A move to a plurality of elders provides centralized leadership for all aspects of church ministry. Our current system places the responsibility for church oversight to the senior pastor. Such oversight will be expanded to include those affirmed as elders. Rather than one person providing leadership to committees, church events, and administrative decision making, a plurality will provide greater accountability.

Another change that will come from this transition is some of the operational expectations of deacons. Currently the church’s constitution ascribes some oversight responsibility to deacons which does not conform to the best biblical practices. The constitution also places matters of church discipline into the hands of deacons. Again, the New Testament does not place such a responsibility to deacons. Such matters will be handled by elders.  

The transition to a plurality of elders will enable a more efficient means of overseeing the general operations of church life. Communication will be much improved. Clarity will be provided as the church knows where to direct questions about church matters. Greater accountability will be provided.

No, the church will still identify as a congregational church. The primary distinction of a congregational church is local autonomy rather than answering to a higher ecclesiastical body. For example, many Methodist churches are accountable to the synod which is comprised of leadership from a region of church. Presbyterian churches answer to a presbytery, also comprised of leadership from other regional churches. Furthermore, the church will continue to be the final vote on all matters of church life. The congregation will still approve budgets, nominations of leadership including deacons and elders, major expenditures, etc.

No specific number of elders has been determined though the presence of both paid and non-paid elders will be the goal. Furthermore, length of service has yet to be determined though a proposed term of five years is typical in many churches. We would propose no limit to the number of terms to be served. However, after the length of the term elders would be reaffirmed.

A method similar to that of deacons will provide a model for the selection of elders. Since the elders represent a smaller group the process does not include a general form sent to the congregation each year with names submitted and then evaluated. However, names of qualified men would be submitted and the current elders will work through the names, go through an evaluation process (again, like the deacon nomination process), and finally those names approved by the elders will be submitted for congregational affirmation.

No, the purpose of elders is not to reduce Pastor Scott’s engagement with members. Pastor Scott will continue to minister to the needs of people as time allows. The addition of more elders provides greater access to pastoral ministry to people as some may have a better relationship with another elder.

The ordination process for elders would include a thorough examination of the potential elder’s theology, qualifications for the office, and ability to effectively serve the church in this position. After an examination process the elder(s) would be presented to the congregation and then we would have an ordination service.

An often used cliché states, “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” Such a sentiment has been shared in the midst of discussions about this transition. However, there are important reasons for such a change. First, on a personal level I have found the burden of decision making and oversight responsibility to be immense, especially coming out of COVID. Though I had already been convinced that a plurality of elders would be the best way to provide biblical leadership for the church, the pressures of those unique times further illustrated the need for such a plurality. Furthermore, a plurality of elders would ensure pastoral leadership receives biblically appropriate accountability.

Second, a plurality of elders reflects the best practices of Scripture. Though the New Testament does not explicitly command a plurality of elders, the vast majority of references to elders in the NT involves a plurality. For more information on this principle take a look at the sermons from Titus made available on the information page for elders. Though other forms of leadership can work we should strive to implement that which is best and most faithful to Scripture.

The directors would continue to function as legal representatives as they currently function.

The simplest answer is to refer to 1 Timothy 3:2-7 which identifies a host of characteristics consistent with Christlikeness. Furthermore, it emphasizes the responsibility to faithfully teach, handle, and defend the Word of God. Therefore elders should be mature followers of Christ who know doctrine and Scripture and are committed to leading in light of it.

Elders would be required to hold to the doctrine of the church. They would be expected to be knowledgeable in all aspects of the church’s doctrine and capable to teach and defend it.

Once the fundamental commitment to a plurality of elders has been made, the Constitution and By-laws will need to be reviewed and amended accordingly. Such a process will still follow the process for approval as outlined in the Constitution.

Yes, one of the benefits of a plurality of elders is the expansion of those who can provide pastoral counseling. For those who serve as elders who have not received training, opportunities will be made available.

Yes.

After an initial phase of teaching and discussion a document providing an initial resolution on the fundamental theological principles of elder leadership will be presented for the congregation’s affirmation. The next step would be a revision of the Constitution to accommodate the changes and how the church would function under a plurality of elders. Those changes would be presented to the church for discussion and then adoption. Adoption of the constitutional changes will follow the process outlined in the current constitution and by-laws.

An elder-led church still maintains a commitment to congregational rule. This means the congregation is still approving actions necessary to maintain church life. An elder-ruled church would remove all decision-making responsibilities from the congregation and invest that authority in the elders. See question on congregational church above for more information on our commitment.

In Titus 1:5-9 and in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, Paul gives instructions to both Titus and Timothy for the appointment of elders. However, in 1 Timothy 3:8-13, immediately after his instructions regarding elders to Timothy, Paul also provides instructions for the appointment of deacons. The two separate lists are virtually identical, with one exception: elders must be able to teach (1 Tim. 3:2; cf. Titus 1:9). These two offices are also referred to by Paul in distinction from one another in Philippians 1:1-2, when he writes: “Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Further reflection on biblical terminology offers insight into the distinctions between the two offices. First, it is important to note that the term “elder” is synonymous with “overseer” and “pastor.” Thus these terms elaborate on the responsibilities of elders. In 1 Timothy 5:17, Paul writes: “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.” Further, as this verse implies, elders are responsible to instruct the church in sound doctrine.

Elders are responsible for the general spiritual health and care of the members of the church. Paul commands the elders to Ephesus, “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care (literally “to shepherd”) for the church of God, which He obtained with his own blood." Likewise, Peter commands the elders through Asia Minor: “So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock” (1 Pet. 5:1-3). In short, the elders are responsible to lead the church of God with the wisdom and loved.

The word “deacon” means “servant” or, more specifically “waiter.” For example, the men serving the wine at the wedding at Cana are referred to by John as “diakonoi” (John 2:5, 9). Thus, deacons are called to provide more general service and care in the church. Acts 6:1-6 provides the first use of the language and identifies seven men capable of serving the widows of the early church in the distribution of food. Such service freed up the apostles to “devote [themselves] to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (Acts 6:4). Therefore, deacons emerged from the need to have faithful men serve practical needs of congregational life enabling church leadership to attend to spiritual matters.