Consider a typical progressive Church of Christ, led by a plurality of elders with two or more ministers on staff. Everyone is qualified for his position. The elders are good elders. The ministers are good ministers.
Query: how should they relate? Or to put it another way, what advice would you give a young minister as to how to deal with his eldership?
We’re not dealing with a bunch of legalists. The elders understand the difference between a church and a business. With an imperfect but largely spiritually healthy eldership, how should the ministers act toward their shepherds? What mistakes should they avoid?
What’s the goal?
Well, before we get to any do’s and don’t’s, we need to consider what the overarching goal should be. If I’m the new youth minister,* what is my goal in terms of how I deal with the elders?
Well, some youth ministers don’t like authority. They have issues with their biological fathers or they just don’t see the benefit of the elders’ wisdom and experience. They see any participation by the elders in decision making as interference.
Other ministers — far fewer — are unwilling to take initiative. They just want to be told what to do. They’re so afraid of making a mistake, they struggle to make a decision.
Now, the fact is that the ministers often have some advantages over the elders in decision making. For example —
* They know their ministry better than the elders, as a rule, because they live with it 24/7. Of course, this also may mean they lack objectivity.
* They may have far more formal Bible education.
* They likely have been to more seminars where speakers use words like “missional” and “dechurched” a lot. They may even read blogs.
* They have more time to invest in studying and thinking through issues, whereas elders are parttime amateurs.
* Elders may only meet every-other week. And their consensus style of decision making may be painfully slow, whereas ministers have more time to invest in decision making and in consulting with one another.
But the elders have a few advantages of their own —
* Age. There’s no substitute for experience. I’ve tried it both ways. I know.
* Time in the word. There’s something about decades and decades spent in Bible study that can’t be replaced with even a D.Min.
* Time in prayer. Again, the ministers may well spend more time in prayer each week than the elders, but the elders have often been at it for decades longer — meaning God has had more time to answer those prayers.
* Knowledge of the church. The elders have usually been a member of the congregation for decades longer than the ministers. Now, sometimes this means the elders just know the older members better than the ministers. Sometimes it means the elders become advocates for their friends’ bad attitudes. But good elders will have a circle of friends and contacts much wider then their own age group.
Therefore, the optimal result is a blending of the talents and experiences of the elders and ministers. Both groups need to be humble enough to recognize that they need the other.
That doesn’t mean a 25-year old youth minister should be ordained an elder, but it does mean his relationship with the elders should be one of collaboration. They should work together toward understood goals.
__________________
* I’ll typically refer to the youth minister in this series, because in most churches, if there are two or more ministers, one is a youth minister. I’m not picking on youth ministers. It’s just a convenient way to speak. And I’m not picking on the youth ministers (past or present) at my own church. I’ve know A LOT of ministers of many kinds at many churches.
Wow! Interesting question…Not having been a minister I really don't qualify to give an answer but I have been in the business world quite some time and it's not that much different…
First thing is to find out the direction that the leadership wants to take the church…conservative, ultra conservative, progressive, etc….Then, how do THEY see my role…What are the expectations of the job? It's an interview process not unlike any other position…If the youth minister can agree on his role and the direction of the church he should jump in. If not, he should try to get in and change things…
Once established in the role, his relational interaction with the Elders should begin with respect. They have the maturity and by scriptural command respect is due them…butting heads doesn't get anybody anywhere. I would invite them to consider the upcoming sermon series well in advance if possible and maybe schedule a regular time each week to talk about various implications of the text and sermon. Generally, talking about things and agreeing in advance seem the wise things to do. Elders don't like surprises from the pulpit…
Then, there are the deacons…:)
Maybe I'm missing something in the question. The Elder's hired the Minister. Therefore, the minister
(1) does what they Elders tell him
(2) keeps the Elders informed
Again, maybe I'm missing something in the question.
The key, to me, in a hierarchical organization (which an elder-led church is), is reciprocity.
Just as Christ opened up the world of God to us, taking the initiative even though he was/is the supreme authority, the leaders of the church today must do the same. Open up not just their experience, their knowledge, etc. Not just give decrees and ordinances. Share their lives, their struggles, their failures. Spend time serving, being with those in their care. Be open with your personal finances, struggles with children, addictions, failures. Share hopes and dreams from a personal setting. Share failures you have experienced in life, both by your own doing and those caused by others.
Take the bold, creative, vulnerable step of sharing your entire life, your entire self. Do this as the first step, as a sacrificial offeingr to those in your care, holding to the hope promised in the Word that your hope is not in vain and that your pouring out will be renewed in the Spirit. This is the way of Christ, the way of the cross, the way that Jesus opens the very nature of God to us.
I am convinced that those who submit to your authority will be convicted, compelled, and called out by your offering, thereby opening their lives as a response – hence the reciprocity. In recognition of the offering of your true self, the church can now listen and respond accordingly – submitting, supporting, engaging – even when individuals think you are wrong.
By giving your heart freely, you enable those in your care to honor and protect that heart – even when others will spurn and reject it.
So the circle of reciprocity is complete when the congregation takes your offer of the self, accepts it, conforms their own path within the church to it, and then offers their own selves back to you as the authority in the church, knowing that you will likewise protect their offering as best you can by honoring the God-given responsibility of eldership over the people/church. The circle is bound by humility, by mutual submission, and by love, just as is Christ to us.
I'm missing scriptural authority for an elder-minister structure in church leadership. All I see are elders/bishops (also called shepherds and teachers) and deacons.
So, maybe, man-made tradions result in man-made dilemmas. I've had the privilege that for over 20 years I've only been in congregations without a full-time minster (or pastor); and I can only recommend to give this another consideration …
Alexander
I don't understand why a progressive church would have elders. The concept of a plurality of elders clearly comes from a CENI perspective. It is the first departure in the early church from biblical examples having gone to a single president over a congregation in the second century and on to bishops shortly thereafter.
Having seen in industry how poorly "manage by committee" usually works, this concept would be my first recommendation to be thrown out if I didn't respect and uphold the concept of approved biblical example.
From observation, it seems denominations experience better growth when the local church is led by a high quality CEO (senior pastor) than when the minister is a highly trained spokesperson for a committee of elders.
Don't get me wrong. I believe in elders. I know God has His reasons even if they don't make sense from a human perspective.
The advantage of Elders is that they function in the same way as fathers in a household. They don't come from the outside, but they are the leading older men of a "clan".
In OT times, the elders of a city were those who exercised oversight and st in the gates of the city. These men were closely connected to their tribves and clans, known and respected by the members of these.
Elders in the NT context are pretty much alike. They have to be men who showed their abilty to lead and take oversight by having presided and cared for their own families, who show a mature faith, a Christian character and have the abilty to teach. We speak of the house(hold) of God (1Ti 3:15 or Eph 2:19), which is the same word (oikos) that is used for family.
This means they are not to be compared to managers in a company, they function in a completely different way.
So far I have not yet seen any equivalent to the idea of hired ministers in the scriptures. I see prophets that come and go, apostles that stay for while and move on, while the church is permanently primarily under the care of her elders.
I really have a problem with this idea of ministry, where some gifted brothers are being sent to seminary at quite a young age, get their heads stuffed with a bunch of more or less useful knowledge and alongside with this quite often some very awkward academic ideas, that tend to be liberal or strongly influenced by historical criticism – depending on where you study. Then after they got their degree, they are being hired by a church they don't know based mainly on their degree. There are some denominations where you cannot teach or preach unless you have such an academic dregree.
I am writing this way because I am quite critical about what I see and hear from some universities (even of CoC background) and more often than not I wish these gifted brothers would just have stayed in their church and had received training by their local elders, had served in various areas in their congregation, had married (or stayed single) and developed a Christian character and life-experience to become elders at – let's say 45-50 years of age for as long as they have a clear mind and can fulfill this task. Once they are retired at 60 or 65 they even can be seen (and can serve) as full time elders.
This is at least the Biblical model. Men, that are old enough to be called "elders", men with white beards or grey hair, well versed in the Scriptures and its application in every situation of life. Diligent shepherds who seek the lost and strengthen the weak. Men who are not that much interested in theological novelties but stick to a simple and down-to-earth understanding of the scriptures; who are not quick to abandon traditions, unless they find out they are really opposed to God's will; but who stand for continuity.
If we give the youngsters the pulpit, the worship team and everything that is more likely to be seen and heard publicly, the church will be ruled by a spirit of change rather than stability.
They may be asked to give a semon every once in a while, in order to learn also this skill. But I would rather listen to the elders. They should have the main responsibilty for teaching and preaching and shepherding. But the way we treat Eldership when we have ministzers quite often reduces these men to managers, who decide on more "practical" matters such as the carpet for the worhip hall and finances for the building program – issues deacons should be called to deal with. But we hardly hear the elders preach, when we have ministers, don't we?
Alexander
Having been blessed with three Godly elders I have made it my mission to be their friend. We spend hours together talking, discussing, praying, counseling etc. Somehow we all attain the same vision and methodology. We never argue about authority or pride of place. In fact, we never argue at all. I have had my mind changed many times through our discussions, but I have never felt diminished or like I lost an argument. Their humility, compasison and love for the sheep is evident to all and as a minister with a decade of hard won experience and advanced and terminal ministry degrees I would follow them anywhere knowing Christ was going before them. Every one of them is the product of an extensive discipleship where they worked closely with other elders and evangelists and when the time comes to raise up another to stand beside them I will look for someone with a similar background from among those that are being discipled now.