A practical guide to our weekly Sunday gatherings.

Scripture Reading

We begin and end our time of worship with the reading of Scripture. The Bible is the very word of God and therefore is authoritative, sufficient, necessary, clear and without error. When we worship, we want God to speak, so we start and end with his words. In addition to the opening and close of Scripture, we typically read an entire chapter of Scripture before the pastoral prayer.

Hymns

The church has a rich history of praising God in song. We value that rich heritage and so sing hymns from the earliest centuries of the church to hymns written today. The primary instrument of praise is the congregation singing in unity to our God. Therefore we value hymns that are rich in truth and that allow us to unite our hearts and voices together. Our worship in song is typically accompanied by the piano and/or organ with a capella singing on the last stanza.

Prayer

We worship the one true God who can hear and answer prayer. Central to our time of worship is a pastoral prayer where one of the elders prays for the people and our mission to glorify God by making and maturing disciples of Jesus Christ.

Sermon

In every age, the proclamation of God’s word has been central to the worship of believers. A sermon takes the word of God, explains its meaning and gives appropriate application for us today. Through the sermon, we are instructed, and encouraged to see and love God for who he is.

The Lord’s Supper

The Lord’s Supper, sometimes called Communion or the Eucharist, was instituted by Jesus as a way for his disciples to: (1) remember his work on the cross that brought the new covenant into effect, (2) to enjoy present fellowship with him and one another, and (3) to look forward to his glorious return.

In an effort to love one another, we use non-alcoholic grape juice in individual cups and have gluten-free bread available.

If you have questions concerning who should participate in the Lord’s Supper, click here.

If you want to know why we practice the Supper weekly, click here.

The Fellowship Meal

An important part of the early church’s gathering was a time of fellowship together over a meal. Most Sundays after our time of worship we head downstairs for a meal. For more details about our weekly Fellowship Meal, click here.

Our church is led by a plurality of elders or pastors. A question sometimes raised is, “What about deacons?”

In the New Testament we have many references to elders, but just a few references are made to the role of deacon within the church. In fact, they are only mentioned by name in two places in the New Testament (1 Timothy 3 and Philippians 1:1, and arguably Romans 16:1). First Timothy 3 mentions the qualifications for deacons but nothing about what they actually do and Philippians 1:1 is simply a greeting to the elders and deacons in Philippi (dido with Romans 16:1).

Modern Conceptions of Deacons

Modern conceptions typically portray deacons as a board of church leaders functioning as a committee that meets regularly and handles most of the physically needs of the congregation (e.g., building and finances). In recent times, when churches have realized the need for a plurality of elders, they end up moving toward a form of government that now has two boards or committees that share power and rule the church. This is not the biblical model. There is no indication, not even a hint, that the New Testament church operated with a dual-board structure of elders and deacons. There is no indication in Scripture, nor history, that it was setup like the House and Senate in a democratic government. There is also no indication that the elder board primarily handles spiritual issues and the deacon board handles physical ones.

The biblical data establishes a plurality of elders (also called overseers or pastors) to rule the church (e.g., Acts 14:23; Acts 20:17; 1 Timothy 4:14; 5:17; and James 5:14). Deacons are godly men (who meet the qualifications of 1 Timothy 3:8-13) and are appointed by the elders to specific tasks so that the elders are free to focus on the ministry of prayer and the word.

Acts 6

While deacons are only mentioned a few times, their inception is seen in Acts 6. Here the apostles are functioning as elders. They are leading, feeding, and shepherding the early church in Jerusalem and a problem arises that demands their attention. Greek-speaking Jewish widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food (v. 1).

This problem, while brought to the elders for attention, wouldn’t be handled by them. They needed to remain devoted to prayer and preaching, not to serving food (v. 2). The situation was delegated by having the congregation identify seven godly men whom the elders would appoint to this task (v. 3). So they chose seven men and these men then serve as the pattern for New Testament deacons.

When we examine the qualifications for elders and for deacons in 1 Timothy 3 we notice that both elders and deacons must be godly men. The major difference between the qualifications is that elders must have the ability to teach whereas this requirement is not asked of a deacon. This makes perfect sense when we consider the roles of elders and deacons as expressed in Acts 6. The elders in Acts 6 devoted themselves to the ministry of prayer and the word (v. 4), and the deacons handled this task of making sure the Greek-speaking Jewish widows were not neglected.

Role of Deacons

What we can conclude from the qualifications of deacons in 1 Timothy 3 and from their role in Acts 6 is that deacons were godly men who were appointed by the congregation and elders to carry out a specific task. There is no data in the New Testament or what we know from the history of the early church to suggest that the deacons in the early church met together as a committee or board.

This biblical task-oriented model in today’s context would mean that we would have a deacon (or deacons) appointed to certain tasks (e.g., building maintenance, cleaning, finances, fellowship meals, sound equipment, etc) and there would be no need for a regular meeting of all the deacons. Why would the deacon handling sound need to have a monthly meeting with the deacon handling lawn care? And why would deacons need to wait for a monthly meeting to get approval for what they’ve already been assigned to do by the elders? What we see from Scripture is task-specific godly men who serve the needs of the church appointed by the elders so that the elders can devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the word.

Is this what comes to your mind when you think of deacons? It certainly is a ministry mind-shift for what many conceive when we ponder the role of a deacon. I believe that this task-oriented deacon model is so foreign to us because we’ve lost sight of biblical eldership. When a church is functioning biblically with a plurality of qualified, godly men serving as elders, the deacons come under their leadership and act as the recognized servants of the church. As needs are brought to the elders, they direct deacons to handle these needs so they can continue their labor of leading, feeding, guarding, and praying for the sheep.

Female Deacons?

The New Testament word for deacon is diakonos and this word is translated as “servant,” “deacon,” or “minister.” For example, the term is used to refer to the office of deacon in Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8, 12. It is used to refer to the civil authority as the “servant of God” (Rom 13:4). It is used of Christ where he is called the “servant to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness” (Rom 15:8). It is used to refer to Apollos and Paul as “servants through whom you believed” (1 Cor 3:5) and to Timothy as a servant (1 Tim 4:6). The same term is also translated “minister” (e.g., 2 Cor 3:6; Eph 3:7; 6:21; Col 1:7, 23, 25; 4:7).

Concerning female deacons we start our investigation in Romans 16:1 where Phoebe (who is called “our sister”) is referred to as a diakonos. Should this be translated “servant” or “deacon”? Did Phoebe serve in the office of deacon in the early church? In this verse, the translators of the NIV and NLT translate the word as “deacon” whereas the ESV, NASB, KJV, NKJV translate the word as “servant.” This verse is really no help to us since the context does not give us any more detail about Phoebe’s specific role (some suggest that she was the one who carried the letter to the Romans church). Either translation is an accurate rendering of diakonos.

In addition to Romans 16:1, some understand 1 Timothy 3:11 to be giving qualifications for women deacons. This verse says, “Women, likewise, must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things.” The original language can either be translated women or wives depending on the context. The ESV translates the verse this way, “Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things.” In this regard, it’s better to understand this verse, like the ESV translators, to be speaking about deacon’s wives since the verses both before and after verse 11 are speaking about male deacons (and in verse 12, faithful husbands!).

From these two verses you can see that the evidence for women appointed to the office of deacon is tentative at best. We simply do not have a clear example of women serving as deacons in the early church, however, there is no Scripture saying that they cannot.

What is clear from Scripture is that women are not to hold positions of authority or teaching over men in the congregation (see 1 Tim 2:14). Therefore, in churches where deacons teach or exercise authority, women would not be able to serve as deacons. However, when we consider that teaching and governing are functions given to elders, not deacons (see 1 Tim 3:2, 5; 5:17; Titus 1:9; Acts 20:17, 28), there is no reason why women serving as servants in the church could not be called a “deacon.” That is, if a deacon is a servant of the church that does not teach or exercise authority over the congregation, there is no reason why women could not serve in this role.

Elders are given the authority to rule and teach. This office is reserved for biblically qualified men. We also see that when deacons are functioning as deacons, and not elders, there is no biblical reason to exclude women from this role. Caution is necessary in this case however, since to most people “deacon” is a label that carries with it authority and a governing role. It would seem that in many ways, biblical eldership has undergone a period of misunderstanding, and so to for the office of deacon.

A Call to Service

Everyone in the church is called to service (Eph 4:12). In that sense, everyone is a deacon. However, some are entrusted with tasks that involve skills of organization, administration, and leadership. As a church body grows, more deacons are needed to carry the weight of the growing vine. Both men and women are necessary in roles of service so that the body can continue to grow, and go into the world as ambassadors for Christ.

One aspect to consider with regard to elders and the life of the church is to understand how elders should be selected. The second is to understand where authority rests: the eldership or the congregation. In other words, who rules who? It’s these two matters that this article addresses.

Selection of Elders

In Acts 14:23 it says, “And when [Paul and Barnabas] had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they had believed.” How did Paul and Barnabas appoint elders in the young churches in Galatia that they just planted?

Paul gave Titus the same instructions for the churches in Crete when he said, “This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you” (Titus 1:5).

At first glance these two passage would indicate that other church leaders, or elders, selected elders in these young churches without congregational involvement. However, as commentator Simon Kistemaker notes, “the term to appoint actually means to approve by a show of hands in a congregational meeting” (Acts, New Testament Commentary, 1990, p. 525). The Didache (an ancient Christian document dated to 80–150 ad) referred to bishops and deacons appointed by the congregation with a show of hands (15.1). The historic London Baptist Confession also included a congregational vote for these offices.

From this we see that congregations were involved in selecting their own leaders. This is certainly what we see in Acts 6. When the early church encountered an issue, rather than the apostles dealing with the issue directly, they appointed deacons. Acts 6:3 says, “Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty.” This text is clear in its example. The apostles asked the congregation to select seven godly men and then the apostles would appoint them to this duty. We see here that the leaders of the early church are appointing officers but this does not mean the congregation is not involved. This is the biblical pattern we seek to maintain.

Elder Led vs Elder Rule¹

The second issue we must investigate is with whom does authority rest? God has given elders to lead the church, to exercise oversight, to manage the household of God, to preach and teach sound doctrine, and to refute false teaching. Certainly, these elders’ functions carry with them authority. This is why in Hebrews 13:17 it says, “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account.” That is, elders are called to lead the church, exercising authority.

We also have text in which the congregation is invested by God with authority. Final disciplinary action to remove a member is given to the congregation of believers (Matt 18:15–17; 1 Cor 5:1–13). So is receiving a member in love (2 Cor 2:6–8). We’ve seen already how the congregation is involved in selecting its own leaders and servants. Not only these items but the church, as a whole, is called to advance the Great Commission (Matt 28:19–20), and is called to do the work of ministry (Eph 4:12). From these texts we can conclude that the congregation has the final responsibility with regard to the church. This is what we mean by congregationalism.

So how do the elders relate to the congregation? Mark Dever says, “The final responsibility of the congregation does not contradict or undermine the elders’ general leadership, but it provides an opportunity to confirm it when it is right and to constrain it when it is in error. This position is called elder led” (The Church: The Gospel Made Visible). Elder led means that while the final authority rests in the congregation, the congregation recognizes and submits to the elders.

Dever continues and says, “On matters that are important and clear, the elders and congregation should normally agree; and when they do not, the authority of the congregation is final. On matters that are less clear, the congregation should trust the elders and go along with them, trusting God’s providential work through them. Churches always benefit from clearly delineating and agreeing upon everyone’s responsibilities and obligations.”

Elders? Aren’t elders a Presbyterian thing? Don’t the Mormons have elders too? What do elders have to do with a Baptist church?
These questions are understandable. Especially since elders are a new thing for our church. What may surprise you is that elders aren’t just a modern church fad, but rather are an historical form of church governance, even for Baptists!

Historic Baptist Position

Arguably the most famous and influential confession of faith among Baptists is the London Baptist Confession of Faith (1689 LBC). Regarding the church, it says, “The officers appointed by Christ to be chosen and set apart by the church are bishops or elders and deacons.”

A few things are important to note here. First, two offices in the church are affirmed, elders (Greek: presbuteros) and deacons. Notice also that elders are regarded as synonymous with bishops (Greek: episkopos, which is also translated overseer). This is important since churches today in a move toward biblical eldership miss the mark and end up with three offices, i.e., pastor, elders, and deacons. Rather, this historic confession and the historic practice of Baptist churches has been to recognize the two offices outlines in Scripture: elders and deacons.

It must also be noted that elders and pastors are regarded in this historic confession as the same office. In the same section, the famous confession also says, “an obligation lies on the elders or pastors of the churches to be urgently preaching the Word by virtue of their office.” Here, it is quite clear that elders and pastors are synonymous, they are one and the same. We can then see that Baptists historically have recognized the two offices of the church being elders (also called pastors, bishops, or overseers) and deacons. This is not a new idea.
Second, what we also see from this historic confession is that our forefathers in the Baptist heritage recognized a plurality of elders. It speaks of appointing elders (plural) when it says:
“The way appointed by Christ for the calling of any person fitted and gifted by the Holy Spirit for the office of bishop or elder in a church, is that he is to be chosen by the common consent and vote of the church itself. Such a person should be solemnly set apart by fasting and prayer, with the laying on of hands of the eldership of the church (if there be any previously appointed elder or elders).”

By noting churches in history we see that a plurality of elders/pastors in Baptist churches was common. There was commonly an “eldership,” i.e., a plurality of elders/pastors that shared the responsibility of leading and exercising oversight over the church.

So what happened?

Why does the “normal” Baptist church function with a single pastor and with a board of deacons? Why does eldership, a plurality of elders/pastors leading the church seem so foreign to us if it’s an historical position?

In his book, Elders in the Life of the Church, Phil Newton offers two explanations. The first, the rise of individualism in our culture. This cultural trend led to a suspicion of authority in the church with many churches limiting the leadership to a single pastor so that more authority rested in the individuals in the congregation. This reaction is unfortunate since Baptists have maintained that elders lead under the final authority of the congregation. Authority and submission are not dirty words. God demonstrates this in the inner workings of the trinity and by giving church, civil, and family structures positions of authority and submission.

The second factor that Newton mentions that has led to a model of church governance where there is a single pastor is how churches have begun to resemble big businesses and adopting corporate structures of leadership. The pastor became more of a CEO with a board of directors leading different groups of volunteers that were determined to “grow the business.” This has led to a professionalism among church leaders, a growing trend of moral failure in pastors, short-lived pastorates where the pastor uses churches like stepping stones as he climbs the corporate ladder. [Note: The book shown here is NOT recommended!]

It is time that we, like our Baptist forbearers anchor our church structure and practice in the teachings of the Scriptures. Let us not conform our church to the popular designs or trends of our day, but apply the paths of Scripture, knowing that we stand in an historical tradition that has done likewise.

The primary focus for church leaders today must be to understand what God’s Word teaches, and then to order their churches accordingly. History merely serves to affirm the veracity of Scripture — Phil Newton