Christ, but instead, places the elder, in trust, to execute ecclesiastical administration while possessing equally those powers which lay Christians already maintain. In fact, the Presbyterian Church in America’s (PCA) Book of Church Order (BCO) affirms this relation clearly in section 8-3, which states

“All those duties which private Christians are bound to discharge by the law of love are especially incumbent upon them by divine vocation, and are to be discharged as official duties”. Therefore, an elder is one elected by the lay members of the church to exercise government and to “officially” discharge duties that all private Christians are generally obligated to perform.

In Jay E. Adams ’s book Shepherding God’s Flock, this relationship can be seen in practice in the area of counseling [2]. It is the primary duty of elders to provide biblical counseling to the flock with additional support from the congregation as needed. For example, a congregational member suffering from drug addiction, along with counseling from the elders, would need additional day to day support from the congregation. One of the important aspects in dealing with an addiction is the removal of the addict from daily influences. Therefore, congregational members can play a huge role in barring the influence of the addiction through daily fellowship and emotional support (which is part of counseling). The elder can’t possibly provide this kind of support without distracting from other duties that he must perform (like counseling others, daily church administrations etc.) The congregation must realize that they too must support counselees in order to assist the elder in “watching over the flock”. The congregation is not absolved of responsibility to assist fellow members thus leaving the elder alone in the execution of his duties. An elder will most certainly fail without the support of the congregation in these types of matters.

Another point to make here is that the administrative authority that the elders maintain over the flock is given to them by the flock for the purpose of being governed. The misconception here is that congregational members must submit to the elders only when they agree with them. This sometimes being the case, I find it ironic, except in cases of unbiblical leadership, that we have examples of congregational members not willing to submit to the authority of the elders whom they, themselves, have elected! The scriptures have provided the method by which complaints can be brought against an elder (1 Timothy 5:19 ), but they do not speak of how congregants can remove themselves from the obligation of submission outside the method (due process) that God has provided. In the end, congregants should keep in mind that elders are sinners too, mistakes will be made, and forgiveness is obligated by all Christians regardless of position or responsibilities.

ELDER RESPONSIBILITIES

The next area of interest was to obtain an explanation of the duties and responsibilities of an elder. In order to fully comprehend the application of responsibilities of a ruling elder within the PCA , I turned to section 8-3 in the Book of Church Order (BCO), which refers to the responsibilities of Ruling Elders (REs) in the PCA:

8-3. It belongs to the office of elder, both severally and jointly, to watch diligently over the flock committed to their charge, that no corruption of doctrine or of morals enter therein. They must exercise government and discipline, and take oversight not only of the spiritual interests of the particular church, but also the church generally when called thereunto. They should visit the people at their homes, especially the sick. They should instruct the ignorant, comfort the mourner, nourish and guard the children of the church. They should set a worthy example to the flock entrusted to their care by their zeal to evangelize the unconverted and make disciples. All those duties which private Christians are bound to discharge by the law of love are especially incumbent upon them by divine vocation, and are to be discharged as official duties. They should pray with and for the people, being careful and diligent in seeking the fruit of the preached Word among the flock.

As to the duties of an elder, the BCO states that elders watch over the flock that no corruption of doctrine or of morals enter therein, exercise government and discipline, and take oversight of the spiritual interests of the church. Generally speaking, these duties would not be conducted by the congregation as a whole (compared to the inherent responsibilities that all individual Christians should execute out of love). However, their interest in such matters as a body of believers necessitates the need for ecclesiastical representatives to perform them. Therefore, it is necessary for elders to be called, trained, and ordained as representatives of the body to properly execute these “governmental” obligations. Elders are also to visit the people at their homes (especially the sick), instruct the ignorant, comfort the mourner, nourish and guard the children of the church, set a worthy example to the flock, pray with and for the people, and be careful and diligent in seeking the fruit of the preached Word among the flock. It is obvious that these duties can and should be performed by the body of believers individually, but in matters corporately, elders are appointed to perform them with assistance from the congregation as required.

What lies here is another misconception, which, I believe, has damaged the Christian Church. Ruling elders are responsible for performing those functions which are often assumed to be the sole responsibility of the teaching elder. Indeed, according to section 8-5 in the BCO, the difference in responsibilities between a teaching elder and ruling elder is only found in the additional duty of teaching elders to “feed the flock by reading, expounding and preaching the Word of God and to administer the Sacraments”.

8-5. When a man is called to labor as a teaching elder, it belongs to his order, in addition to those functions he shares with all other elders, to feed the flock by reading, expounding and preaching the Word of God and to administer the Sacraments.

The responsibilities shared between the ruling elder and teaching elder are closer related than most churches admit in word and practice. The misconception is due, in part, to the high standard of education required for the ordination of teaching elders in the PCA. This education includes counseling, administration, preaching, and a number of ecclesiastical functions. Therefore, teaching elders are more equipped to execute biblical eldership than many ruling elders. This misconception often leads to an improper view and function of ruling elders. Due to lack of training and experience, ruling elders are often viewed as “committee chairmen” or “ecclesiastical faculty” when compared to the educated and experienced teaching elder. For this reason, every effort should be made to ensure all church members fully understand the relationship between ruling elders and teaching elders. Ruling elders are not to be considered “board elders” or “elders by committee”. Alexander Strauch correctly states,

“When the church eldership is viewed as a status or board position in the church, there will be plenty of volunteers. When it is viewed as a demanding, pastoral work, few people will rush to volunteer.”[3]

As stated earlier, ruling elders are to visit the people at their homes (especially the sick), instruct the ignorant, comfort the mourner, nourish and guard the children of the church, set a worthy example to the flock, pray with and for the people, and be careful and diligent in seeking the fruit of the preached Word among the flock. The main principle here is that ruling elders (as well as teaching) should visit the members of the flock. This principle can not be understated. John S. Watkins emphasizes this principle brilliantly in his Hand Book For Ruling Elders. It is here quoted at length (emphasis mine):

It is impossible for him [ruling elder] to take proper oversight over them [the flock], look after their spiritual interests, and give them due attention, without coming in personal contact with them in their homes… Families are thus brought into close contact with the church, and made to feel that they are a living part of it. The members learn to regard the elders as their friends, and turn to them as well as to their minister for advice in trouble, and for comfort and sympathy in affliction… Many elders shrink from the duty of comforting the bereaved, and excuse themselves upon the ground of incompetency. Even if they cannot give spiritual instruction, they can at least show a heart-felt sympathy, which sometimes accomplishes more good. They may read a few appropriate verses from Scripture, and offer a brief prayer. The obligation to visit and comfort the bereaved rests entirely too lightly upon most elders. This is regarded as a duty which the minister only can perform. But it is a great mistake. Times of sorrow, when God softens the hearts of his children by fatherly chastenings, furnish a grand opportunity for elders to endear themselves to their people and to strengthen Christian bonds. Any genuine expression of sympathy, any kindness shown, any help rendered, when the heart is raw under crushing grief, will leave its impress forever. [4}

The vitality of Christ’s Church rests upon intimate fellowship and ministry by the elders with in the congregation. Elders that perform their duties in a biblical fashion will often find themselves overwhelmed by the amount of dedication and sacrifice it takes to shepherd the flock of God. A good standard by which any church can measure the success of their eldership is by the level of congregational awareness of the demanding work involved. With biblical eldership properly executed, many congregants would not feel a strong desire to volunteer for the work, nor be willing to sacrifice so much of their personal time to the execution of the duties. R. Paul Stevens sets us on the right track when he writes:

“And for tentmakers to survive three full-time jobs (work, family and ministry), they must also adopt a sacrificial lifestyle. Tentmakers must live a pruned life and literally find leisure and rest in the rhythm of serving Christ (Matt. 11:28). They must be willing to forego a measure of career achievement and private leisure for the privilege of gaining the prize (Phil. 3:14). Many would like to be tentmakers if they could be wealthy and live a leisurely and cultured lifestyle. But the truth is that a significant ministry in the church and the community can only come by sacrifice.”[5]

Selection of Elders

The next area of interest is the selection of men for the office of elder. The scriptures are very clear in the qualifications for eldership (1 Timothy and Titus) and one does not need to go much further than scripture in defining those characteristics needed for qualification. Too often, the church feels an obligation to select men who are influential in the congregation based upon prominent civic employments (i.e., significant businessmen, doctors, college professors etc.) Although these men might have leadership traits that are favorable for church leadership, their civic employment alone should not influence congregational members to nominate them for the office of elder. Another misconception in the area of selection is age. It is common for congregations to establish age as a criterion for selection of men to the office of elder. However, there is no biblical reference regarding age as a qualification for the selection of eldership. Indeed, Paul encourages Timothy in 1Timothy 4:12 not to be concerned with those who would question or disapprove of his authority due to his age:

Let no one despise your youth, but be an example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love, in spirit, in faith, in purity. Till I come, give attention to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine. Do not neglect the gift that is in you, which was given to you by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the eldership.

Additionally all men should strive to conduct themselves within the scriptural requirements stated for an elder so as not to disqualify themselves for potential service. Indeed, it’s a sad thought to think of a church without qualified men to fill the offices of leadership in Christ’s church when the need for selection arises.

The life of Christ’s Church rests upon the relationship between those whom He has placed in position of authority and how the administration of that authority is executed. With the help of His Word and the Holy Spirit, we can gain greater understanding of how Christ would have us operate and function in a manner that would please Him and bring glory to the Father.

Notes:

1 (The Banner Of Truth Trust 3 Murrayfield Road, Edinburgh EH12 6EL P.O.Box 621, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, USA First published 1869 First Banner of Truth reprint 1958)

2 For more information on congregational counseling techniques, see Jay E. Adams, Shepherding God’s Flock (New Jersey: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., 1980), pp. 199-201

3 Alexander Strauch , Biblical Eldership: An Urgent Call to Restore Biblical Church Eldership (Littleton: Lewis and Roth Publishers, 1987)

4 Watkins was born in Virginia in 1844, and studied at Union Theological Seminary from 1869 to 1872 under Robert L. Dabney and Thomas E. Peck. He was afterwards pastor at Roanoke, Va., Raleigh, N. C., and Spartanburg, S. C. The following was excerpted from his A Hand-Book for Ruling Elders, published at Richmond in 1895 by the Committee of Publication of the Southern Presbyterian Church.

5 R. Paul Stevens, Liberating the Laity (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1985), p. 147.