One safeguard among those who propose an eldership rule over local churches is the law of local autonomy and rules for establishing authority. These provides the added protection needed for any abuse of leadership and authorized work for the organization. It is believed that the Bible’s mention of only a plurality of elders is the only authorized pattern and a divine safeguard to avoid abuse of power. This ignores the possibility that the use of the plural to describe a class of people, like the word “children”, is used to define a certain classification. In this case, no one would conclude that a man does not have children if he only has one. It also fails to recognize that, while this view gives the appearance of no one-man rule, the reality is that it does not prevent one-man rule, as is claimed. Frequently, local church organizations select a plurality of men, while one man still runs the show. Granted, it may have a better appearance, but it does not prevent the one-man rule in practice.
I have observed that many such elders in this tradition have misapplied the meaning of the word “rule” in connection with their role and the context in which that word was used in the Bible. Many in this tradition advocate that the rule cannot be in matters of spiritual shepherding because that rule is already being exercised by Christ. So, the rule must be exercised by making decisions for the local church organization in matters of judgment. This gives rise to a new role of church business that is not found in the Scriptures. It is entirely absent in our Bibles. Of course, in the absence of such men, local churches still have “business meetings” that are felt necessary to make decisions for the church.[1] Of course, once we buy into this model of the church as an institution, then, it only follows that we must organize ourselves after that model.
Is this arrangement from God or from men? We propose that one go back a few years and note the origin of churches in the Restoration Movement. An example is cited from the minutes of a church conference in Pike County, Illinois, who met April 9, 1841, to consider among other questions, the following, How is a church organized? They unanimously agreed that a church is organized as a church by “giving themselves first to the Lord, and then to one another to watch over one another for good.” However, this isn’t adequate. He continues, “They are not fully organized til they appoint for themselves elders and deacons, and have them scripturally set apart by duly authorized persons.” Other questions dealt with the name of the church, whether God gave the Spirit since the apostolic age and the working relationship of the organization to the preachers.[2]
In 1843, Stone was again asked how he would proceed in organizing a church. There were forty immersed persons and the writer wants to know how Stone would “proceed to set them in good order for keeping house and whose duty to set them in order.” Stone tells him to appoint a day for all to meet and read the following document or one similar, ‘We, the assigned do agree, and hereby have agreed to worship together as a Church of Christ – to take the Bible as the only rule of our faith and practice, and to be called Chrsitans, after the nane of Christ our Lord.’ Then, list all the names of the members. They should agree to assemble every Lord’s day to exhort one another, sing and pray. Anyone apt to teach or posses other qualifications of a bishop should be encouraged to the work and when satisfied, invite two or more ordained elders to come and set them apart for the office by fasting, prayer and the laying on of hands. I advise not to have it done suddenly. Afterward, choose from among yourselves two or three good and holy men for Deacons, and let them be set apart in the same manner. Also, let the ordinances of the Lord’s house be regularly attended to. Have no dumb bishops, nor elders. Until you can have one apt to teach, do without and pray God to bless you with such an one.“[3] In the case of not having qualified men to serve, the tradition often speaks of being “unscripturally organized,” but no one seems to be too alarmed by being “unscriptural.” I’m guessing that the logic for this conclusion is that it’s best to be unscripturally organized than unorganized. In other words, it’s best to practice what is unscriptural than it is to remain just a community of individual saints. It will be shown in later blogs that New Testament Christians shared their spiritual gifts to equip them for the work of service. Those leading are the instruments of the Spirit who are appointed to fulfill a work of service. Each saint had at least one gift through the laying on of the apostles’ hands in order to edify and equip the others. Stone’s advice in being organized requires an eldership, but no apostle to impart a spiritual gift or evangelist to appoint such men who meet the qualifications given in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. The foundation for this advice is built on the assumption that each community of saints must for themselves into an organization under the oversight of an eldership.
Imagine that the gospel is preached in a community, wherein only one or two accept the message of the Holy Spirit. That community would have a saint or saints that would ake up that class of identified as the “ekklesia”. Such a person would share the wonderful news of salvation. At what point would they ever need to form themselves into a “little institution?” At what point would a handful of Christians decide they needed to hire a preacher to tell their neighbors about Jesus? At what point would they ever need to appoint an eldership?
This begins to look absurd but the institutional concept associated with the word “church” forces us to make foregone conclusions that have not been defined by the biblical text. Today, all Christians have access to the same spiritual guidance through the living Word, which is the work of the Holy Spirit. Each saint is responsible for how they handle it, apply it to themselves, and use it for the needs of others. In the absence of spiritual gifts and the laying on of the apostle’s hands, there is no special class citizen within the ekklesia. Naturally, we would expect older men and women whose experience (cf. Hebrews 4: ) would spur them to share, warn, and encourage others to fruitful living. We might deem such as “leaders” because of their living example and encouragement among saints. By this definition, leaders are not made by appointment but by living an exemplary life of purity and holiness.
[1] Babylonian Captitivy of the Church, vol. 2, p. 283.
[2] Stone, Baron W. Christian Messenger, Volume V. 11, 1840, pgs. 342-343
[3] Stone, Barton W., Christian Messenger, Vol 13 pg. 253-254,)