Tag Archives: Elders

Elders, families, and law keeping

gavelRecently I was discussing some topics about elders with some friends on the Internet. Specifically, they were questioning the need for an elder to be married and to have children.

In his Declaration and Address, Thomas Campbell expressed:

That although the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are inseparably connected, making together but one perfect and entire revelation of the Divine will, for the edification and salvation of the Church, and therefore in that respect can not be separated; yet as to what directly and properly belongs to their immediate object, the New Testament is as perfect a constitution for the worship, discipline, and government of the New Testament Church, and as perfect a rule for the particular duties of its members, as the Old Testament was for the worship, discipline, and government of the Old Testament Church, and the particular duties of its members.

Many of us, myself included, have moved away from this way of seeing the Bible as some sort of constitution for the church. One can look at Exodus and Leviticus and see what religious law code looks like; such language is absent from the New Testament.

For some, that means that the New Testament is little more than a snapshot of how the church was then; at best we’re seeing one possible expression of Christianity.

I view the writings of the New Testament differently, specifically the letters. I see in them an expression of how things should be. We take things like culture and context into consideration, but we don’t use them to render the epistles meaningless.

Especially when looking at elders. Among the things we see in the New Testament are the lists of elders’ characteristics in 1 Timothy and Titus. These letters are written to churches in very different situations. Timothy was in Ephesus, where the church had functioned for decades. Titus was on Crete, where the church was apparently just gaining a foothold. Because of this, when we see things in the list that overlap, those teachings are especially powerful.

So it is with elders and their families. It’s especially telling in Timothy, where we’re talking about men who aren’t new converts. Even so, Paul tells Timothy

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? (1 Timothy 3:4–5)

You expect these instructions to be given to Titus (and they were: Titus 1:6), who wouldn’t have the luxury of seeing how candidates had behaved themselves in church for years and years. But even in Ephesus, Paul says that the home life of a man will show his aptness for the job of elder.

That’s why elders need to be married. And have children.

“Is that a law? Will we go to hell if we do things differently?”

It doesn’t seem to be stated as a law. For me, it’s like the need to change the oil in my car. The owner’s manual doesn’t state that as a law. I don’t know of any state or federal regulations that require me to change the oil in my car. But I trust the car manufacturer and other knowledgeable people who have told me of the need to perform this needed maintenance. Frankly, I’d be foolish to do otherwise.

I trust the New Testament writers to describe what is best for a church. I want to do what will edify the church. In my life, I want to do what will most please God. For me it’s not a matter of law. It’s a matter of trying to be the best Christian I can be.

A letter to the UCC elders

I don’t like open letters, but I’m about to write one. Largely because I want to publicly thank and applaud the elders of the church I attend: University Church of Christ in Abilene, Texas

*****

Dear elders,

I know this is a bit impersonal, and I hope to speak with each of you personally. For now, let me publicly thank you for the statement you issued on Sunday about the participation of women in our Sunday assembly. It was a milestone on a long road, one that many of us had grown weary of. I’m sure that you especially have longed to reach a resting point in this discussion.

You’ve had my prayers, as always. I’ve prayed even harder as I’ve realized how especially difficult this process had begun. To be honest, I despaired of a solution that wouldn’t tear our congregation apart. You showed great wisdom, Spirit-filled discernment, in reaching a compromise.

No, I didn’t agree with every word in that statement. But I heartily agree with the expression of love and unity found in those pages.

We members have not behaved well. Many reacted without knowing the facts. Assumptions were made, conclusions drawn. You were attacked for moving too fast and for moving too slow. You were criticized for being too backwards and too progressive. Your motives were questioned.

Some chose to leave rather than work through the messiness that is church life; I pray they’ll be better prepared for disagreements that will come up in their new church home.

We’ve given lip service to Bible study while actually following our feelings and preferences. We’ve hard a hard time differentiating between “thus saith the Lord” and our own druthers. That’s hard to admit, but it’s true.

You’ve been publicly attacked and privately criticized. Too little grace has been extended your way.

Through it all, you’ve behaved like gentlemen. More than that, you’ve behaved like Spirit-led Christian shepherds. I’m proud to be part of your flock.

Thank you for your service.

 

Grace and peace,
Tim Archer

So where did elders come from?

elderLast month, I spoke at the annual Preachers Conference in Cuba. Our general topic was 1 Timothy; one of my assigned topics was “Elders.”

Two years ago, the whole conference looked at the theme of elders, so I wasn’t too excited about looking at the same material we’d seen then. I decided to start with the Old Testament and look at elders there. The New Testament church drew the concept of an eldership from somewhere. Given the Jewish nature of the early church, it’s almost a given that this idea of elders came from Judaism.

In the Old Testament, we see that the elders were the heads of the tribes and the chief members of each family (See 1 Kings 8:1, for example). That’s why we don’t see elders among God’s people until the book of Exodus; Genesis principally deals with a single family.

Then in Exodus, we see Moses dealing with the elders of Israel (3:16; 4:29; 12:21). From that group, he selected 70 “special” elders (Exodus 24:9; Numbers 11:16-30). These were the recognized leaders of Israel, leaders of each family that made up the nation.

As time progressed, each town came to have its elders (Deuteronomy 16:18; Ezra 10:14). They would typically meet at the gate of the city to discuss important matters (Deuteronomy 25:7; Ruth 4:1-2; Proverbs 31:23). After the exile, they came to form part of the Sanhedrin, along with the chief priests and teachers of the Law. (That description of the Sanhedrin is found numerous times in the gospels)

Now here’s where I start speculating (I didn’t share this in Cuba). The elders were the patriarchs of each family. I think they were the men who were physically unable to work or serve in the military. Because of this, they had the time to sit around and act as a governing body. They were respected because of their age and experience.

Either way, when the church began, the idea of older men discussing important matters and making decisions was a natural one. It took no special prompting for the church to follow this system of organization which they knew so well.

Disciplined Congregations

Shepherd and sheepOn Monday, I mentioned some articles by Jay Guin that refer to an interview with Stanley Hauerwas. I included a quote from that interview which fit well with some things I’ve been thinking about. Hauerwas says in that interview:

So evangelicals, I’m afraid, often times, with what appears to be very conservative religious convictions, make the church a secondary phenomenon to their assumed faith and I think that’s making it very hard to maintain disciplined congregations.

Disciplined congregations. That’s definitely something we lack in Churches of Christ. In fact, we often rankle at the thought of submitting ourselves to the leadership of others. Because, as Hauerwas notes, we see our personal faith as more important than our community faith, we hold the community to our standards rather than the other way around. We want the kind of music that we feel is appropriate. We want a preacher who presents God’s Word in a way that suits us. We want our elders to make decisions that line up with our personal beliefs. If not… we’re gone. We’ll find another church that does things the way we want.

That’s not to say that leaders are never wrong or that we can’t have bad leadership in place. But there has to be a trust in the body to be able to deal with such. And we have to be an active part of that body for it to be able to function as it should. It’s only in a church that lacks an active membership that bad leadership can thrive.

I could be wrong. You could be wrong. Our leaders could be wrong. Previous generations could be wrong. God is right. His Word is right.

So we make leadership selection a spiritual process and not a series of business decisions. When choosing our shepherds, we look for just that… shepherds. We seek men who want to minister and serve, not men who want to rule. We seek men with a heart for God and a heart for the flock. Once chosen, we follow. We pray. We support. At times we offer suggestions and advice. But we have to trust.

And yes, that can lead to hardship. It can lead to mistakes. It can lead to discomfort. But it won’t lead to anything that we can’t deal with as a body. That is, we can deal with it if we are functioning together as a body. If we’re just a group of like-minded individuals, then there’s trouble ahead.

Bridging the past and the future

Van Gogh shepherd

Tradition is the living faith of those now dead.

Traditionalism is the dead faith of those still living.

Jaroslav Pelikan
The Vindication of Tradition

Traditions of a church can provide an organic link to her past. They can also choke out the future. It takes discernment to have traditions without traditionalism.

Another reason that I think that, in most cases, the elders are the ideal ones to lead the church is their tie to history, their ability to bridge the past and the future. The average minister comes into a congregation and spends a limited number of years. He’s not part of the past of the congregation and probably won’t be part of the future.

A wise minister recognizes the temporal nature of his work. He doesn’t defer to his elders on everything nor kowtow to the youth at every turn. He works to shine God’s Word on the church’s present situation, helping provide insight that might not be there otherwise.

A strong eldership provides the knowledge of the past with a desire to prepare the church for the future. It allows the minister to focus on God’s Word and its application to the congregation, while the elders focus on shepherding the flock.

Lots of ideals there. But I think a healthy congregation has an eldership that refuses to be a board of directors and a minister that refuses to be CEO. They choose to walk the path of the Lamb rather than the cold cobblestones of Wall Street.