Read Titus 1:5-7; Acts 20:28-31; 1Peter 5:1-3; Ephesians 4:11; Acts 6:1-4; 1Timothy 3:1-11
In studying Church History in preparation for this series, revealed that denominations use the same passages of scripture yet apply church governance in a variety of ways. The structure and hierarchy is drastically different across the board. Mount Ararat is a Baptist church which is a congregational governance with a single elder model. Congregational polity is description that marks being Baptist. We defer to the passages that say take decisions to the church. The danger is going too far to either side. Congregational polity was never meant to be democracy or a dictatorship. It was meant to provide voice and participation in a Christocracy model where Jesus is the Senior Pastor. Southern Baptist dropped the title Elder before the turn of the 1900’s. In some settings Elders and Deacons were morphed together to create one office. This is dangerous since the qualifications and tasks differ. An Elder, teaches, and a deacon serves. However, most churches the Senior Pastor is the lone Elder. Their is danger with this reality in that the word is always used in a plural form.
What are we missing by not having a plural group of men to lead the church? Is it placing unrealistic expectation and weight upon one man? Is more negligent to an unqualified man into a role of teacher without that gift?
These are good questions to ask if we considered moving to an Elder model at Mount Ararat.
- What decisions would a congregation make?
- What decisions would pastor/pastors make?
- What decisions would Elders make?
Could we maintain congregational polity in this form of governance? Would representation goverance allow more interaction with staff and decisions made? Could this shrink the gap between staff and lay leadership?
what?
All good questions. The churches pictured in the New Testament had multiple elders, any one of which might have spoken to the body. Decisions were made by those same men who served as elders. They, as a group, were better positioned to hold one another accountable and to make decisions through the wisdom of shared counsel and a shared sense of how God was leading the body.
To determine the polity and governance for this church, it would be useful to refer to its foundational documents, such as the articles of incorporation and bylaws. Could you provide the link to them here? In preparation for answering the three “what would” questions above, maybe we should consider the “how do” answers to those questions as we’re currently structured. Is there a link on the MABC website that addresses the current processes and systems?
Thanks,
G
Gordon,
This sermon is timely in the sense we have been working on our church consitution for the past several years. We are within months of unveiling a new living document in addressing these issues of church polity. I wanted to start with theology and move to practice.
We currently are a congregational church = Senior Pastor led – committee and congregational approved.
A working document of the new constitution is coming.
Thanks for the explanation. I’ll look for the constitution. Will it be posted here or somewhere else? Will the incorporation discussed under “Administration” occur after the constitution is done?
G