How should the structure of the governing body of a local church be set
up? Undoubtedly there is room for a wide divergence of opinion on this subject.
Granting this, let's examine both the biblical and practical reasons we
might use as guidelines for an idealized pattern.
A Board---or Just Bored?
I remember once telling my pastor I would never again serve on the board
of a church. I was bored, fed up, and plain disgusted with the petty, unchristian,
and sometimes ridiculous antics we groaned through. Our action had better
be more vital than that. Otherwise we have bored boards.
But first, how many boards should we have? May we suggest from practical
considerations that the answer is one. The reason seems obvious: only one
board can assume the responsibility for governing. Any other way results
in confusion, because it sets up rival authorities. Certainly the one responsible
board can set up committees and delegate responsibilities for various areas
of ministry, but the overall accountability is nontransferable.
A division of authority along the typical lines of spiritual, temporal,
and financial realms invariably seems to breed strife. That's because the
basis of division is false: it implies that financial matters and mundane
housekeeping chores are not considered "spiritual." This runs
counter to the principles of Scripture, for in 1 Corinthians the inspired
writer moves without a pause from the obviously spiritual consideration
of the resurrection (Chap. 15) to the matter of finances (16:1-4). Also,
as previously cited in Acts 6, spiritual qualities were required in men
called to the household chore of waiting on tables. Neither of these matters
is considered less spiritual than more deeply "theological" issues;
all are to be handled in the power of an indwelling Lord and under the direction
of the Spirit of God.
A more biblical division of labor is set forth in the view that the elders
are responsible before God to rule, and in addition there are many functioning
deacons (household servants) who are called of God to function in equally
important and vital ways-but without any ruling authority whatever.
The key issue seems to be: who are the ones God will call to account for
the governing responsibilities? They are the ones described in the Word
as guardians or overseers. They alone have ruling authority---and accountability.
Now, based on this reasoning, if we assume that one board is best, how should
it function? And on what biblical principles?
What's the setup?
Our Lord lays out the basic concept which answers this question in the simple
phrase, "you are all brothers."
If we read the statement beginning in Matthew 23 in this context, we see
that the Lord Jesus is saying,
"Don't emulate the scribes and Pharisees, for they have set themselves up above the masses, and love the honor and praise of men, including being called 'Rabbi.'" [He is cautioning us not to look for exalted titles and ranks, for we are all just brothers in a great, big family---God's family. And there are no ranks and titles in a family! So he says:] ". . . you are not to be called Rabbi: for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called masters, for you have one master, the Christ" (Matt. 23:8-10).
This means that every man on the governing board of a church should have
equal standing and authority. The pastor and/or paid staff should not dominate
the action. Major decisions (and perhaps even some minor ones, when necessary)
should be made on the basis of unanimity with each man exercising a single
vote.
If you question the workability of this rule, let me give you an example
of how it works. As a Board of Elders we were considering the important
matter of calling a youth pastor. The need was pressing. Our young people
needed a shepherd; their parents were concerned; and so were we. We interviewed
a young man, discussed his potential leadership and other qualifications,
assessed his spiritual life and maturity, and everyone agreed we should
call him---except one elder!
Since we were committed to unanimous action, the heat was on. Was the majority
right, or was the one odd-ball holdout right? Who really had the mind of
the Lord?
It could be either way, so we rested the matter back on the Lord for further
clarity of understanding and direction. We prayed, and talked, and thought
and prayed some more. And as you can imagine, the pressure was really on
the holdout. The longer it went the more he thought "I must be wrong
on this. I couldn't be the only one out of all these guys to have the clue
from the Lord." So he finally succumbed and said, "Okay, let's
go ahead and call him." But it wasn't over a couple of months until
all of us realized we had made a mistake. The man we called did not handle
the ministry satisfactorily, and we faced the painful necessity of letting
him go.
That was an important lesson none of us have forgotten. We learned that
the Lord may be trying to tell us something through the one man who does
not concur in the action. And we'd better not pressure him into feeling
he is so far out of it that he is the unspiritual and insensitive one. In
this one case the safeguard didn't work very well---but only because we
panicked! In many other cases it has saved the frustration and embarrassment
of making hasty, wrong decisions.
Unanimity is a great safeguard against precipitous and premature decision.
Why? Because it makes us truly dependent on the Lord to pray it through
in patient waiting on him. The eternal God is never in a hurry even when
we are. And most of us sit pretty close to the panic button-sometimes on
it.
We need to give each leader unhurried and unharried freedom to respond to
Christ as Head. Discussion without pressure, logic without coercion is the
way to go.
Who takes the lead?
Okay, so we're all brothers. And we do need the safeguard of unanimity.
Doesn't someone have to exercise leadership in the action of a ruling board?
Leadership, yes---domination, no. Leadership is needed, and in order to
balance the obvious advantage staff men have (because of spending all their
working hours in the ministry of the local church) the leadership roles
should be given to the non-staff elders. In one church we know there is
an unwritten but well-established rule that no staff man may hold office
on the board. That is, non-staff people act as chairman, vice-chairman,
secretary, treasurer, and other officers. On the other hand, every elder
has an assigned area of responsibility in the ministry. These ideas help
to maintain the equality of "brothers" in practical terms.
Neither are the staff personnel to be considered as "employees"
of the board. There are employment considerations to be made, in view of
tax laws, vacation policies, insurance programs, and so on; but the attitude
"He's my brother" should be reflected as the background feature
of the relationship between staff and non-staff elders.
Clergy---What's That?
Where do we get the idea of a "clergy" anyway? Certainly not from
the Bible! It's more likely that an enemy has planted this idea in our minds,
because it has done so much to reverse God's order of things in the church.
Even in enlightened quarters the idea persists that only the paid minister
can perform certain church functions like baptizing, serving communion,
and visiting the sick. In recent situations which we have observed, various
Christians have complained bitterly because the "senior pastor"
was not able to visit their loved one, conduct the funeral for a member
of their family, or other such services, even when all kinds of loving care
were being expressed by other members of the Body. And when in the course
of planning a men's conference we suggested that some of the ordinary "civilians"
conduct a communion service, one man said, "Oh, can we do that?"
I often wonder why we don't think back to the first-century church scene:
Who conducted the early communion services? From what seminary did they
graduate? What denominational Sanction did they have? Was it not the rough
hands of unlettered fishermen who broke the bread of those early days? Or
perhaps it was the cleansed heart of a converted publican that expressed
thanks for "the blood of the new covenant shed for the remission of
sins."
What seminary did you attend?
There are only three schools I can think of from which those early disciples
could have graduated:
(I) The Jewish instructional centers like that of Gamaliel, from which they could hardly have learned Christian truth,
(2) the "School of Despair" as Ian Thomas describes it, otherwise known as the "School of Hard Knocks,"
(3) or "St. Mary's College," the one which Mary of Bethany established when she sat at the feet of Jesus.
This third school is the one which every Christian must attend---and
the one from which none of us ever graduates. It's the source from which
the wisest, most distinguished pastor or Bible scholar as well as the lowliest,
least-recognized Christian must draw. "You are all brothers."
In God's eyes there are no ranks, no hierarchy, no clergy---just Christ's
men and women with different gifts and ministries, loving one another and
caring for each other in Christ's name!
How about seminaries?
Lest you think I am against seminaries, let me hasten to correct that impression.
Good seminaries perform a very necessary function, giving men the tools
for becoming good Bible expositors and building their background of understanding
in theology, besides the disciplining of thought and study habits. But placing
confidence in our academic excellence or degrees is never an acceptable
substitute for being taught of God and walking in genuine dependence on
the available resources of our Risen Lord!
I hope the point is obvious: Our Lord has more than one way to educate his
men. Some he teaches through a seminary; others learn from faithful pastors
and Bible teachers. But all must respond to his personal instruction, not
just for three or four years, but for a lifetime. Make no mistake---God
puts no premium on ignorance, but he reserves the right to be the Master
Teacher.
A seminary education (or an engineering degree) is simply a license to look
for a job and start using what we've learned in productive employment---under
the personal tutoring of the Spirit of God. Academic truth has no real value
until it becomes applied truth.
In a church I know, one pastor has earned his doctorate in theology, while
his co-pastor has never attended seminary. As I facetiously tell them: one
is educated beyond his intelligence and the other is hardly even educated.
The beauty of this situation is that both men are completely free and uninhibited
about it! But both men are educated. Their education came through different
channels, but both are taught of God and fulfilling an effective ministry
side by side---with no strain about their educational disparity.
When All Else Fails
When the "untaught" man was introduced to the congregation he
was to serve, the "doctor" asked him, "What formal theological
training have you had?" (This was in a Sunday service on an entirely
unrehearsed basis.) The slightly startled reply was, "I've Never had
any," followed by the next question, "Then what makes you think
you can be a pastor to these people?" I'm sure there must have been
a long pause at this point---and then the thoughtful response, "I know
I'm not adequate in myself to think I could make it, but I have the assurance
from God that he has qualified us to be ministers of a new covenant. That's
the basis of my confidence."
You say, "Wasn't this interview kind of risky?" Sure it was, but
the "educated" pastor knew his man and on that basis proceeded
with confidence. And can you imagine how this set up the new man with the
people? Their hearts were enlisted to move with him in the fulfillment of
his ministry, and they were at the same time encouraged to think, "If
the Lord can teach this man and we use without formal training, maybe there's
hope for me!"
The point is this: the real qualifications for ministry are Spiritual, not
scholastic.
The Lord seems to delight in shaking up the theological world by revealing
truth to unlikely candidates like A. W. Tozer, or to a British Army officer
like Major Ian Thomas. God, it seems, is well able to make his own channels
for disseminating his truth. I say this only that we might let God be God,
and not try to press him into our academic molds. I've noticed he easily
avoids our misguided attempts to package him and sell him under our labels.
What About Denominations?
The same idea applies to the view one takes toward denominations. I
suggest that denominationalism is an attitude of mind rather than a mere
attachment to a name. It's possible for a nondenominational church to be
permeated with such an avid sectarian Spirit that its people are more denominational
than those in the denominational framework. The same is possible regarding
our view of the pastorate: I have known some who are so anti-clerical that
they have made a "clergy" of the laity. What a beautifully simple
word our Lord uses to resolve all of this: "You are all brothers."
Communications and P.R.
Communication and public relations are essential in any local church scene,
simply because love communicates. This means that we need to spend enough
time and express enough concern to begin to know each other and show that
we care. This should take place on every level of church life: in the governing
board, among the staff and extending to and through the whole congregation.
At a board meeting I attended not long ago the leader chairing the meeting
(not the board chairman, but one of the men being given the opportunity
to act in that capacity as a learning experience) asked the question, "Is
anyone hurting?" This invitation for us to share areas of need with
the other men resulted in silence for a bit as we all thought through our
situations. Then the first elder (whom we'll call Len) said, "Well,
if you fellows aren't hurting, I am! I came home late tonight after one
of those impossible, hectic days at work, had a spat with my wife and slammed
the door after me as I left the house to come to this meeting. And I feel
rotten about it."
Well, that opened us up! Other elders began to share their needs, along
with their victories, and praise. When we had finished praying for each
of the men, one of the elders said to Len, "We'll take a five-minute
break. How about calling your wife?" When the meeting resumed, Len
was all smiles and ready to lead with joy instead of a heavy heart.
On another occasion one of the pastoral staff came to a meeting with a sad
face and eyes red-rimmed from weeping. He shared a deep concern which was
affecting his whole family and possibly his ministry. The response was such
a ministry of love from all the elders that we could only express our hearts
to the Lord with a communion service! So the cookies and punch on hand for
refreshments became the elements of a "holy" communion which could
only bring delight to the heart of the One whose death and life it portrays.
Do you see this picture? Here are ordinary "civilian-type" Christians
ministering to a pastor! Here are brothers together, communicating Christian
love.
In our all-day staff meetings the most important ingredients are hearing
from the Lord, through His Word; sharing our personal needs and heart concerns;
and praying for one another concerning personal and ministry needs. Only
after that are we ready to function as a team under the Lord's direction---to
think through and develop plans and programs to equip His saints for their
ministry.
A classic illustration of a board ministering in love occurred with a pastor
I know. This pastor had a heart attack, for which the only attributable
causes were stress and fatigue. So knowing how difficult it had always been
for him to say no to any appeal for help, his board of elders issued orders
to limit his activity, taking steps to guard his health. The board chairman
personally became the guardian of his ministry activities. And all this
occurred after three months' absence of the pastor and in the face of multiple
problems of both personal and management nature in the life of the board
chairman. That's what I call T.L.C. (Tender Loving Care) to the nth degree!
Then there is the case of Pastor V in Chapter Three. This man was asked
to seek another place of ministry, not for failure to perform, but to develop
his own potentials. At least three elders on the board that took this action
were among Pastor V's closest friends. Can you see some of the possibilities
of misunderstanding in this? The suspicions of double-cross and betrayal?
This was a costly decision-running the risk of misunderstanding and possible
loss of friendship for love's sake.
Communication is a necessary feature of life where love is involved, maintaining
the freshness of that love relationship and the clarity of understanding
that creates harmony of thought and unity of action.
How about the Test?
Now that we've considered communications on a staff and board level, what
about public relations with the rest of the local body?
This is frequently an area of weakness, especially in a church not committed
to democratic or congregational lines of government. But if the elders expect
people to cooperate with the lines of action they believe were received
directly from "Headquarters," then the people must be included
in the communications loop. This can be done in a number of ways:
(1) through published information in the church bulletin and/or newsletter;
(2) through representatives of the congregation meeting with the board as advisors;
(3) by inviting leaders of the various ministries of the church to meet with the board for sharing of information and reporting;
(4) by appointing liaison representatives from the board to each ministry group in the church;
(5) by appointing advisors to the board from the various segments of church life, particularly the youth and children's areas of ministry (and any other that might be more remote and thus tend to be neglected);
(6) by honestly considering and heeding criticism from the people and by maintaining a consistent, ongoing assessment of congregational needs.
There are undoubtedly many more ways, but they will only be apparent
as we learn to exercise that thoughtful consideration generated out of genuine
love. For love communicates. And that's how we came to know the Lord of
love, through the costly com-munication of the Cross and the Word of the
Cross.
The leadership of love is easy to follow!