This writer is not aware that this subject is a matter of animated discussion among the assemblies. This issue is the denial of one of the distinctives of the assemblies of the Brethren. Yet, we would discuss the issue because it is raised.

We affirm that there are pastors in the Assemblies of the Brethren. These pastors are always in plurality. But the Brethren Assemblies do not call them pastors but elders. This is because the term ‘pastor’ has gone into disrepute and the denominational churches use this title to the ordained minister of their church. This is a denial of the Scriptures. We recognize that there are pastors in the assemblies (elders) but there is no Pastor to an assembly. Apostle Peter writes: Shepherd the flock of God which is among you serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly, not as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock (1Pet.5.2-3).

The issue is raised because of some misunderstanding. No New Testament Church ministry is success-oriented. The Lord has called us never to be successful ministers. Our call is for faithfulness and not for success. We do achieve success of course in the ministry. But it is not always so. Jeremiah is a classic example in the Old Testament. After 52 years of faithful ministry even under persecution, Jeremiah could not produce any convert, except possibly the Ethiopian. Isaiah was asked to preach, “until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate”. Yet he was told to tell the people, “Hear ye indeed, but understand not, and see you indeed but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart and convert and be healed” (Isa.6.9-11).

Humanly speaking Paul’s ministry in Athens was not successful, but he was faithful. If the aim of the minister is success he would adopt all means to be successful, but he is only called to be faithful.

The second misunderstanding is because some fail to grasp that the Lord of the Church has not sanctioned any human appointment in His Church. The Lord alone does all the appointments in the Church.

The third misunderstanding is because of the premise that our model is the so-called “pastor-oriented Churches”. This is not so. Paul cautions us, “According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise master-builder, I have laid the foundation and another builds thereon. But let every man take heed how he builds thereupon” (1 Cor.3.10, 11). Clear guidelines are given to us throughout the New Testament. We are to build on these models.

We should also bear in mind that when clear instructions are laid down in the Word of God consensus is of no importance. Practice is decided by precepts. In precepts we have been given no option. We simply follow the word. Of course there may be various considerations involved in deciding what we practice. But the appointment of 'Pastors" does not fall in the category of practice. No consensus is needed for this. It is not the majority that is to decide the issue, but the Word alone. Sola Scriptura.

However, since the issue has been raised we need to answer them. Who are these ‘pastors’?

[Back to Top]

The Divine Provision for the Assembly

When the Lord ascended up on High, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men… And He gave some, apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers (Eph.4.8, 11). The Assembly has the “unity of the Spirit”. Assembly is comprised of born-again believers and they are indwelt by the Spirit (1 Cor.6.19). The Assembly itself as the temple is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor.3.16) The Spirit of unity is in every believer and this Spirit units every believer one with the other.

But the ‘unity of faith’ (Eph.4.13) is something to be achieved. The five men mentioned in Ephesians four-eleven are the divine provision to attain this unity. One of them is ‘pastors’. No human appointment is needed for this.

[Back to Top]

Who is a pastor?

Two scripture portions may be noted in this connection. "The elders (Gk. Presbuteros) which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed, feed (or shepherd Gk. Poimaino) the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight (Gk. Episkopeo) thereof not by constraint but willingly" (1 Pet.5.1-2).

In Acts 20 Paul calls the elders (presbuteros) of the Church from Ephesus (20.17) at Miletus and charge them to "Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost has made you overseers (Gk. episkopos) to feed (gk.pomaino) the Church of God (20.28).

From the above two Scripture portions it would be seen that three words elder, bishop, and overseer all speak of one person.

Pastor is an elder. (Presbuteroi). Presbus is an old man in Greek. The word emphasizes spiritual maturity. Who he is, is explained here (Acts 14.23; 20.27, 17; 1 Tim.5.17; Tit.1.5).

He is an overseer, a guardian, a bishop. (Episkopoi). The emphasis here is on his spiritual work. What he does he mentioned here (1 Tim.3.1; Tit.1.7; 1 Pet.5.2)

He is a shepherd. (Poimen). The emphasis here is on his spiritual capacity. His attitude and character is in picture here (Eph.4.11; Acts 20.28; 1 Pet.5.1-2). Therefore we understand that elder denotes spiritual maturity, bishop denotes spiritual work and shepherd denotes spiritual capacity.

Though the functions of pastors and teachers may overlap, the pastor is more occupied with the souls of men whereas the teacher is primarily occupied with the Scriptures.

[Back to Top]

Elders and their appointment

In the book of Judges, it is written: there was no king in Israel. Every man did that which was right in his own eyes (Jud.21.25). Where there is no rule, authority or order, there will always be confusion.

In the human body, all members are equal. Though the head directs them, all members do not have the same role and they are not independent but interdependent. Churches can exist without elders but this is only a sign of immaturity - "things that are lacking" should be supplied (Tit.1.5).

Scripture teaches that there should be a plurality of elders in each local assembly to oversee the flock of God. Without God-given leadership, a local assembly would be like a ship in the high seas without a rudder.

Though it is true that Christ is the Lord of the Church and He will direct the affairs of His Church, He has chosen to do so through the elders. As under-shepherds they are responsible in their oversight ministry to the Chief Shepherd.

The numerous references to elders in the New Testament affirm clearly that there were elders in the local churches (Cf. Phil.1.1; Acts 20.28; 15.22 etc.) of New Testament times.

The three persons in the Godhead are co-equals. Yet, Son and Holy Spirit are subordinate to the Father (1 Cor.3.23; 11.3; Heb.5.8; and also Jn.5.17; 5.19-20, 30). Initiative flows from the Father.

Likewise initiative for action or direction flows from one or the other of the elders. Elders in the assembly not only supply leadership but also set sound examples.

Though an elder is an individual, in the assembly there is a plurality of elders as mentioned earlier and they are to function as a coherent entity and the congregation should be able to observe this. How true it is that an uncertain sound cannot rally the people (1 Cor.14. 7, 8). God calls a man to be an elder, but the right to lead the flock should be earned by Him.

This coherent entity is realized only through spiritual maturity and includes the ability to accept and stand behind the actions of colleagues even when those actions are not quite as one would have done things oneself.

Though elders do not have a human leader among themselves, (the so-called 'chief elder' or 'duty elder') there has to be initiative always. Absence of this initiative can create paralysis within the group and then consequently in the body itself. They cannot command the respect and confidence of the congregation too. The conduct of the elders within the group should be with integrity. "In lesser matters it should be possible for individuals to allow their preferences to be overridden by the majority without the feeling that some great personal or theological cause has been sacrificed."

Elders are set in the assemblies to initiate various ministries. It is quite possible that sometimes the initiative will come from the congregation itself. The elders are there to monitor the activity and give guidance as and when it appears necessary. The congregation should not be allowed to drift aimlessly. The flock should be able to feel that the elders care about them. But the elders should take care to see that a false impression is not created that they do not trust others to do the job properly.

Gifts given to all members by the sovereign will of the Spirit do not render leadership unnecessary in the Church.

Their appointment

This is a true saying, If a man desires the office of a bishop, he desires a good work (1 Tim.3.1). It is a noble task. This is not self-seeking. Without this deep desire and willing spirit a man will not be and should not be an elder. But human willingness alone is not sufficient. There should be divine enabling also.

Though there are many words used in the New Testament to translate 'appoint' there are only three words that are relevant to our subject. They may be noted.

1. Acts 20.28 Made or set (Gk. Tithemi)

2. Acts 14.23 Appointed (Gk. Cheirotoneo)

3. Tit.1.5 Appoint (and their parallel references (Gk. Kethistemi)

[Back to Top]

Appointment of Elders by the Holy Spirit.

Acts 20.28 is a very clear statement concerning the appointment of elders. "Take heed therefore, to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers to shepherd the Church of God. (Gk. Tithemi, vb. Etheto). The different translations read: 'has set you', 'has placed you', 'has appointed you', 'has given unto your care' etc.

Our Lord used this word concerning his disciples. I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit (Jn.15.16). 'I set you' would be more in keeping with the metaphor of grafting (W.E.Vine).

Concerning his ministry the Apostle Paul writes, "Christ enabled me because He counted me faithful putting me into the ministry (1 Tim.1.12) Cf. 2.7 also 2 Tim.1.11) It is also used of 'appointment to punishment' as of the unfaithful servant (Matt.24.51; Lk.12.46) and of unbelieving Israel (1 Pet.2.8) (W.E.Vine). The verb made (set or placed) conveys the idea that the Spirit as Sovereign selected these men as elders (Acts 1.7; 13.47; 1 Cor.12.28; 1 Tim.1.12). Commenting on the use of this verb in 1 Cor.12.28 T.C.Edwards concludes that 'Etheto' means 'placed for his own use'.

The various functions depend on the sovereign will of God who is the source and the end of all. The means employed to publicly set the elders aside as overseers is not stated. Any appointment of the 'flesh' instead of bringing blessings may bring hindrance in the functioning of the Assembly itself. Whatever may be the 'modus operandi', if the selection of elders is left to the members of the Assembly it is definitely possible that they may choose the wrong man. Holy Spirit alone appoints elders in the Church according to His sovereign will.

[Back to Top]

Appointments of Elders by the Apostles

The next word 'Cheirotoneo' (Acts 14.23 'appointed') was primarily used of voting in the Athenian legislative assembly and meant, "to stretch forth the hands". But it is this word which is used in Acts 10.41 to speak of witnesses, 'chosen before of God. Therefore, this word cannot be used to mean 'stretching forth' in the sense of election. The same word is used for the brother chosen (2 Cor.8.19) by the churches of Greece to go with Paul to convey their gifts to the poor saints in Judea.

There are many, who consider that the prayer and fasting of Acts 14.23, was held before the appointment of elders and not after their appointment. It was as the church was praying and fasting the mind of the Lord was made known regarding the choosing of Paul and Barnabas by the Holy Spirit for missionary work and with prayer and fasting the church commended them to the work (Acts 13.1-3). Likewise, it is suggested it was as the apostles were praying and fasting (Acts 14.23) that the Holy Spirit revealed His mind and they appointed as elders those whom the Holy Spirit had placed in the Assembly.

[Back to Top]

Appointment of the Elders by the Apostolic Delegates

Titus was left by Paul in Crete, so that he 'should set in order things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you' (Tit.1.5).

The word used here is a strengthened form of 'histemi', which is translated: God 'has appointed a day on which He will judge the world'. The word in Tit.1.5 signifies 'to appoint a person to a position'. In this sense the verb is often translated 'to make' or 'to set' in appointing a person to a place of authority. See also the example of a servant over a household (Matt.24.45, 47; 25.21,23; Lk.12.42, 44), a Judge (Lk.12.14; Acts 7.23, 25), a governor (Acts 7.10); God setting man over the work of His hands (Heb.2.7); and the appointment of the seven deacons (Acts 6.3).

Therefore, what we are able to conclude is that in Tit.1.5 it is not a formal ecclesiastical ordination in view but the appointment for the recognition of the churches, of those who had already been raised up and qualified by the Holy Spirit and had given evidence of this in their life and service (W. E. Vine).

From the foregoing one thing is clear. Apostles and their representatives appointed elders in the early church. The Holy Spirit in his sovereign will appointed elders. By revelation of the Spirit He revealed whom, he had set as elders in the churches and the Apostles appointed them. By inspiration the apostles wrote what by revelation had been given to them and the qualifications of the elders were passed on to the apostolic delegates and they in turn appointed the elders. Both the appointments by the apostles and their delegates were during the transition period. During this period, the Scriptures were written and we have received it.

[Back to Top]

The Present Practice

In many assemblies, the members lament that the congregation is in the hands of elders who are not qualified. This means that they have some idea as to who is an elder and what an elder should be like.

In some assemblies, some or all the male members deal with business matters when they come together. Without commenting on such an unscriptural practice, it should be noted that such assemblies feel that oversight is only for transaction of such businesses. Is it because they forget that elders are not a board of officials set over an assembly but labourers among the saints? (Acts 20.28; 1 Pet.5.1-2). Yet, in other assemblies, because of the announcement that those who consider themselves elders should attend the meeting, self-elected elders are present in the meeting.

In the Episcopal churches their “Bishop” appoints the ‘elders’. In Presbyterian churches, it is the responsibility of the presbytery. In churches with a congregational form of government such as the Baptists, a person is ordained by a group of his fellow ministers.

It should be noted here that no formal ecclesiastical ordination is ever taught or practiced in the scriptures. There is no ceremonial act connected with the appointment of elders. Neither is it true that the laying on of hands confers any spiritual gifts to any individual.

[Back to Top]

The Transition Period

When local churches were first established there were no elders. The Church as such did not know the required qualifications of an elder. But as the Church grew and the time passed the Lord prepared some to be leaders in His Church and the Holy Spirit placed them in the Church.

From a reading of Acts 14.23, it is evident that the Apostles, on the basis of knowledge by revelation, knew who were the elders and they singled out these men who met the divine standards and publicly named them as such.

In the case of Titus (1.5) he was commanded earlier to appoint elders and in writing to him Paul enumerated the qualifications needed for an elder.

[Back to Top]

What shall we do today?

Today we have no apostles or apostolic delegates, but we have the complete New Testament and we are able to know what an elder is and what he is supposed to do. When we see such qualified men whom the Holy Spirit has placed in the church and actively serving as overseers, we need to recognize them (1 Thes.5.12). For this purpose each local assembly should come together in fasting and prayer to know the mind of the Lord and recognize and esteem those who are the elders. Acts 13.1-3 is a classic example. There is no question of electing anyone to this office. There are, of course, those who remark that if the requirements in I Timothy Three and Titus One are to be strictly followed there would be no elder today. This is simply to refuse to accept the authority of the Scriptures. The standard given in the Bible is neither unattainable nor unreasonable. When we refuse to accept this standard, we only betray our own spiritual state.

[Back to Top]

Co-option by the Existing Elders

The present system of appointing elders and the functioning of elders in some assemblies is deplorable. The prime criterion seems to be the age of the person. Next, though this may not be chronological order followed, is their wealth and social standing. Every other qualification seems to be irrelevant to them. If the brother is able to preach, though this is not essential (and the louder the better) it is a desirable qualification. Their sole function in the assembly seems to be, giving thanks for the bread and the wine and the distribution of the elements. In certain assemblies the first and the last 'prayer' is reserved for two elders whenever they are present.

The system of co-opting an elder to the existing oversight also leaves much to be desired. This co-opting is only to fill a vacancy that has occurred either due to death or transfer of an elder to a new location. In exceptional cases an elder may be co-opted because he has newly come into the assembly and was an elder in a different assembly or because he is exceptionally rich!

Sometimes in city Assemblies, this co-opting is done if the brother holds a 'respectable' position in his secular field of service. The 'chief elder' in certain assemblies co-opts other elders whom he hopes will always say 'yes' to him. It is very seldom if at all, that the existing elders look out to see if anyone is already doing the work of an elder and whether he has the requisite qualifications before he is co-opted as an elder.

Co-opting of elders seems to be desirable and scriptural if the scriptural norms are followed and the human element is kept to the barest minimum. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that this is not something done casually. Since it is the Holy Spirit who appoints elders, the New Testament practice ought to be that the Church wait on the Lord with prayer and fasting so that the Lord will make it clear to everyone who is an elder. By appointing a person to the office of an elder, he does not then do the work, but is recognized because he is doing the work.

[Back to Top]

A note of warning

A note of warning is in order in this respect. Gifts are given to each member for the edification of the body. As each member exercises his gift, the body is built up. It naturally follows that the assembly is the sphere where a young man is matured and by watching and following the existing elders he himself one day participate in the oversight.

A phenomena found in these days is to be noted. A 'full-time worker' immediately after his 'call for service' goes to a Bible School and after a period of training from 6 months to three years goes to an assembly and assumes the role of an elder. Without discussing whether the Bible School is Scriptural or otherwise and whether every 'full time worker' is an elder, it is correct to say that such a Bible school is not the place where a young man is trained to be an elder. Godly men need to be watchful.

[Back to Top]

Retirement from Eldership

The right to lead the congregation is earned by the ministry. The tradition is that once an elder, always an elder. Only 'removal to another church, death, total mental or physical incapacity, rank heresy and immorality are seen as reasons for withdrawal'. This is only because Eldership is seen as a status rather than a responsibility.

Eldership requires not only the requisite qualifications but also the opportunity and ability to function. If this is not possible, an elder of his own accord should withdraw from this office. His stepping down does not mean he loses his status in the Church but it will only enhance it. His spiritual maturity and experience should always be available, if other elders require it, when they seek his advice. Why don’t elders step down when they are not able to function effectively? Is it because the Holy Spirit did originally not appoint the incumbent who refuses to step down when he is not able to function at all, or that he has lost his vision of who an elder is?

[Back to Top]

What are the dangers of appointing a Pastor to an assembly?

Any salaried ministry in the New Testament is a strange practice. The scripture of course affirms that the laborer is worthy of his wages (Lk.10.7) and those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel (1 Cor.9.14).

In every profession, the one who pays the salary controls the employee. The danger of those who hire the pastor controlling his preaching cannot be overlooked.

The employer who pays the salary can insist on productivity as in the case of secular professions. Recently in one of the magazine, which is the mouthpiece of a Fund the editor has made unwarranted remarks against the evangelists in the guise of ‘commitment’. This is only because today he happens to be the CEO of this Fund. I was only wondering what would have happened if he was the ‘employer’ of these workers. Thank the Lord that he is not. May the Lord be merciful to him for his derogatory remarks on the Lord’s servants.

A salaried employee of the church will have the temptation to soft pedal the truth and preach only what the congregation likes to hear. Can we rule out the possibility of the paid pastor taking sides of those who pay him? Will not a fixed salary weaken the faith of the worker and reduce his dependence on the Lord? Will not a pastor, because of his achievement of the so-called success in his ministry search for greener pastures? Will not the richer congregations be on the lookout for such pastors to oversee their own congregations? These are the dangers of secular professionalism and should the assemblies of the brethren import them to their assemblies?

[Back to Top]

Conclusion

The Brethren Assemblies don’t need any of the so-called full time appointed pastors. There is no human appointment envisaged in the Scriptures. The ascended Lord has given gifts to the Church. In His sovereign wisdom, He has decided what is needed for the healthy growth of the Church and He has made divine provision for this. Let us not try to be over smart. What is required of us is to follow the clear guide lines provided for us.

[Back to Top]