Church Polity

Government is a kind of necessary evil: if something needs to be governed, somebody has to do it. A state or national government has an obligation to “protect the lives, liberty and property of the people, from whom its legitimate powers are derived, and for the advancement of whose happiness it was instituted.” A church has a different task, different officers, and a different jurisdiction. In the church, as in the nation, we have just finished an election. We feel a sense of relief when the Presidential election cycle has ended, but I detect a sense of excitement or enthusiasm when our new church officers are selected. Let’s take a moment to refresh ourselves on the roles and responsibilities in church government. 

We should distinguish between the offices established by the bible and those we use for legal or practical reasons. The New Testament offices and their qualifications come to us primarily through the pastoral epistles. There are two, three or four offices, depending on who you ask.

The pastor or minister is the most familiar office to us. He shepherds the flock, conducting the service, delivering the sermon, and engaging in discipline. He is equipped to consecrate the elements of communion and declare absolution of sins.

The ruling elder, also called bishop or overseer, is tasked with the same responsibility to rule as the pastor. He also must be able to teach. Biblically, pastors and ruling elders are both types of elder, but for ease, we simply say “elder” for “ruling elder”. It is preferable to install several elders in each church when possible, following the example of Acts 14:23.

The deacons are officers of service. They are not given the burden of rule. They are traditionally responsible for serving as ushers at communion and during the offering. 

Lastly, the teacher is the odd man out. This is not a schoolteacher, but a teacher in the church. Ephesians 4:11 refers to “pastors and teachers”, so many argue that these are the same office. I take the minority opinion and consider them distinct, but it is inconsequential in our context. These New Testament offices are biblically restricted to qualified men.

You will know that our church also employs officers on the council: President, Vice President, Secretary, Clerk, Envelope Treasurer, in addition to members at large. We would do well to read our constitution and remind ourselves of their duties as we pray for them and as their installation approaches this month.

A church council is a vital entity in a church. The fact that we have one at all says something about how we read the bible and interpret church government. Non-autonomous churches sometimes do not have them, as their responsibilities are outsourced above the local level.

I had the chance this month to find a constitution of the old E&R denomination from 1959. As you know, the E&R merged with the Congregational Christian churches that decade to form the UCC. What you may not remember is that a group of Congregationalists sued to stop the merger. This was on the grounds that our E&R polity was actually too Presbyterian, too centralized. The suit ultimately failed, but part of the opposing party would become the Conservative Congregational Christian Conference.

You could say the Evangelical side of E&R (that’s us) had a more independent tone, while the Reformed side was more Presbyterian. This shows up in the E&R constitution. Each congregation was expected to have a Church Council or Consistory. It seems our Evangelical churches used the term “council” while our sister Reformed churches preferred “consistory”. It was to be composed entirely of the pastors, elders and deacons of the church. The president of the council was to be the pastor or an elder. A second body called the “spiritual council” is the same as our “board of elders.” 

Every E&R church was expected to have a local constitution that generally aligned with the denominational constitution. In the parsonage safe, I found copies of our church constitution from 1930 and 1890. The 1890 constitution is not only in German, but in cursive, so I can’t make heads or tails of it. The 1930 constitution is impressively similar to our current revision. What I find very interesting is that the minute details of our structure did not ever conform to that E&R constitution, which did not come into effect until 1936. Our predecessors continued to include other members on the council and did not make the pastor to be council president. The selection process for officers in the denominational constitution is not made explicit, but it is also curious that we elect our officers as a body, then they select their roles as a group. Usually, the whole church would decide who the elders are, who the deacons are, and who the treasurers are. The New Testament does not prescribe a method either. In fact, we are deliberate to differ from Titus 1, where Paul tells Titus to unilaterally “appoint elders in each town” on the island of Crete. It is also unusual among American churches that our council offices are tied to certain New Testament offices, vice president to deacon, and secretary to elder. 

I believe these details say something about the high degree of wisdom expected of the council. Remember that the office of elder is one of spiritual rule. By delegating the selection of elders to the council itself, we are saying that we trust the council to select from among itself the right people, and that the councillors we elected include qualified individuals. In fact, I think the expectation was for every council member to be qualified in both lay offices (elder and deacon), even if we still included non-elder and non-deacon councillors.

I hope some readers find this short study on our church government as interesting as I do. Bottom line, our officers must perform their duties well, we must pray for them, and we all must express unity in the church.