Who Controls Church Organization?
Apr 30th, 2007 by Nathan White
This is the second post on the Regulative Principle of worship. The first one can be found here, as it simply provides a definition/foundation for a continued discussion on this matter.
When examining modern-day churches that have the Regulative Principle spelled out in their church doctrine, there are usually two interesting distinctions that we will discuss today:
- The almost total absence of segregated worship services (separated by age group).
- The absence of any church title other than elder or deacon.
The absence of segregated worship services:
The Regulative Principle obviously has an effect on the whole of church organization. Not only is the specific manner of ‘worship’ defined by this principle, but the specific organization of the church is governed by this as well. It is generally considered a violation of the RP to split up worship into different age groups.
In an age where there a church almost certainly will not ‘grow’ without: ‘children’s church’, youth/college/singles groups, a nursery, etc., this consequence of following the RP is almost certainly as unpopular as the last area we examined (drama, concerts, etc.).
Thus, for consideration today: Is it biblical, unbiblical, or simply a matter of preference to split up church members into age groups or other genres? Besides the main worship service, should Sunday school be divided into different groups, even if the worship service includes everyone? Should we shun the practice of having a nursery for young children?
The absence of any church title other than elder or deacon:
Another aspect of the RP, an aspect which I personally see as transcending the RP alone, is the absence of ‘titles’ for people who do certain things within a church. Youth pastors, secretaries, treasurer, minister of missions, minister of outreach, etc., are common titles in the church today. But the RP stresses that we should be very careful and even avoid assigning titles to men other than elder or deacon. Essentially, we must avoid assigning undue recognition, or assigning undue authority to those who are not biblically qualified to be elders, or who are not holding the office of an elder. This does not mean that these tasks are not performed by certain people, but only that we avoid assigning titles to people who are not elders or deacons in the church.
Thus, for consideration today: Is it biblical, unbiblical, or simply a matter of preference to assign official titles to church ‘employees’ who do not meet the qualifications of an elder, or who are not practicing the office of eldership? Also, among our elders, should we be cautious in how we label our elders such as, ‘Pastor’, or ‘Senior Pastor’, etc.?
In conclusion, we would do well to consider the following before coming to our own opinion on these matters:
- Has God specifically instructed His church in these areas, or has He specifically outlined in His word that we are free to use personal preferences, pragmatic methodology (whatever proves to work best), or majority-rule? Brethren, I assure you that the truth is one of the two options here. He has either spoken and given us instruction or examples in these matters, or He has clearly outlined our freedom of choice in this area. I encourage you to search the scriptures and see which one of the two is the truth.
I personally agree –to some extent– with these two principles, but not in what would be considered a strict manner. I will provide more basis for these beliefs in the upcoming posts on this subject.
A couple questions:
1. Is there a place for official “servants” of a church, who fulfill certain church duties? I’m thinking of Rom. 16:1:
“I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church in Cenchrea. That you may welcome her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints, and help her in whatever she may need from you, for she has been a patron of many and of myself as well. ”
Or do you think she was a “deaconess,” as some people interpret it?
Nathan,
I think age segregation is clearly unbiblical. It actually stems from evolutionary thinking which was picked up by the public school system and later by the church. The Old Testament revealed the bringing of little ones, even those nursing before the congregation of the Lord in order to hear the Word of God (cf Deut. 29; 31). Also, though all the people were gathered together, the teaching seems to be particularly aimed at the fathers of the congregation, since they are to lead in their own homes. In Nehemiah we see that played out as the whole congregation was taught and then the fathers from the families came to the elders with questions for clarification so they could return and teach their families.
I won’t even go into the women’s bible study:)
Davide,
I don’t think that is a specific office. There were many who served in the church who were women, but by service I mean just that, not an official title of some sort. Tabitha was such a woman that loved widows and cared for them, but she was not an office holder in the church. Deacons are clearly men as described in 1 Tim. 3.
Also,
I think that many titles stem from the fact that the church accumulates wealth and then has to set up committees and all such other things to handle that, not to mention all sorts of programs which they feel must have different officers. I think those roles of such things should be handled by elders and deacons.
I’ll also throw in that church daycares are completely off the map of what the church should be doing. BTW, they are usually run by women:)
Tim,
You’ve made a lot of good points. Churches is being run with a capitalistic mindset. They are being run like corporations. When bigger buildings, bigger audiences, bigger orchestra, bigger choir, and a bigger youth group are the goal, then RPW simply doesn’t cut it. What they forget to realize is that biblical church growth is not found in its numbers but its holiness. God couldn’t care less about buildings, audiences, offices, etc.. The RPW is repudiated because it bring the kind of results they are looking for. But it does bring the results God is looking for:)
Nathan, I agree that some distinctions are clearly not biblical. Our Presbyterian brothers commonly divide the elders into two groups (”teaching” and “ruling”) for instance, which cannot at all be justified by the Word. An elder is an elder. The Westminster Confession (though I love it and it pains me to point this out) creates a priesthood, pragmatically, by inventing a new class, called a “minister of word and sacrament.” And they take that really seriously. No one can preach but them, or baptize, or even pronounce a benediction on the congregation.
Additionally, I’ve noticed in small churches that there is a person who normally has dictatorial power over the day-to-day administration. Not an elder or deacon, no. She’s the Secretary. And woe be unto the young, idealistic pastor fresh out of seminary who tries to dislodge her!! The only thing he might do that is more detremental to his own health than that, is to try and suggest changes to the church’s music, by confronting the ORGANIST. The churches of God have lost many brave but foolish men in such quixotic endeavors.
Would that be ………….emasculation, Gordan?
Indeed the church has become feminized.
OK, I don’t want to turn this into a ‘the church is now run by women’ post.
Godly women are vital to the health of a church, and they serve in many different ways. The word ‘deacon’ simply means servant’, and I believe it is used of Phoebe in Romans. But, Tim is right, the offical office of a deacon is for men only.
Secondly, I’m not sure I’m convinced of NOT ever separating for Sunday School before the main worship service. What would be the difference in this and in something else later in the week? Is this really a part of the RP? It has nothing to do with HOW we worship God, but more on organization, it appears. I just don’t know; still studying this one.
Gordan, I have had my run-ins with the organist, the children’s church head, the secretary (one secretary of the former mega-church I used to attend came on a blog one-time and ripped me to pieces), etc., so I’m not stupid enough to cross them anymore
Also, with the old people who have sat in the same seat for 50years….or when they have a pew with their name on it….trust me, stay away from them too. 
Well, Nathan, you bring up RPW and women in leadership is going to show up sooner or later. The churches have been feminized. I don’t see anyone debating that point. Does RPW have anything to say about that?
I forgot about the children’s church (or, “Christian Education”) head. That’s another knotty problem, and I feel for the young pastor who has to deal with it.
Gordan said: “The churches have been feminized. I don’t see anyone debating that point.”
I definitely agree with you, no question. But maybe we need to step back and examine why this is so. Personally, I see some of this as a result of the men failing to fulfill their responsibilities, and the women just doing whatever is necessary to survive.
Gordan,
You said: “Our Presbyterian brothers commonly divide the elders into two groups (”teaching” and “ruling”) for instance, which cannot at all be justified by the Word. An elder is an elder.”
I tend to differ with you on this one. Although every elder should be able to teach and lead the congregation, not all of them are going to have the job descriptions. Notice what Paul said to Timothy:
“Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.”
This implies that some elders have a specific role of preaching while some other don’t. I am in agreement with you, however, in the fact that Presbyterians take this way to far almost to the point of a clergy-mindset.
I’m with Nathan about the Sunday School thing. I’m just not totally convinced that there is anything wrong with dividing up.
I am, however, against contests, games, skits, and puppet shows during Sunday School and Children’s church, which, obviously have absolutely nothing to do with worship.
Davide,
I’ll give you most of that. There are elders who are more used of God in teaching and preaching, and there are those who are frankly better at than others, due to the gifting of God.
However, I still don’t think this warrants differing labels, dividing one elder from another and seemingly setting up different classes of them.
Nathan et al,
I came across this verse recently in my daily devotions, seems pretty relevant to this discussion.
Joshua 8:35 “35 There was not a word of all that Moses had commanded which Joshua did not read before all the assembly of Israel, with the women, the little ones, and the strangers who were living among them.”
Seems that there was no segregation in the old Israel! In general I think where the church is gathered it should be all the church and their children. This does not preclude other childrens meetings at other times/evenings etc. In our circles we call such united meetings “The Gathered Church” and that included all.
JP