THE ELDERS, AN EXPOSÉ

In Acts 20:29-30 Paul warned the Ephesian elders; “I know that after my departing grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 AND FROM YOUR OWNSELVES MEN SHALL ARISE, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. ”

In 1944, H. Leo Boles wrote: “There are elders who think themselves clothed or invested with all authority. They do not regard the wishes of the congregation, but impose their own dictatorial authority of the church. They never attempt to get the wishes of the church; and when the wishes are known, they do as they please. They “boss” the affairs of the church. They usurp the authority from Christ and are dictators over the church (Gospel Advocate, Feb. 2, 1944, p 2).

Perhaps the most diabolical and insidious plan of attack Satan ever devised to destroy the effectiveness of the Lord’s body was done so by working among its members. Mainly using its elders, he slowly corrupted its teachings, its members, and altered its purpose, order of worship and function. These infidelic and pernicious apostates with the introduction of their false doctrines and often innovated and progressives teachings would slowly and continuously gnaw away like a deadly cancer from the inside at its God given and precious soul saving truths which were the apostle’s doctrines. And by the middle of the second century, very little of its first century teaching was recognizable. And by compounding error on top of error, adding creeds and traditions or changing doctrine for hundreds of centuries, the results today is a corporate style worship system God never intended or approved.

In I Peter 5:2, he exhorted elders to “tend the flock which is among you exercising the oversight, not of constraint, but willingly, according to the will of God…”obviously they did neither. They neither exercised proper oversight nor according to his will. In my opinion the sad and often ineffectual condition of the Lord’s people today can be laid directly at their feet! I don’t believe the damage to the Lord’s body can be estimated that has been done through a corrupt, power hungry, unqualified or ignorant group of men unscripturally designated “The elder-ship.” Is it no wonder Satan has chosen these deceived men to work through in order to destroy it!

I think all would be in agreement that a congregation, regardless of its size, must have knowledgeable and faithful leaders. Although not necessarily from today’s elders as they believe only they can provide such leadership. Personally, I have never witnessed such in over fifty four years in the Lord’s body! And I don’t believe one exist! And much to my chagrin, every elder-ship I have been associated with usually created more problems than they solved and was fraught with multiple weaknesses. As a matter of fact, I have never met the elder that could direct my life (spiritually or otherwise) better than I could! This again, demonstrates just how inadequate they were then as now.

This is an issue that has not been confronted to my knowledge in any meaningful way. Therefore, I write this, not to be mean spirited or from some personal vendetta or to unnecessarily disparage those calling themselves elders, but to be a voice for what many in the congregations of our Lord secretly believe but are fearful of speaking out publically against because of reprisals they know will surely follow (based on past history). As many members know, the threat to be “withdrawn from” is one of the elders’ most powerful weapons often use to keep its members in line! And anyone who associates with someone that has been withdrawn from or is not favored by them could suffer the same fate. So they rule by fear and intimidation. Although from those I have witnessed being withdrawn from, their lives’ were either not adversely affected or actually improved!

While preparing this exposé I found it interesting how wide spread this ill feeling is toward elders going back over fifty plus years. This includes not only the membership in general but quite a number of professional and non-professional ministers (men that do not rely on the Lord’s people to support them financially) and bible teachers being fearful less they be permanently banned from ever preaching or teaching again should they disagree with them. Over the years, I kept running into the same basic problem of those disappointed with elders, either believing them to have no authority, not necessary or really qualified. At first I dismissed it as just isolated incidents probably from disgruntled members, I assumed. But gradually I discovered through personal experience, this was not confined to just one or two areas but in many states and congregations of all sizes from the east to west coasts.

The full extent of this dissatisfaction, I don’t believe, is completely known and may never be; as too many are still fearful of speaking out against such an all-powerful and vindictive organization they know has many problems. So feeling helpless and powerless they continue to act hypocritical or are forced to turn a blind eye, submit and suffer in silence. Some surveys show an alarming rate of members leaving the Lord’s body or turning to other denominations and we believe elders play a major role in it. I was surprised at the number of web sites devoted to helping ex-Church of Christ members regain their faith! Whether elders are aware of this or how the members may feel I have no way of knowing. The general consensus among elders is, they were probably not “good Christians” anyway, so good riddance!

And I could cite numerous examples of those who opposed them (myself included) and suffered their wrath and vengeances; others I personally witnessed! Several members and a few ministers have expressed deep concerns to me in (very, very) private and confidential conversations about this and other issues, many of which I will address here. However, in order to correct any situation that needs so, one must first realize and admit there is a problem. This, evidently, the majority has not done or is not willing to do. Most of the reasons will become abundantly clear as you continue to read. I am aware there will be those reading this, will do so from a preconceived and traditional point of view. And react with visceral hatred. Whenever elders are mentioned, it is done so with the understanding of what their leadership consists of today, not godly leaders in the first century ecclesia before corruption set in. Whether you hold liberal, conservative, traditional or other denominational views, much of what is said will be in light of that understanding. Whatever views you hold now, we ask only that you give us the courtesy of reading all of the articles with an open mind and give it serious consideration before coming to any conclusion.

Human nature being what it is I realize many will vehemently disagree with our views and choose to remain in total and slavish submission to elders. We truly understand it is much easier to follow party-lines and not break lock-step. Adopting the “go along to get along” philosophy or don’t make waves and just conform is always safer and you will be loved and accepted by them. If you are a professional minister, your employment will certainly be more secure! But just as many will also completely agree, and hopefully, have the courage to demand our Lord’s body begin to function as it was intended to.

Here are some traditional beliefs and issues surrounding elders that will be addressed; not necessarily in order: 1) Believing a congregation must have elders in order to be scriptural. 2) Many appointed out of desperation. 3) A belief they are needed in order for the church to grow spiritually or numerically. 4) Not apt to teach nor having a deeper understanding of the scriptures. 5) Not understanding the real needs of the congregation. 6) Not considering the feelings and opinions of the members. 7) Showing favoritism (mainly to family members or those that closely support them). 8) Not leading by example. 9) Lack of mature or sound judgment. 10) Losing sight of why they were appointed. 11) Power hungry, obstinate (haughty, or becoming so). 12) Binding on the congregation or demanding things God never bound or commanded. 13) The, “I’m in charge, do as I say” syndrome. 14) Actually believing their decisions are not to be questioned or challenged. 15) Believing their appointment to the so-called elder-ship is a lifetime position. 16) That no one may remove them but other elders. 17) That they alone have the authority to appoint others to this elder-ship. 18) Any efforts by any individual or group to teach the gospel not sanctioned by or under the leadership of elders are not scriptural. 19) Some elders believe all religious websites are unauthorized and evil; even if sponsored by a CoC congregation and sanctioned by its elders. 20) Believing only they have the right to hire/fire ministers, or appoint song leaders or class room teachers. And we could expand this list greatly

J.D.Williams~

PROBLEMS WITH ELDERS, NOT A NEW ISSUE

Problems with elders are not a new issue by any means. Early men, often called “pioneers of the restoration” in America, saw the danger and gave warnings as far back as mid 1800s, that elders should not control the church, but would, if given the opportunity. In my experience, perhaps as many as 90% of those of the Lord’s ecclesia today have no idea what the restoration movement was or its importance to Christians in America. Nevertheless, here are some excerpts from earlier writers, well known to the brotherhood.

Tolbert Fanning:

One of several well-known and highly respected writers during this period rejected the idea of a “ruling class” of men in the congregations of our Lord. He concluded, as did others, that elders are not officers of the church, who are invested with authority to rule over the people of God. And emphatically believed a distinction made between officers (ministers, elders, priests, bishops etc…) and the rest of the people would ultimately lead to a Roman style concept where the church would be composed of “clergy and laity.” And did that not happen?

After explaining the proper use of the word “elder” (presbuteros) as used in the New Testament, he wrote; “That older men or seniors had a special work to perform, we have not doubted, but whether the word ever signified an officer, or that any one was entitled to his eldership, by investiture, is the question. That any elder was necessarily an officer we have failed to discover. We think there is no proof.” The Religious Historian, 1872-74.

Two other pioneer Restorationists, David Lipscomb, and E. G. Sewell, also foresaw the rise of the elder-ship institution as a threat to our Lord’s ecclesia and constantly warned against it. Brother Lipscomb pointed out that: “an elder is not an officer who holds an office with authority and power like a sheriff or governor. He is not a decision-maker and he is not a ruler.” Instead of filling an office and exercising certain powers, Lipscomb pointed out; “he performs a work, the core of which is teaching. As a shepherd he feels the needs of each member and is a confidant and counselor. He leads by example and never by command. His role is to enable the congregation to make the decisions needed to make the body effective and to grow into maturity. By no means should the elders collectively supplant the church as the functioning body.” (Quote from Central truth ministries).

Here is another quote from early articles by Brother Lipscomb.

David Lipscomb on Church Authority

“Whenever a man or set of men...assume to exercise authority in a church by virtue of some official appointment, or to assert, they have rights and authority as officers above others and assume to exert their rights without the full consent and approval of the members, they should be resisted even to the disruption of the body. They are lording it over God's heritage, and are exalting their authority at the expense of the authority of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. One man, in the assertion and maintenance of the Divine will, has as much authority as another, more than a thousand ordained ones in disregard of that will. The only reason we have seen from Scripture for appointing certain individuals to special work was to see that neglected work was performed. The seven at Jerusalem were appointed to see that the Grecian widows, neglected in the daily ministration, were fed. Titus was sent to set in order the things "wanting" and to place Elders in their proper work. Whenever a man in the church of Christ claims authority or exercises power merely on official grounds, he is essentially a pope and claims the prerogatives of papacy as fully as does he of Rome. He may be a smaller one, his sphere of action may be more limited, but the principle is the same. All the evils of the papacy arise out of the claim of the Pope and his council to decide questions by virtue of official position.” --Gospel Advocate, 1877, Page 232.

Guy N. Woods wrote in his book, Questions & Answers open forum, published by Freed-Hardeman College, Henderson, Tn. “The eldership is in no sense an official position into which men are induced and which they hold for life or for a number of years.”

J.D.Williams~

MUST HAVE ELDERS FOR GROWTH

Another myth which has been hammered home in many sermons over the years is how the ecclesia (God’s called out) must have an elder-ship in order to grow or that a congregation is not scriptural without them. I fail to see how having an elder-ship would help in this area. Wouldn’t a congregation have to have grown (spiritually) to the point they would have produced qualified men before appointing them elders? And would that not demonstrate there was no need for them, and the congregation had done, and was doing its duty to God without them?

And besides all congregations existed without elders in the beginning! I know of a large congregation that didn’t understand this. They were planning to divide and begin a new work in a different area but wouldn’t before finding and appointing “qualified elders” to put in place first! Apparently it never occurred to them to simply allow whoever wanted to be part of a new congregation to do so and let them grow and appoint their own elders!

Elders insist they have total control over their own; that it is not scriptural to interfere with another congregation’s autonomy; yet, in reality, that was what was being done, because elders at one congregation were appointing elders for another congregation! They did eventually establish another congregation, and yes they carried their pre-appointed elders with them. And to my knowledge the original congregation continues to aid and influence them even today!

However, the fact remains an elder-ship was not appointed first and then a congregation formed! So how is it that a so-called “unscriptural church” can produce scriptural elders?? Therefore, for a congregation to exist without an elder-ship is not unscriptural as elders and those that side with them have led many to believe. I think the position is ludicrous. Truly, the legs of the lame are unequal!

It has been my experience quite often; smaller congregations are desperate to appoint elders believing it gives them an air of legitimacy in the eyes of those with elders. In past years I have noticed many, usually larger congregations, will not, or are at least, hesitant to fellowship those without elders. And it seems elders are often appointed for this reason alone; which has led to many not having qualified elders.

I recall at one congregation where I was worshipping, which had no elders; elders from a larger neighboring congregation paid us a visit. They said if you don’t appoint elders, we will have to denounce you as being unscriptural. The congregation was very small with mostly women; there was no way any male could possibly meet such qualifications. But the visiting elders had a solution to our “lack of elders” problem they said: we will loan you one of ours, “and he will drop in on you from time to time to straighten out any problems you might have and give any oversight needed!” The minister objected to that arrangement and almost immediately was branded as a trouble maker and not willing to cooperate with elders offering them a solution to their “lack of leadership problem!” Several members became alarmed and agreed to the “elder loan.” Some didn’t. Needless to say this threw a peaceful congregation into turmoil and divided it. I had to move due to employment requirements and never learned all the details of how it turned out. Until about eight or nine years later, I did hear from a former member this once peaceful and happy congregation no longer existed. And if memory serves, what was left of that small congregation merged with the larger one; and the belief by most was that was their intent all alone! This particular group was formed 50 to 70 years earlier and was doing as well as any small rural congregation could. Where these elders believed they got their authorization to act in such a manner, I have never been able to discern from the scriptures! I can’t help but think unauthorized interference from elders from another congregation was the major cause of its demise.

This error in thinking comes directly from elders and has been fortified by the membership being ignorant as to what constitutes a so-called elder-ship; and in general, not willing to accept those without them. And others, fearful of having elders angry with them, will not consider visiting or worshiping with them. And without realizing it, have made having an elder-ship a test of fellowship, although an elder-ship is never mentioned in the scriptures! I heard an old gospel preacher say once, “Many of the issues that face the Lord’s church today are over things never mentioned in the scriptures!”

There are some who believe a congregation without elders is “not fully developed” yet; and must appoint them in order to be mature. However, it appears from letters written by the apostles to the Saints, those “fully developed or mature” congregations had as many problems as did the rest! Sometimes we lose sight of what is important and what is not. There are things far more urgent for the growth and development of a congregation than appointing elders. Emphases must be placed on teaching God’s word, practicing our worship correctly, caring for one another. If a congregation is doing well and there are no problems, elders as it is understood today are not needed.

J.D.Williams~

ARE CONGREGATIONS WITHOUT ELDERS

Considers this: In what area is a congregation restricted that has no elder-ship? The gospel is preached, the scriptures are taught, benevolence to needy saints is provided (as opportunity and finances are available), Spiritual as well as numerical growth seen, the physical and spiritual needs and comfort for the congregation is provided and its general business is seen to. In other words, those without elders do exactly the same work as those with them. And our work is just as authorized and acceptable to God as those with elders. Of course it is often countered: “they may be doing the same work, but they are not authorized to do so.” But our position is: “What teaching in the new testament prohibits individual Christians from coming together and forming a (new) congregation and doing the work our Lord gave his saints to do without elders?”

In reality, appointing elders will not provide any more spirituality than what already exists. Remember the old saying, “There is no point to making house rules for children when there are no children!”

Also it has been my experience; when a congregation without elders is doing a good work, people say, “The ___ congregation is doing such a good work.” But if they have elders, it is: “The elders at are doing such a great work!” And the members are not recognized as having any part in the work! Again, no New Testament writer ever praised elders for the work they were doing.

J.D.Williams~

ELDER’S MEETINGS, OPEN OR CLOSED?

Actually the saints are rarely consulted on any decision making done by the elder-ship that may affect the entire congregation. Their attitude is; you as a member have no voice, vote, authority or responsibility in running the congregation. We are the ones that will decide what times to meet, how many times, what order of worship will be followed, who will receive financial support, when and how much, and you will be taught what we have decided is the truth. I say that because I have never witnessed anyone allowed to teach or preach anything they disapproved of! Their meetings are treated as some mysterious relationship they alone have with God and no others are allowed to hear what goes on in these “holy meetings,” because, well, it would be way over your head anyway as the average member is believed to have little or no understanding of the things only they are privileged to know! Meetings are held in secret and members are allowed to know only what elders want them to know. A member once asked if they could attend one of their meetings, they were told (quite rudely) “This is elder’s business and does not concern you!” Leaving the impression members have no voice in the running of their own congregation, as they are the ones in charge; which is true in every situation I am personally aware of!

These secret meetings are an excellent way of hiding nefarious dealings from the membership too. Members at a large southern congregation had been told for some time all was well and were in good financial shape. But when members asked for the congregation’s finances to be reviewed, the elders refused and for good reasons, as it was later discovered. And it took a court order from a judge to make them comply! All of them were paying themselves hugh salaries with one drawing over $200,000 a year! Other financial dealings that come to light were several bad investments had not paid as well as expected and the congregation was deeply in debt! Yet, they tried arrogantly to argue before the judge they as elders had a divine right to do with the congregation’s money as they saw fit! The judge disagreed and evidently viewed them as nothing more than a corporate board of directors running a business and ordered them to comply. It never ceases to amaze me how any man could call himself an elder and claim to serve God and his people with such a heartless, mercenary and spiritually nihilistic attitude!

J.D.Williams~

THE RISE OF THE ELDER-SHIP

Have you ever wondered how or why elders rose to such dominance in the church? Or why no New Testament letters were written or addressed to elders? Why do we not find an example of elders disciplining anyone?

We have an example in I Cor 5 of disciplinary action against an individual, but the entire congregation was involved; not elders alone taking action and then informing the congregation what they had done; which is usually the case today!

No records exist showing where elders ever withdrew from any unruly person; or even a letter written to that effect! Not one letter from apostles or other New Testament writers has been found that was ever addressed to elders advising them as to what action should be taken and leaving it up to them alone to solve issues facing the assemblies at a particular time or place. Has no one ever asked why, or even notice this? Or perhaps I should ask, “Does anyone really care one way or the other?”

Could it be elders were not authorized to function in these areas any more than the members? The word elder (presbuteros) has been grossly distorted to mean much more than it originally did. Its basic meaning is simply, “an older person.” This computes to a person having more experience in life than a younger person. When applied to older men and women, those in a congregation, it would, at least, infer, have more experience in life, sounder judgment and more learning in the scriptures than younger ones. And that’s all that can be legitimately and scripturally concluded.

Why then would it be deemed necessary to confer on them a questionable title and appoint them to some official position in order for them to “lead the congregation?” It wouldn’t. And it was never the job of an elder to function in the capacity of total leadership as it is believed today. This thinking is derived from misinterpreting other verses where elders are mentioned. I think all would agree the older women certainly could be looked to as role models for younger women and children (and in some cases men), without being appointed to an “elder-ship”.

Please note also an official elder-shipis never mentioned or implied anywhere in the scriptures! Why? Could it be the apostles knew these older saints were to be limited in their roles in the congregation not required to or capable of making every decision in their congregation and had no more authority than any other male member? And whatever so-called authority they may have had lay only in the fact they were more knowledgeable than others in the congregation or in areas where their particular gift could be utilized? But how did that give them authority to rule over anyone! After all, their knowledge and gifts were given to guide or aid the Lord’s people until the congregations could function without miraculous power; not make any demands or set traditions for them! Many believe in the first century ecclesia, all elders may have had miraculous gifts. But is it reasonable to believe only elders had these gifts; therefore only they could lead while the rest of the congregation was to remain silent and submit to whatever they thought best?

Reading Eph 4:10-13, it appears others were involved in the “leadership” of a congregation; and never relied on elders alone. Paul said The Lord’s congregations were given apostles, prophets, evangelists; pastors and teachers; why were these given? “For the perfecting of the saints… building up the body of Christ…gaining knowledge of Christ…unity…” Wouldn’t this give each of them equal and God given authority to act in the congregation? I would imagine if today’s elder-shiphad been in charge of the first century saints, before working a miracle, they would have insisted these men must first, have their approval, work through them and be completely under their control and direction!!

We also wonder how could they direct or supervise a person with a miraculous gift equal to or greater than their own. Did one have to seek permission from elders before working a miracle, teaching, speaking in a foreign language or prophesying? Did any apostle ever seek the approval of an elder before writing to a congregation? And neither do we find any scripture that would authorize one so-called elder telling another what he must do. I mention this because (in my experience) invariably one elder in the group will always assume leadership! At one congregation where I served as minister, one of the elders often referred to himself as the, “Head Elder!”

J.D.Williams~

THE EVILS OF INDIVIDUAL MINISTERIES

The far reaching and ill perceived power of authority and control by elders often extends beyond their congregation. This is inadvertently at least, done so by condemning any effort of any individuals or groups to reach others with God’s word that does not work through theirs or any local congregation. It is their God-given, and divine right they believe to oversee, approve or in some way sanction any work done of a religious nature by members of their congregation. But do not hesitate to condemn other congregations that approve it. And often will not fellowship them, believing them to be acting without God’s authority. God’s authority of course is elder-speak for “their authority!” This often includes church websites as well as individual efforts (such as this site). However, I have been unable to find any verse which states in any way that I as a child of God must ask permission from elders or anyone to preach the gospel.

J.D.Williams~

HOW DID ELDERS ACQUIRE SUCH POWERS

The tragedy is; no one seems to realize this attitude comes from the Catholic denomination! And should you find that difficult to accept, study the early development and structure of catholic leadership. Their own records show how one elder was singled out and treated special and given power over his congregation in the beginning no one was authorized to give and he didn’t deserve.

And eventually given the title of bishop over other congregations later becoming bishop over several in his district. Along with this position came other titles such as: father, archbishop, cardinal, etc… as well as many special titles of reverence not found in the scriptures; “Your grace, reverend, most reverend, monsignor, his immense…”

Eventually this led to him being placed over the entire denomination. With total power concentrated in the office of the pope! Another statement you may find difficult to believe is: the elders claim as much power over their congregations as the pope over the Catholic denomination!

J.D.Williams~

THE ELDER-SHIP, SIMILAR TO ROMAN DENOMINATION

This “do as I say” syndrome is the results of the power grab early Christianity went through by unscrupulous leaders (toward the end of the first century and at the beginning of the second) which led to division that yielded such offices as men being given official titles of elder, priest, father, bishop, cardinal, and pope. Although it would not be fully developed until centuries later when the Catholic denomination come into full power and has dominated (or tried to) all religions ever since.

This mind-set has perpetuated itself for centuries, and has led to the binding of many things on the membership that God never did. Why should we continue to entrust the Lord’s congregations to a body of men that led it straight into apostasy?

Today, the Lord’s people through its elders have a similar version. Although not as corrupt (yet) as the Roman denomination; the principle is basically the same. One example that comes to mind is: the elder-ship at one congregation ordered that all attend what they called “fellowship dinners” and if you didn’t, you would be considered a member, “not in good standing!” What verse gives them such authority?

Elders at another congregation announced they believed baptism was not essential to one’s salvation and to insist on it was to “limit” God’s ability to save (And I am hearing of this thinking with more frequency). They also claimed he could save anyone at any time he chose; but couldn’t be sure when God did save someone! As you might imagine, some members left but sadly a majority stayed. Which proves just how deeply ingrained is this blind loyalty and spiritually unhealthy attitude member’s hold when it comes to unquestionably following elders!

Often this obsession to control everything spills over into what I would call trivial, if not ridiculous matters. It was announced from the pulpit at one congregation that no one was to touch or adjust the temperature controls, as the “elders” have set them and believes that to be the best temperature for the congregation. He could have simply said, “the controls have been set, pleased don’t adjust them on your own.” But using the term, “The Elders” well, that made it an official act of the elders, which meant if you do, you have violated their decrees and you might be subject to their wrath! I vaguely recall at another congregation, someone complained the water fountain was not cool enough. Rather than having someone who knew how to adjust the temperature do so (by simply removing the front cover and moving the temperature dial to run cooler) and that being the end of it; they were told it first must be brought to the attention of the elders and at their next meeting they would make the decision as to whether or when it should be done, who would do it and just how low it was to be set! One Sunday one of the ladies mentioned the tissue was getting low in the ladies room; they were told, “You need to let one of the elders know this!” This is how today’s elder-ship is often view in many congregations. Their main function is limited to asinine decisions, mostly in trivial matters anyone with half a brain could make! They serve as nothing more than a corporate, policymaking board of directors. The lines between liberal and conservative congregations have become blurred on the elder’s function because an alarming number of conservative congregations have also adopted this corporate method of leadership. This attitude that nothing may be undertaken without first consulting elders, no matter how trivial, is not only unscriptural but ludicrous, and the business men’s arrangement is sometimes just as bad, because they often adopted the elders’ attitudes!

In sharp contrast to this, one congregation where I served as minister that had no elders, when an issue of any kind arose that concerned the entire membership; we simply called them all together and discussed it, came to a joint decision that best served all or at least the majority. I have often said, those of us meeting in private homes do not have to contend with this nonsense, and can concentrate of teaching and living a life of daily worship more in line with first century practices.

J.D.Williams~

THE NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY OF ELDERS

This type of personality may be found in any organization; but seems to be in abundance in the hierarchical organizational body of mainstream churches of Christ. And it seems it is almost a prerequisite if one is to be a “good elder.” While it may be difficult to place any particular characteristics in a descending order from most important to least; I would say their belief they are very important or perhaps more important than all others, might be first. They either rarely see others point of view or tend to ignore it if it does not meet their critical and narrow way of thinking. After all, they are the appointed (anointed) ones why wouldn’t their views be the only ones considered important as they are the elders?

They are of course authoritarian (not authoritative) in their approach; insist on enforcing the rules more so than the principles these rules teach. Never admit they are wrong, and never apologize; becomes upset and often hostile when challenged on anything related to their overseeing of THEIR flock.

They do their best work with people (members) with dependent personalities! Because these personalities usually have no opinions of their own and readily adopt others. Actually I have found the majority of members are afraid to worship without elders! I see this in adults that have been “raised up in the church” as the saying goes (or any denomination). To me, it’s like a form of brain-washing! They become so dependent on someone else to tell them what to believe they are fearful of any deviation taught by their particular denomination’s creeds that have been drilled into their minds for years. And will tolerate just about anything elders (or bishops) order be done. And perhaps the saddest of all is they truly believe God is happy with all of this monotonous, pre-arranged ceremonial rhetoric and see nothing wrong with this arrangement while happily obeying like mindless zombies. The old adage comes to mind here: “Ignorance is bliss!” So they continue to stroke their egos, are very obedient and submissive. On the other side of the coin, we see many that attend mainly from a sense of guilt and could really care less about the politics of the congregation. Just get in, get out and go on with your life! Either way, what elder would not want a group like that? While discussing some points of doctrine with an elder once, he told me of all of the Churches of Christ in the area (there were about six, all larger than his); his was the only one teaching the truth! And how lucky “these people” were to have membership here and be under his rule!

The only way to deal with this kind of elder (if you have the stomach for it) is to flatter them every chance you get, tell them how loyal you are to them and how great they are and what a fantastic job they are doing for the Lord! If you are a male, you will go far in the corporate style worship system now in place. I know because I have seen this too many times! Or you could just avoid any confrontation with them; find another congregation which has no elders or where this kind of elder does not exist…good luck with that!! Better yet, begin worshipping in your home as they did in the first century. Those of us that meet to memorialize our Lord’s death each week, have no such problems!

J.D.Williams~

ELDERS BELIEVE CONTROL IS SCRIPTURAL AND NECESSARY!

Elders as well as the membership believe this is necessary in order to “oversee” their congregation; while at the same time claiming they are not “lording it over” their charges.

We would ask, “Can they exercise control, without being controlling? How can they have authority or rule without ruling or being authoritarian? Generally speaking, the definition of authoritarian is: “anyone belonging to a system or group where strict obedience to the ruling person or group is strongly enforced.” If that doesn’t accurately describe elders (or all denominations), I wouldn’t know what would? Some synonyms are: totalitarian, dictatorial, controlling or demanding. I have never yet met an elder that didn’t fall into at least one or more of these categories. God’s people have far more freedom and liberties than elders would have you believe. I am reminded of a story I heard many years ago about a dog that was kept fenced in all of its life. One day the owner removed the fence, but the dog would not venture beyond the boundaries of where the fence was (perhaps a variation of “Pavlov’s dog”). Or perhaps more accurately, the “Stockholm syndrome” (a condition experienced by some people who have been held as hostages for an extended time in which they begin to identify with and feel sympathetic toward their captors). I strongly suspect the membership would react much the same way even if they come to fully realize they were completely free of elder rule! Traditions can have a powerful and controlling influence even on higher intelligent beings.

But the only way one may know the extent of our freedom in Christ is to study his word for yourself and not rely on traditions or what elders say must be done; because it will always favor their particular view! Paul in Gal 5th chapter warned them about falling back under the yoke of the old law said in vs 1; “For freedom did Christ set you free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage.” Jesus said in Matt 8:32, “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” But anytime one deviates from scripture it is a form of bondage. It is a sad commentary on the state of our Lord’s congregations that elders claim a position of superiority to its members and insist they have a right to rule, which they do not scripturally possess, nor was given them!

The freedom Paul and Jesus were talking about was freedom from sin and man-made yokes of bondage placed on his people through ignorance or a misguided sense of authoritarian rule unscripturally imposed on God’s people by elders.

J.D.Williams~

ELDER WORSHIP?

Has the Lord’s ecclesia (those called out) placed the elder-ship on a pedestal?

By that I mean have members elevated them far above all other members as well as what God intended? I think so. Have you ever noticed how zealously the elder-ship is defended? You may say all manner of disparages about brethren, the minister, song leader or classroom teacher, but if you even slightly suggest anything that is considered the least negative about an elder, you will be attacked with the fury of a swarm of angry hornets defending their nest!

These men are revered to the point of shameless “elder worship.” I’m surprised they don’t expect us to “genuflect” before them! Their decisions are often considered infallible. I cannot recall the number of times over the last five decades I have heard it said, “The elders have ruled thus and so, so it must be right and we have no choice, we must obey!

Whether we want to admit it or not, some men (and women) want and love positions of power and leadership, although in some cases they may not be aware of it! This is not a new problem. Human nature has not changed, and it never will. Even Jesus’ disciples were subject to this (see Matt 20:21-24). This leads us to ask;

“ARE ELDERS SPECIAL?”

Consider carefully: if a person is told they are special and treated as such, invariably they will come to believe they are. When a man (or men) is appointed an elder, he is placed in a special position. Effectively, the elder-ship as it exists today constitutes an unauthorized “special class” of saints in the Lord’s body. And his appointment (as well as deacons in most cases) is treated like a coronation with much pompous ceremony.

This means, the congregation’s view of him is now different. And the brotherhood in general looks on him in a different light. James in the second chapter of his letter warned God’s people not to make a distinction (show partiality) among members (2:4). I realize he was referring to the poor being treated differently than the rich. But the principle is still the same. When a distinction is made it is a sin, regardless of the reason. I can acknowledge a person whose abilities, and knowledge may be greater than mine without making a distinction or showing partiality to him over others. If the official installation of elders is not making a distinction among God’s people, I don’t know what is!

But elders also make distinctions among members because they cannot help viewing them differently either! Under those conditions, the very nature of the elder-ship causes division among its members. How did this happen? Notice the difference a day makes! Yesterday, he was just one of the brethren equal to them in the congregation. Today, after being officially appointed an elder, the members have given him power and authority over them in all things spiritual. Power he didn’t have before! And he accepts the appointment with the mistaken attitude he is supposed to rule, be a strict leader, a whip-cracker, if necessary. Sadly, he often views himself as an enforcer, a watchmen that must watch for any dangerous thinking that does not conform to his (their) standards; and to see to it that mainstream church of Christ traditions are unquestionable followed.

Elders are sometimes called “overseers” (episkopos) acts 20:28…a verse that has been grossly misinterpreted in the New Testament; because they act as though they have been placed “over the church” and no longer consider themselves regular members in the body of Christ! And as such believe it to mean they have the right to pry or spy on any member suspected of not following the rule of the elder-ship. Or to pry into the members personal lives. A Mormon told me once how their bishops would order sanitation workers to secretly go through a members trash if they were suspected of some wrong doing; or have local police (both who were members) to follow or watch them to see who they associated with, why, where they went and how long they stayed. Today’s elders are not far behind that.

A member of the Lord’s body told me once when he told one of the elders he was going on vacation with some friends; they demanded to know where and with whom. When he told them, they forbid it as they did not approve of the area and did not know the people he was associating with (the brother went anyway). We find no authority for such maniacal and irrational behavior. But another verse (Heb 13:17, to rule over you) which has been grossly misinterpreted, thinks this gives them the right or authority to do as they please. (See article on “Hebrews 13:17” under misunderstood scriptures).

Even sadder; the members appoint him with the same expectation! As they believe elders have a special relationship with God others don’t!

J.D.Williams~

ELDERS ARE NEVER WRONG!

My experience has been if your conclusions disagree with an elder’s then it is automatically assumed you are the one in the wrong! You are the one in error, and will be condemned as unsound, unfaithful and if continued in, may face some sort of disciplinary action by them. In all of my fifty-five years in the Lord’s body, I have never heard an elder admit he was wrong about anything or apologize. In this respect, I see little difference between them and the Pharisees; as Jesus openly disagreed with them many times and even challenged them to prove him wrong. We all know what happened to him! I was discussing a point of doctrine with an elder once and before I could finish fully stating my view, he rudely interrupted and angrily told me in no uncertain terms, I was wrong and he seriously doubted my soundness! And he would not discuss it any further. And I thought how could he be so certain I was wrong when I was not allowed to finish explaining what I believed and why? I also noticed his attitude toward me was never quite the same after that! Which confirmed what I have observed many times in the past. I have never known anyone that openly disagreed with an elder to remain in good standing. And usually remain in the congregation! That situation will simply not be tolerated by them. And you can be assured great efforts to discredit or silence anyone that disagrees with them on anything will be put forth!

As a matter of fact my articles for the Sunday bulletin were no longer used and he deleted all of my articles posted on the congregation’s website, as well as removing all of my audio sermons. When I asked him what happened to my material, I was told he wanted to remove old sermons and articles to make room for newer ones. When I naively told him I would be glad to write newer ones he said, “Well, we need to wait and see!” See what, I don’t know! I saw no valid reason for him to remove my lessons.

Evidently he found nothing wrong with them before our disagreement, as they had been posted for several years. But now felt I was wrong on everything because I had disagreed with him on something else entirely! What I found interesting was all of the older material on the site by others before I posted mine was left intact. By the way, these were posts by family members and close friends!! The man openly lied to me. We wonder just how childish and petty some people can be! But this has become a conditioned reflex with me!

A fellow minister told me on several occasions he was asked by elders to leave different congregations as they didn’t want him influencing the members; although they could give no scriptural reason for doing so, other than it was not their tradition to teach such things! But the brother is as sound doctrinally as anyone I’ve met in the Lord’s body! Now as we’ve said earlier, before a man becomes an elder his opinions, yesterday, could be disagreed with, argued against; challenged or even rejected. But today, he is an elder therefore his decisions and authority are now absolute and final. There are no other men or man that may be appealed to if their decisions are not agreed with. Usually the only options one has in that situation, is to remain silent or leave; because should you attempt to bring it to an open discussion; you will be viewed as a trouble maker trying to divide the church or some other charge equally ridicules. I witnessed this in one congregation and know of others where the elders were accused openly of being corrupt by the minister (he had definite proof), but the outcome was, he was fired, and to my knowledge was never allowed to preach anywhere in the U.S. The last time I corresponded with him, he was teaching in a small village somewhere in West Africa. This attitude is comparable to the Great Sanhedrin under Jewish law; their decisions were final with no appeal. Or to put it in more modern terms, elders are like the supreme court, whatever they deicide is law… is law! Tell me that kind of power will not affect anyone’s mind! It did then, it does today, it will in the future! And that’s what makes appointing elders so spiritually dangerous for the Lord’s called out!

And this attitude is allowed to continue because members believe elders are the best men the “church” can produce. They are considered the “cream of the crop.” No one is above them. When a man reaches this level he is considered the supreme leader(s) in the congregation as well as the brotherhood; he can rise no higher (up the corporate ladder) he is considered the ultimate Christian, and afforded the highest honors. As one church website put it: “There is no earthly authority superior to the elders of the local church.”

Nothing negative may be said of him. Of all the sermons I have heard and most I have read over the years concerning the elder-ship, with few exception, have I heard anything but the highest praise for them (publicly). I strongly suspect professional ministers are very cautious not to offend in any way because they owe their present and continued employment to them; which means their total allegiance. And on two or three occasions I have personally known elders to hunt down former ministers from state to state, making phone calls to congregations, sending out letters of warning or running background checks etc… in order to keep him from preaching or being employed by another congregation! One was a fellow minister and his only crime was exposing them for the miscreants they were!

Their decisions are never to be questioned. And to do so is to blaspheme their good name and office(?). Therefore, their attitude is: to disobey them is to disobey God! Most members (elders included) believe elders are God’s representative on earth (a belief the pope at Rome also holds). There is no question they believe God has turned over all authority, control, leadership and decision making to them; and they are to exercise this authority until Jesus comes again, at which time they will return control of his kingdom back to him… Hopefully!

And the membership by accepting these conditions, has given him (or them) far more power than God did. We often wonder who has the greatest sin of ignorance; the elders that rule with this attitude or the membership that allows them to rule? And it will continue to be this way until saints wake up and realize what has happened to our Lord’s body! Because no dictator (or elder-ship) may rule without consent of their lackeys.

J.D.Williams~

HOW ELDERS VIEW ATTENDANCE

Should a person miss a service or several, they are often looked upon as unfaithful. Should they fail to attend Wednesday or Sunday evening services, again they are castigated. Because they are being held to elder’s standards, not God’s! God never commanded attendance on Wednesday or Sunday evening. Yet, if you fail to do so, you are viewed as rebelling against the elders and subject to action by them (see my article, “Sunday attendance, once or twice” under Misunderstood Scripture). I have also observed a high percentage of members attend these times only because elders say they must; while quietly disagreeing with them, yet do so believing they have the authority to decide when members will meet. Elders too, believe they have the authority to do whatever they feel necessary to keep the flock faithful… However any authority they may have must be within the bounds of what God set, not them. A small fact that is regularity ignored.

J.D.Williams~

IF ELDERS ARE NOT SPECIAL, WHY QUALIFICATIONS?

The Holy Spirit never commanded anything that was not necessary. Therefore there is a reason why he directed Paul to give different qualifications for these particular men. I Tim 3:1-7.But that doesn’t make them “special” above all others with similar attributes as the brotherhood seems to believe! Being married and having children are two unusual qualifications, granted. However, there seems to be only three areas of any contention: A) marriage (once only, or remarry), B) children (how many) and C) apt to teach (his ability to teach). We will address those; the other qualities, I believe, should be characteristic of all Christians!

Marriage:

Like other verses in our scriptures, several interpretations have been placed on this one. Some believe the marriage spoken of here means the bishop should consider THE “CHURCH” his bride or wife, and does not refer to a civil marriage and the children are the members! That belief is so asinine I won’t comment further!

If one studies the history of that period, they will find polygamy was still a common practice. Which was not all that unusual or unexpected as most converts came from pagan backgrounds. This practice (though tolerated, like divorce) was not God’s original plan for mankind. (See Gen 2:21-25). The biggest problem for most seems to be; “…the husband of one wife.” That has for centuries, been interpreted to mean, “Married only once.” Traditionally, there has always been a stigma attached to divorce and remarriage, regardless of the reason. And when applied to elders (and often ministers), can only mean married once, period. But, as with other verses, more has been read into this stipulation than is really there. The verse (as it should be read and understood), does not prohibit a second marriage. Neither does it prohibit a divorced/remarried man from serving as an elder. All of these traditionally taught CoC prohibitions are man’s idea which originated with the Catholic denomination and do not allow other options. Should an elder’s wife die it is taught he must resign as an elder. And may never re-marry and still be an elder. Why? Because, it is believed, he must have had only one wife! But that’s not what the verse really says. Why is it so unreasonable to assume at the death of his wife if he marries a second time this would violate the scriptures? Well, it wouldn’t really. Because he still would have only ONE wife, the other being dead can no longer be considered his (present) wife! There are no verses that teach he cannot remarry as many times as he wishes. The natural and logical prohibition within the context is, only one wife at a time, and says nothing about multiple marriages! The same principle would hold true for one that was divorced and re-marries; he would still have only one wife! And no, we are not playing with semantics or looking for loop-holes, we just look at what the verse actually teaches! But God’s people (especially Church of Christ’ers) have become so paranoid about MDR they see gremlins where there are none! Tragically, they have fallen victims to another catholic teaching and do not realize it! See my article on divorce and re-marriage under MDR.

MUST BE APT TO TEACH

This is, perhaps the most important qualifications. As one might presume, there were no “preaching schools,” online bible courses or “church” funded and operated colleges at that time. Our scriptures (New Testament) were still in the process of being written, and would not be available in “book form” for several centuries. Can you think of a better way for the saints to learn than from older men who possessed vast knowledge and wisdom of God’s word and were able to teach it to others? I have sat through many classes taught by elders; and it became apparent to me very quickly they were not qualified or competent to teach! An example of what I’m talking about is: a verse is read. The elder/teacher asks someone in the class what they think it means. They respond saying something like, “I think it means pretty much what is says.” Another person is asks what they think. Usually they will agree with what the other person said. Then the elder/teacher continues by reading another verse! Sometimes elders will appoint others just as incompetent as themselves to teach. I recall once one of these teachers covering the entire book of third John in one 30 minute class! When I was asked to replace him, which I did and started the book over. It took me eight months to complete it. There was an old saying I heard often while growing up I think very applicable here, “Before you teach a mule anything, you gotta’ know more than the mule!”

The phrase, “apt to teach” is understood my most to mean: he should be willing or competent to teach. But doesn’t if he doesn’t want to! We believe this to be the traditional view because I have seen very few elders that actually taught (or preached). One large congregation I am aware of with several elders usually sits in on classes they say; in order to make sure what they believe is being taught (especially the lady teachers for some reason). But mostly they concerned themselves with the unnecessary affairs of the congregation that any reasonably intelligent person could do, with no problem! My understanding of “apt to teach” means he must always be engaged in teaching as that was his main function in the congregation. Secondary, when asked, was to advise the congregation in spiritual matters only, as it became necessary! If a man is not doing the work of an elder, then he is not an elder, regardless of how he or the members view him! Personally I am of the opinion all members of the Lord’s body should be able to teach in some capacity, but not necessarily in a classroom setting, but certainly be able to teach others how to become a Christian! Actually, don’t we all teach with our manner of life?

< b>CHILDREN

A popular belief among many members is an elder must have at least two children. This is claimed because it says, “Children,” usually meaning more than one. But there is a provision in the Greek language called, “plural of case.” That means a word, though used in the plural, may also be used in the singular. Another belief I’ve heard is: a man that has adopted a child (or children) is not qualified because they are not his biological children! Another fallacy often heard is: “he must have believing children!” And it is assumed they must be members of the Lord’s body, regardless of age. Common sense would dictate a man has no control over his children after they become adults and leave his household. Evidently this is not the meaning. While it could be argued if a man cannot instill proper Christian principles in a child during its formative years, it would cast serious doubt on his ability to teach or be a role model. That being said, I have known several godly men (and women) whose children were perfect examples of how children should be raised, that later turned out bad; some leaving the Lord’s ecclesia or joining cults or denominations diametrically opposed to God’s teaching. Again I think a little common sense is called for!

J.D.Williams~

ELDERS, SERVANTS OF GOD?

“…Whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister. …And whosoever would be first among you shall be your servant.” Matt 20:26-27. Elders insist they function as ministers and servants of God. But my experiences for over a half century as one of God’s ecclesia suggests to me today’s elders have no concept of the word as used in our scriptures. The apostle Paul uses a word in I Cor 4:1 I’ve found not only interesting but very revealing when he wrote; “Let a man so account of us as ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.” The Greek word for minister used there is “hupertes” and literally means “an under-rower”. These unfortunate men were often prisoners of the state or those captured in battle assigned to the lowest part of the ship as galley slaves usually chained to their oars and made to row unmercifully sometimes to the point of death. They were considered utterly contemptible and the lowest form of human life aboard ship. Although Paul and the other apostles were chosen by God to bring the message of salvation to all men and possessed with the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit, look at their attitude! They never considered themselves superior to others, never abused that power or position, certainly never lorded it over God’s people and considered themselves as one serving in abject slavery. What elder ever served with that attitude? Right the opposite, they believe themselves to be superior to members and expect to be obeyed and honored!

Jesus uses two different words to describe those that would be great and first among brethren, neither of which suggests or indicates “an official title or position.” And certainly not one with the attitude he rules or feels he must be obeyed. The first is diakonos: It can be said those who serve in this way have dedicated their lives to the service of others; and do so freely out of love for their brethren. The other is doulos, a bondservant. This kind of servant was often indentured, either by some legal obligation or voluntarily; but still under obligation to serve. Jesus uses it here in the sense that one who would be first among brethren would feel a sense of duty to them as well as God. Jesus of course would be the best demonstration of what a real servant of God is and how they should serve others!

With that in mind, we would ask those calling themselves elders: “do you feel you are serving God:” When no elder-ship is ever mentioned anywhere in our scriptures… when you think God has turned over complete control of his body to you… When you hold meetings behind closed doors, and refuse to allow any member to attend… make decision in secret and simply announce to the congregation what you have decided…set policies (doctrine) you feel must (will) be obeyed without question…that no one in your particular congregation or anywhere in the Lord’s body is above you… when you act as authoritarians and dictators… that the Lord’s ecclesia cannot grow spiritually or numerically without you… binding things on God’s people he never did…that nothing may be done in the congregation without your approval…there are other questions, but these should suffice.

J.D.Williams~

WHAT WAS A FIRST CENTURY ELDER?

What did he actually do in the congregation? First we need to define the word elder; Presbuteros. Its basic meaning is “an older person.” It did not then nor does it now carry the idea of an official title or position within the Lord’s congregations. As pointed out elsewhere, this was a “get rich” scheme invented in the early Roman denomination and continued today by other power hungry and misguided leaders. First century leadership consisted of being nothing more than a role model. One who by study (or with the aid of the Holy Spirit) had come to knowledge superior to others in his congregation. He possessed sounder judgment, and greater wisdom. His life was exemplary in all areas. Should there be a question concerning doctrine, it was his vast knowledge of God’s word (will), sound judgment and wisdom that was appealed to for guidance. After giving his views, it would allow the congregation to make the correct decision as to what should be done. They were never forced to follow it; that was up to them.

The elder(s) never demanded strict obedience or over-ruled others in the congregation or force his views on them. All he could scripturally do was give guidance and sound council to them. An elder serves (not rules) by his knowledge and example. That was how he led (or guided) the congregation! And that is the role God intended for him. How simple is that? In reality, in first century congregations, any older man, wiser and more knowledgeable in the scriptures could function as an elder to younger less mature Christians. His function was not to be a ruler or an authoritarian and certainly not complicated as it is today with him concerning himself with every aspect of the member’s lives in the congregation. He was just another member of the Lord’s body that could be called on as needed to aid others in becoming better Christians. He did this not only with the sound advice he gave but with his personal life also. I would suggest, if a man feels he can only lead by having some “official title” or that others are compelled to obey him (usually out of fear or some sort of reprisal), instead of commanding (not demanding) the respect and influence needed by his Knowledge and godly personal life, then he does not have the proper attitude God would have him to lead. And he doesn’t need to be serving in that capacity. There is no reason the elder could not continue to do so today. But in order to return to first century practices; all of this unscriptural and artificial authority must be relinquished. He, as well as the members needs to understand he is just a member of the congregation, nothing more. His standing before God is the same as all other sinners. He is not in a special class within the Lord’s ecclesia as many apparently believe. Do I think this will ever happen? NO! But at least all who read this article have been informed; what you do with the information is up to you!

J.D.Williams~

A CHALLENGE TO ELDERS

I would issue a challenge to those calling themselves elders reading this article: Which do you love more, the Lord’s body or the awesome title of elder? Would you be willing to give up that questionable title of “elder,” relinquish that false sense of self-importance, assumed authority, turn over the running of the congregation to others just as competent as you and stay out of their business unless called on to teach, preach, counsel or sweep the floors if necessary? And simply concentrate only on leading and advising others in spiritual matters based solely on your knowledge, wisdom and godly life as our Lord authorized and just function as a member of your congregation? Do you believe you could lead the congregation without being an elder? Jesus led his disciples by knowledge an example. Can you not do the same? If not, why not? As I’ve said previously, I seriously doubt that will ever happen, because elders don’t believe the Lord’s body can properly function and would simply fall apart without them in complete control of everything! And none I have ever met would do so, or be willing to give up the great honor, prestige, power and sometimes lucrative salaries that come with the so-called position

J.D.Williams~

RELATED MATERIAL

Here is more material you might find interesting. This seems to be from an older publication. I am not sure of the volume or date, but have given what information that was available to me”.

It should be evident that there is a bottleneck somewhere. Every bottleneck that I have ever seen was right at the top of the bottle. That is the way it is with the church. The greatest bottleneck hindering growth in the churches of Christ is in the eldership. The error of an authoritarian leadership style in the eldership is the greatest single problem that must be overcome to get the churches of Christ growing once again the way we can and should be growing. In this chapter, we will describe the authoritarian leadership style, demonstrate that this leadership style is contrary to the Scriptures, and discuss the factors which have contributed to the development of this style of leadership.

. . .

In most congregations, the work of shepherding the flock has been turned over almost entirely to the preacher. Jas. 5:14 says, "Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church:' those elders were to pray for the sick (Jas. 5:15). They were to counsel those who had sinned (Jas. 5:15-16). The command to "confess your sins one to another and pray one for another" (Jas. 5:16) is generally applied to public confession, but it was written in connection with the counseling, teaching, and praying done by the elders of the church. Today, however, most congregations would re-write Jas. 5:14 so that it would read, "Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the preacher." And the work of counseling, teaching, and praying with those who have sinned is also assigned almost totally to preachers in the church today.

In the New Testament, there were three titles for this office: elder, overseer, and shepherd. But in the churches of Christ today only one of these titles is used to any great extent. Perhaps 99 percent of the time we call these men "elders." We do not call them "overseers" or "shepherds" And about 99 percent of the time when we pray for these men we say, "Lord, bless our elders and help them make wise decisions." About all that most congregations see in this office any more is the decision-making function. That is also about all that many elders see in this office. Many elderships function only as a decision-making, policy-making "board of directors" for the congregation. They do not function as administrators because they do not delegate enough decision-making authority to give them anything to administer. They do not function as spiritual counselors and teachers because they have given that job to the preacher. But the limitation of the eldership to a decision-making role is only one of the characteristics of congregations where the eldership practices an authoritarian style of leadership. Another important characteristic has to do with the way that these elderships lord it over the church in their decision-making.

The English word "lord" comes from an Anglo-Saxon word that literally means "one who guards the bread" (no pun intended). A lord was a person who had the authority to rule and that authority came by right of birth or by appointment of a king. The authority of a lord to rule was totally independent of the consent of the people over whom he rules. In the original Greek text of the New Testament the word for lord is kurios and that word had a similar meaning. It referred to one having power or authority. Jesus assumed this title for Himself (Mat. 7:21-22; 9:38; 22:41; Mk. 5:19). The authority of Jesus to rule is totally independent of the consent of any human being. The authority of Jesus as Lord is based on who He is and what He is In Lk. 6:46, Jesus asked the people why they called Him "Lord" and yet refused to obey His commandments. A lord has the authority to command and his authority is totally independent of the consent of the people over whom he rules.

Elderships which practice an authoritarian style of leadership function as though they had the authority of lords. They make their decisions in total isolation from the congregation. They do not let the members of the congregation know what things are being considered. They do not ask for any input from the members in the decision-making process. They do not create channels of communication to keep the members informed about things being considered. They do not create channels of communication so that the views of the members can be heard before the eldership reaches its decision. And once the decision has been made, these elderships simply announce the decisions as orders which the members are expected to obey without question. These elderships place great stress on the authority of their office and on the chain of command in the congregation's organizational structure. They do not involve the members of the congregation at the input stage of the decision-making process, and yet they expect total submission, obedience, and cooperation once the decision has been made.

Such elderships function as a self-perpetuating board of directors for the congregation. The members of the congregation do not have the right to determine that additional elders or deacons are needed. The members of the congregation do not have the right to nominate men to serve as elders or deacons. These elderships decide when men will be added to the eldership or the deaconate. These elderships decide who will be nominated. Typically the congregation is given only the opportunity to present Scriptural objections in the event that someone nominated by the eldership is not scripturally qualified. And if objections are raised, it is the eldership that decides whether or not to sustain the objection. The eldership assumes that they were appointed for life and they never go back to the congregation to see if they still have the consent of the congregation to serve as elders. Many congregations today have a very high turn-over rate. In many congregations, at least 90 percent of the members were not members of that congregation just ten years ago. And yet in many of these congregations there are elders who were selected at least ten years ago. That means that at least 90 percent of the present members of the congregation had no voice in the selection of the men who now serve as that congregation's elders. But these elders see no need for going back to the congregation from time to time to see if they still have the consent of the congregation to serve as elders. They assume that the authority of their office comes by a direct delegation of authority from God and they accept the doctrine that "once an elder always an elder" (at least as long as an elder remains in a given congregation). Editor's Note: The above quotes are from a book by Flavil R, Yeakley, Jr., entitled: Church Leadership and Organization. It was published in 1980.NOTE: This article is written mainly for those worshipping in congregations where elders have total control. Those of us who meet in our homes to memorialize our Lord’s death never have such problems.

J.D.Williams~