Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 13
January 18, 1962
NUMBER 36, PAGE 3,11b

I Have Changed Positions

Lloyd Moyer, El Cerrito, Calif.

For some twenty-five years I have served my Lord, in the church, in the position of a preacher of the gospel. Because of physical handicap I no longer occupy that position. I now serve in the position as an elder in God's church. This does constitute a change of position. As a result of this change of position, I have been doing some thinking and studying, which, in all probability, I would never have done had this change of position not occurred. This has brought to my attention a condition which exists in the church which, to say the least, is not a healthy one. This condition simply stated it one of "preacher - eldership relation." I am fearful that, in many instances, preachers think and teach one thing about the work of the preacher and the elders, while the elders think and believe another thing about the work of each. Usually, the elders do very little teaching on what they believe about the work of the preacher and the work of the elders. This teaching is left up to the preacher. The elders can do one of two things, if they do not agree with the preacher: One: they can get up and refute what has been taught by the preacher. (Very few elders will do this, fearing the confusion which might follow.) I might add that I fear too few elders are qualified to attempt to refute a sermon preached by a qualified preacher. Two: they can sit quietly by and give endorsement to what has been said, by their silence, even though they do not believe that the truth has been preached. This makes them hypocritical and causes them to allow error to be taught to those in their charge unprotested. Which of the two courses shall the elders pursue? I do not believe it necessary that they be forced to take either one. If the preacher and the elders understood each other, and worked together as they should, the circumstances described above would never arise. Let us consider the TWO positions.

My Position As A Preacher

I have always preached that the work of the church is under the "oversight" of the elders. (Acts 20:28; I Pet. 5:2) Further, that the teaching program of any congregation is a work of that congregation and must be subject to the oversight of the elders. Also, that this teaching, or work included the preaching done there. I have taught that the elders had the right and duty to know what was being taught in each class, and to remove any teacher who taught error and refused to correct such after having studied the matter with the elders. As a preacher, I have always taught that I, too, was under the oversight of the elders of the congregation.

This conviction has led to my having to refuse many works offered me. I have declined many meetings because of my knowing of the elders refusal to study certain points. On the other hand, I have worked with congregations and held meetings where it was found that the elders and I disagreed on certain matters. It was fortunate that in these cases the elders were always willing to study the points of disagreement. The question arises, what would one do in case the elders and preacher cannot reach an agreement? I suppose the answer would vary with each situation. I have had only one such experience. If memory serves me correctly, I had lived at the place only nine weeks. The difference arose. I met with the elders to study the matter. All the elders but one agreed with me after discussing it. The one refused further study. The other elders would not take action against this man. I announced my resignation the next Sunday morning stating why I was leaving. I moved on Tuesday. The members of the congregation discussed the matter with the elders and the result was that necessary correction was made, and the congregation prospered in years to come.

Another example is that of my meeting with the East Bakersfield church in Bakersfield, Calif., a few years ago. The elders of the Central congregation in that city, along with their preacher, J. D. Bothwell, tried to get the elders of East Bakersfield to cancel my meeting. The elders at East Bakersfield refused to yield to such unscriptural pressure. I came for the meeting. Immediately, the elders wanted to know what it was that I taught that caused the preacher and elders of Central to try to keep me out of the city. I made an appointment with the elders and preacher, Randy Dickson, for an afternoon study on the subject of "Congregational Cooperation in Evangelism and Benevolence." After about four hours of study, all the elders and the preacher agreed that I was teaching the truth on the subject. The elders asked me to preach the same thing to the congregation on the following Tuesday night. They composed a letter and signed it; that they endorsed what I preached. This letter was read by one of the elders at the close of my sermon. It also stated that the elders had asked me to preach on the subject. It was some time later that Bro. Rue Porter, over the written request of the elders, and after his agreement not to preach on the subject; came and did preach two nights on it and thus divided the church in East Bakersfield. It was on Bro. Rue Porter's encouragement that some brethren brought the law suit against the elders in East Bakersfield. (I have signed letters proving the above statements.)

I mention all this to prove I have always tried to work with and under the oversight of elders. Wherever the elders have refused to study and/or forbidden me to preach on scriptural subjects I have refused to go.

Yet, to be completely honest, I fear that when an eldership called in question any point of doctrine, or application made by me, that there may have been some resentment on my part. As I look back, I'm fearful that my attitude was, "no eldership is going to tell me what I can and cannot preach." Many times I have quoted Titus 2:15 emphasizing that the preacher has "every possible form of authority" as he "speaks these things." The passage still teaches exactly as it always has. As long as the preacher speaks these things (that revealed in the scriptures) he does have all authority.

My Position As An Elder

As I studied the qualifications and duties of an elder, and as I have endeavored to accomplish that which God has enjoined upon me as an elder, I have viewed the matter from a different point. It is not a matter of the "elders telling the preacher what to preach"; the scriptures tell him what to preach. The question is, who is to determine when the preacher is preaching what is revealed in the scriptures? To answer this question we should consider again the work of the elders. Did God ordain that the elders have the oversight of the work of the church? Surely all will say, "Yes." Is preaching a work of the church? Yes. Then should the work of preaching be under the oversight of the elders? Or did God exclude the preacher and his work from the oversight of the elders? If so, then the preacher is not under the oversight of any one on earth. This smacks of the denominational doctrine of the elevated "clergy." That is, that the preacher is "called" and receives divine "guidance" that other members do not receive. This puts the preacher in a class by himself. "Whatever he decides about the scriptures is bound to be true. No one would have the right to question any preacher on any scriptural subject. And if the preacher decides that others are wrong (the elders included) he could (and should) get in the pulpit and expose them; with no one (not even elders) having the "right to tell the preacher what he should preach." This just about equals the Catholic "priesthood!' The only difference would be that "only the preacher really is able to properly understand, and teach the word of God." Brethren, is this what we want? It is what we have if we take the preacher and the work of preaching out from under the control and oversight of the elders. I realize that in many cases the elders are not qualified to refute error taught by a well educated preacher with a pleasing personality. That is why, for years, I have opposed putting men in as elders who are not qualified. I believe the "eldership question" to be one of the gravest (if not the gravest) problems before the church today. To put in young, untried, unproven, inexperienced, unqualified men as elders is to turn the church over to the judgment of the preachers. I say this because such men in the eldership will follow any persuasive preacher. In many instances, the church will be governed and guided by a very young preacher. In others, by an older one who is "sot in his ways." May God help us to "Lay hands suddenly on no man..." (1 Tim. 5:22) May we have elders (the word means older) who have had the time to have studied God's Word and have had enough experience in the church and in ruling their houses to exercise wisdom in ruling the House of God, May we have members of the church (preachers included) who will work with and under the oversight of Godly elders. (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:2; Titus 1:9-11; Heb. 13:17)