Church Government Acts 6
The subject of Church Government is one that is very rarely dealt
with in our pulpits today. There are a number of reasons for that.
The first is that it is not a subject which is very practical.
The form of church government does not usually make very much
difference to the way that Christians live. Therefore it can be
seen as a theoretical kind of a subject without much practical
value. Certainly we can say that people can be saved and be Episcopalians
and they can be saved and be congregationalists just as much as
they can be saved and be Presbyterians. We could also say that
people can be good godly people and be adherents to any of the
three main kinds of church government. Church government is not
something that is going to make a difference to whether people
are saved or not and it will only make a slight difference as
to whether they are godly or not. It is for that reason that the
subject of Church government is rarely dealt with.
The second reason why the subject of church government is rarely
dealt with is because it is no longer a matter that is much disputed
over. There have been times in the history of the Church when
the different forms of Church government became matters of dispute
and in which Episcopaleanism, in particular tried to force itself
upon people. Those times were times in which this subject was
much debated but in this day when the form of Church Government
is not on the priorities of any government it has become to be
a matter of personal choice or of birth. People live under a form
of Church government in most cases because they have been born
into that Church and people with little interest in doctrine today
are just content with that. they never question the form of church
government they live under. I don't think I have ever a bunch
of ordinary Christians debate over the kind of church government
their church has. It is a matter of indifference to most. In fact
if a Christian for some reason falls out with his church he is
very likely to go to another church which has a completely different
form of government and it will not cause him the slightest thought.
But would we be right to look at Church government like that?
We have said it will not make a difference to whether we are saved
or not but would we be right just to count it as of no importance
whatsoever? I don't think we would. And if I join a church I am
giving my influence as to the truth of the system it operates
and if the Bible indicates the way the Church should be governed
I don't think I am at any more liberty to be indifferent to that
as I would be at liberty to be indifferent to any other part of
what the bible says.
So what does the Bible say about this? Well, we would not deny
that it has been a matter of dispute among the people of God and
when you boil it all down there are advocates for three main systems
of government. The first is Episcopaleanism- that is rule by bishops.
This system has a hierarchy of deacons, priests, bishops and Archbishops
and would be the kind of government you would have in the Church
of Ireland. Secondly you have Independent government. This is
where each congregation has no external jurisdiction whatsoever
but is ruled in itself. In other words every church does what
it likes under God. Now you actually find very few places that
are wholly of this model. Most Churches that operate like this
have veered towards Presbyterianism in that they have some overall
body where they consult together. However Baptist Churches and
Congregational Churches and Brethren Assemblies and many little
halls or chapels here and there operate like this . Then the third
model is Presbyterianism which is the form of government dispensed
by elders met in Session or Presbytery or synod. Now you will
see if you were to take a moment to think about it that each of
these systems of government are very different and in fact opposed
to one another in their basic principles. The question we have
to face is which one is right? Now we want to examine this to
see what the Scriptures say. but I also want to deal with this
as a kind of introduction to our consideration of the qualifications,
duties and responsibilities of elders and deacons. You are not
going to be clear in your minds about what I am talking about
if I don't set the background and lay the first principles. So
what we are going to do today is to try and discern what the Bible
does say about this matter of Church government. You are not going
to hear this dealt with too often so let us see if we can get
this fixed in our hearts as to what the Bible says.
I The Principles of Church Government
First of all I want us to look at the principles of church
government that we have in the Scriptures. Now we have said that
there is dispute even among godly people as to which is right
and part of the reason for that is that the Bible does not spell
out in absolutely crystal clear terms what is the right system
of government. The apostles were writing to people who were members
of the apostolic Church and knew what kind of government it had
and so they did not have to spell it out. However they sometimes
do give facts about what sort of government there should be and
there are hints that help us to build up a picture. There are
things that I think we can see indisputably from the Scriptures.
The first is that there were a number of offices in the Apostolic
Church . The thing was not just left to run any old way and we
can see what they are. There were Apostles such as Peter and John
and Paul who became an apostle. There were Evangelists such as
Philip and Titus. Then there were Bishops and then there were
deacons.
What was an apostle? Well you will notice that if you turn to
Acts 1 and look at the account of where a new Apostle was chosen
to take the place of Judas that the new person was chosen of
these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord
Jesus want in and out among us And that he was said to be
ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. And
so the Apostles were to be those who had seen the Lord Jesus and
had been witnesses of His resurrection and when Paul became an
apostle it was necessary that the risen Christ appear to him on
the road to Damascus so that he could fulfil that qualification
. The apostles held a special office for the formation of the
New Testament Church and they were given special powers of working
miracles and of conferring the Holy Ghost by the laying on of
hands. And Evangelists in the New Testament sense were like assistants
or delegates of the Apostles. So these were temporary offices
that do not exist now. That leaves us with the two offices of
bishop and deacon
Now let us establish that these two offices are scriptural. In
2 Timothy 4 :22 Timothy is described as ordained the first
bishop of the church of the Ephesians 1 Timothy 3:1 says This
is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop,
he desireth a good work. So the office of a bishop was
one that Timothy had and one that others can aspire to. Then the
office of a deacon is mentioned in Acts 6. The early Church had
a problem about looking after widows so we read that the Apostles
said It is not reason that we should leave the word of God,
and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you
seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom,
whom we may appoint over this business. When these were chosen
then they were to be deacons. So there were these two offices.
You say but what about the office of an elder? Well I want you
to see from the Scriptures that the office of a bishop and the
office of an elder are the same thing. The Scripture never mentions
the office of a bishop and an elder as being two separate things.
You never get a verse that says "to the bishops elders and
deacons of a church" as if they were different things. When
James called on the sick to call on the elders of the Church he
didn't mention bishops. But that would be strange if a bishop
was a person ruling over a number of elders. The fact that they
are never mentioned as being two separate things in Scripture
helps us see them as the same. But just because the two are never
mentioned as being distinct does not just prove the point that
they are the same thing. But there is a passage that does prove
it to my mind. Look at Titus 1:5 to 7 For this cause left I
thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that
are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed
thee:
¶ If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having
faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a bishop
must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self-willed, not
soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy
lucre; Now you see that the passage there speaks of ordaining
elders and when it goes on to speak of what kind of a person an
elder should be it says For a bishop must be blameless,
So they are the same. He is describing the same thing but he uses
the term Elder and the term bishop to describe the one thing!
Not only that but when the Scripture speaks of the qualifications
of an elder and of a bishop they are the same. So the office
of an elder and a bishop are the same. We wouldn't want to rely
on the evidence of a man like Edward Gibbon the writer of the
Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire. Nevertheless it was his opinion
that prior to the Council of Nicea that the offices of Elder and
Bishop were counted as the same thing in the Church.
Then there is something else we can learn from the Scriptures
and that is that there were a number of elders in each church.
In the Episcopalian system there is a bishop over a number of
churches but it is evident in the Scriptures that there were a
number of bishops or elders over one Church. turn to Acts 14:23.
There we read And when they had ordained them elders in every
church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the
Lord, on whom they believed. So there were a number of bishops
or elders in every church. T urn again to Acts 20. Here Paul had
come to the town of Miletus which was a seaport 36 miles south
of Ephesus. Then in Acts 20:17 we read And from Miletus he
sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church. So the
church at Ephesus had more than one elder or bishop. Furthermore
when Paul wrote to the Church at Philippi what did he say as he
addressed it? In Philippians 1:1 it says Paul and Timotheus,
the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus
which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:. So there
were a number of bishops or elders and there were a number of
deacons. Episcopalians lay great store on their bishop. People
are confirmed by the hand of the bishop but the Scripture says
there is not just one bishop over many churches but a number of
bishops over each congregation and I think that is unarguable
from the Scriptures.
Then there is another principle that I want you to see and that
is in the case of some disputes the Church had a kind of general
council where the problem was discussed. If you were to read Acts
15 you would find that there was a dispute between Paul and Barnabas
about circumcision. At that time they were in Antioch but the
dispute could not be settled by the Church in Antioch and it was
referred to an assembly of Apostles and elders met at Jerusalem.
This assembly deliberated on the problem and came to a decision
and all the churches then yielded submission to the decision.
And no matter what you argue you would have to agree that there
was some kind court to which this problem was referred. So every
church did not just organise its own affairs, They were submissive
to this assembly and that apostles and elders who were met together
were those who deliberated on the problem. Now that would certainly
suggest that Churches were not independent of one another. There
was a presbytery or assembly to which they submitted.
And then can I give you another principle just before we move
on and that is the point that the Church did not submit itself
to any secular ruler. Caesar or Herod had no say in the Church.
Paul often reminds the readers of his epistles that he is not
an apostle by the will of man. He was not appointed there by the
state. Now you might wonder why I make that point? Well that is
a very important principle. The Church of Christ does not yield
authority to the State. I was showing the Young People some pictures
of christians in Russia during communist times who went to prison
rather than allow the state to control their church. That shows
you how important that was to them. I wonder would principles
like that be important to you? In 1843 a large portion of the
Church of Scotland left to form the Free Church of Scotland over
that principle and ministers and their families were put out of
their Manses. It shows how important people saw these things.
But we see some of the principles of Church Government from the
Bible and I think that if you have understood them that you will
see that Presbyterianism is the system of government that is closest
to them.
II The Practice of Church Government
But let us come now from the Principles of Church Government to
the practice of Church Government. Can we deal with what these
office bearers do. We have come to the conclusion that there are
two offices that are now in existence. There is the office of
an elder and of a deacon . But what are they. What does an elder
do and what does a deacon do? Well we want to see if we can get
a Scriptural answer to that question
Let's deal with the elder first. What does he do? Well we can
get some idea of that from the two terms that are used in the
Scripture for an elder. Maybe you have wondered why if the office
of a bishop and the office of an elder are the same why are there
two names for the one thing. There are two names which describe
different aspects of the office. The word elder describes the
character of the man that occupies the office and the word bishop
describes the duties he is to undertake. The name bishop for example
simply means "overseer" In other words he is to be a
kind of spiritual foreman or inspector. You see it is possible
to "hold the truth in unrighteousness", as the Bible
puts it. It is very possible for us to stray away from the path
of righteousness and so there must be those in the Church who
try to make sure that the flock don't stray and who administer
discipline when they do. You need to have men who have a care
for the spiritual well-being of the community and the congregation.
They are "overseers" In Acts 20:28 Paul exhorts the
Ephesian Elders and says, Take heed therefore unto yourselves,
and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made
you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased
with his own blood. The word feed there is word that can be
translated "shepherd" They are shepherds of the flock.
Peter also told the elders that they were shepherds. In 1 Peter
5:2-3 Peter used the same word when he said Feed the flock
of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof,
not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of
a ready mind. Neither as being lords over God's
heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. So an elder is a shepherd.
He will try to keep the members from going astray so he will instruct
them and warn them of the wrong path. He will also go after the
members of the flock when they go astray and that implies reproof
and corection and discipline if it is needed. He will also protect
the flock from the wolves of false doctrine. And he will try to
heal them and have a care for them when they are wounded and that
implies pastoral concern. So an elder is not just a position,
an elder will be a visitor of the flock and will at least help
the minister who is his fellow elder in the work of looking after
the congregation. But this is a position of some spiritual responsibility
and it is a position of care and compassion. so not everybody
is suited to being an elder. You might be a good and otherwise
very upright person but you might have a harsh streak in you.
You might always be looking to crack a nut with a hammer. You
wouldn't make a good elder. An elder is a shepherd.
But then I want you to think of the deacon. we have already mentioned
how the choosing of the first deacons is mentioned in Acts 6.
If you read that you will see that they were appointed to assist
the elders in looking after the day to day affairs. Acts 6 gives
the idea that the deacons, or what we would call the Committee
was to take the burden of the elders and the apostles in the mundane
things and that they would give themselves to the word of god
and prayer and the deacons or Committee men would be concerned
with the running of the day to day things. So a deacon will be
a more practical person. Now we see that Stephen was one of the
first deacons and he was involved in doing spiritual business
in being full of faith and of great power and doing wonders. Being
a deacon did not exclude them from being involved in the spiritual
side of the work but they did not have spiritual oversight. Their
job as deacons was to organise and provide financially for the
things that needed finances and if they were doing their job right
they would take that burden off the apostles. certainly today
in our churches deacons take charge of the running of the financial
and material affairs of the Church. It should be the desire of
every Committee man to do what he can to allow the minister time
to spend in the studying the Word and prayer.
Now we could say a lot more about the duties of elders and deacons
but that gives us a brief outline of the Practice of Church Government.
III The Picking of Church Government
But just in closing could I say a word about the Picking of Church
Government. How were the office bearers in the apostolic Church
chosen? Well keeping to the passage where the deacons were chosen
we notice how it was done. Look at Acts 6:5 And the saying
pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full
of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and
Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch:
So you see that the whole multitude of the members of the
Church chose them. The apostles alone did not choose them, the
people did. Now you will notice that it was the Apostles and not
the people who laid hands on them but it was the people who chose
them. Again notice what happened in Acts 1 when they went to pick
a new apostle to replace Judas. Verse 23 says And they appointed
two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
Who are the "they"? Well if you look carefully at the
context you will see it is all the disciples met together in the
upper room. So once again it was not the Apostles but all the
people who did the choosing of the one to fill the place of Judas.
And so when we choose elders or deacons we put it to the people.
it is the communicant members of the Church who choose. But I
want you to notice that the choice was made by bringing the matter
to the Lord in Prayer. In Acts 12: 24 when they had to choose
a new apostle it says And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord,
which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of
these two thou hast chosen How important a matter it is
to choose those who will bear responsibility in the Lord's Work.
That matter is one that needs to be prayed over. Tell me have
you been seeking the face of the Lord about the matter? Have you
been asking the Lord to direct you to the right ones. When we
elect elders we will not only be choosing men who will have a
say in running the spiritual affairs of the Church here but of
the Church as a whole. We need to be much in prayer about the
matter To choose men like this is one of the most important things
we can do. In some churches it is just a position. It is just
a kind of an honour that is given to someone who is respected
in the community whether they are right for the job or not. it
shouldn't be any type of honorary position. It should be a working
position. We need those who have a desire to see the Work of God
go forward. We need people who want to see souls saved and believers
built up in the things of God. We want the work of the congregation
to go on in the incoming days and what I want is for partners
to shoulder the burden with me. Will you help me bear the burden.
I have been praying that God's will will be done in this election
and I hope you have been praying for the same thing too.