Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 9
November 21, 1957
NUMBER 29, PAGE 3,10b-11a

Elders In Matters Of Judgment

Robert C. Welch, Louisville, Kentucky

The theory that elders have unlimited and dictatorial authority over a congregation in matters of judgment is as foreign and contradictory to the teaching of the New Testament as the doctrine of the papacy. At the other extreme, the theory that qualified and godly elders are to be respected in matters of judgment no more than others of the congregation is equally false. Very little difference can be found between the doctrine of papal infallibility and this doctrine of "eldership authority in matters of judgment.

If the decision of the elders in matters of judgment is not subject to approval and preferences of the congregation, it is equivalent to infallibility in judgment. If the desires, wishes and counsel of the congregation are not to be considered in matters of judgment, the theory of infallibility of the elders is the result. If their decisions in matters of judgment are not subject to examination, and must be obeyed by the congregation; then ordinances of men have become law to the congregation.

Neither Majority Vote Nor Dictatorship

Inevitably there is rising suspicion of something abnormal and of unprincipled practice when men begin trying to establish such unlimited and unchallenged authority over a congregation. The man who so teaches is either ignorant of New Testament teaching on the eldership or is playing to the eldership gallery. When they themselves demand such unlimited authority in matters of judgment they are either ignorant of scriptural teaching or are seeking to maintain a position of arbitrary, self-willed control over a congregation which might otherwise retire them from their office.

The theory that the congregation is ruled in matters of judgment by majority vote is contrary to the Scriptures. Neither does the Bible teach that elders are subject to a majority vote or decision of the membership. On the other hand, the idea that the elders are to render decisions in matters of expediency and judgment without consulting and considering the membership as to their advice, desires and interests, is contrary to the Scriptures. It demonstrates that they are self-willed and no longer are worthy of the office. If they refuse to cease either their self-willed disposition or their office, then the church needs to relieve them of their position.

There is a vast difference between the elders' determining the preferences of the congregation in matters of expediency and the elders' submitting to a majority rule or vote of the congregation in their decisions. This is expressed in rather poignant language by R. L. Whiteside, Doctrinal Discourses, page 94:

"But it is contended that every expression of a preference is a vote. If that is so, some men, when a political campaign is on, vote several times a day for months before election day! If that is voting, most of the votes are cast prior to the election and are never counted. But the claim is too absurd for serious consideration."

The idea that elders are to "rule" in matters of judgment, but not in matters of faith, is an addition to the word of the Lord. Perhaps they mean that elders can DICTATE to the congregation in matters of judgment, but cannot do so in matters of faith. If that is the sense of the term "rule" when used with reference to the elders, then they have no ruling voice with the congregation in matters of faith. If that be the meaning, then the elders have no rule, they can do or say nothing, when a congregation desires to put instrumental music into the worship. If that be the meaning, then the elders have no rule in the matter and can do nothing when the congregation wants to omit the Lord's supper from worship on the first day of the week. Such persons need to learn that elders are to "rule" the congregation in accordance with the faith as well as in matters of judgment. When they realize this they will then be ready to learn what kind and degree of rule elders are to have in all congregational matters.

Not Lording Over

Those who think that the authority of elders is absolute in matters of expediency or judgment have a peculiar twist in their interpretation of 1 Peter 5:3. It says; "Neither as lording- it over the charge allotted to you but making yourselves ensamples to the flock." They interpret this to be applicable only to matters of faith. If that be correct then it permits the elders to lord it over the charge in matters of judgment. The argument, likewise, would not require exemplary lives of the elders in matters of judgment; for if the first clause of the verse is applicable to matters of faith only, then the latter clause is also limited to matters of faith only.

These interpreters do not have as much proof of their explanation as do those who try to prove "faith only" salvation. The latter produce passages which show that faith is essential to salvation. They just cannot find the passage which says it is by faith only. These interpreters have a passage in which neither the word "faith" nor the word "only" is to be found; yet they want to say that lording over is possible in matters of "faith only." The teaching of the passage is that elders are to have oversight of and be examples to the flock in all matters, both of faith and of expediency. In like manner, elders are not to lord it over the charge allotted to them in matters of faith nor in matters of judgment.

The same expression is used with reference to earthly rulers; "Ye know that the Gentiles lord it over them and their great ones exercise authority over them." (Matt. 20:25). Whatever kind of authority earthly rulers exercised is the kind which the elders are not to exercise. Yet, apparently, some elders assume the role of dictator, and legislator in matters outside the realm of faith. When they do, it is altogether proper to compare their role of authority with the papal authority and with the dictatorships characteristic of Communist nations.

The same address of our Lord which tells of the Gentiles' authority also tells what the attitude of every disciple should be, whether elder, preacher, saint. "Not so shall it be among you: but whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister; and whosoever would be first among you shall be your servant." (Matt. 20:26,27). That is the kind of man who can be respected, and when he is an elder will have his judgment respected and followed. This is in accord with the qualification of one to be appointed to the office, "not self-willed." (Tit. 1:7).

Ordinances Of Men

While upon the earth Jesus had to deal with rules of the Jewish leaders which were made mandatory upon the people. He said; "But in vain do they worship me, teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men." When a matter not contained in the Scriptures, but which lies in the realm of judgment and expediency or opinion, is made into a rule which must be accepted and obeyed it certainly is a doctrine of men. When elders decide that they can make such mandatory rules and laws for the congregation and that a questioning' of these mandates on the part of the congregation is "rebellion against God's rulers," they have begun "teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men." When men decide that they can become such absolute authority in matters where the Lord has not specifically taught, they have done that of which we have a warning and negative example; "If ye died with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, do ye subject yourselves to ordinances, Handle not, nor taste, nor touch (all which things are to perish with the using), after the precepts and doctrines of men." (Col. 2:20-22). This has been applied so much by preachers of the gospel to denominational doctrines that we have forgotten that we may also be making some of those ordinances of men. It is time for elders to re-examine the grounds of their "authority." Can they make a law mandatory upon the congregation where God has not legislated? If their decision is mandatory it is law. A humble, godly, enlightened elder will realize that if it is a matter of judgment, then the judgment of every member will need to be considered in conjunction with his judgment; hence his decision rendered for peace and harmonious progress of the congregation. He will then seek to lead the congregation in a united course in these matters in order that all the flock may grow in grace and knowledge.

The foregoing is concisely stated by brother Cogdill in his book, Walking by Faith, page 38:

Elders, then, are not to make creeds for Christians to believe, teach or live by. Their rule is within the realm of faith, in matters of expediency, within the realm of things authorized by the Lord. They are not Lords. Even in the realm of judgment they are to do the will of the Lord and not their own. Nor are they to use their office as a means of enforcing their own prejudices and preferences to the disregard of the good and rights of the "flock" over which they rule. I Peter 5 :1-4 ; James 4 :11 ."

The Things Of Others

The book of Philippians is addressed "to all the saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons." (Phil. 1:1). This has special significance when we notice that to these saints, bishops and deacons the Lord says; "but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself; not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others." (Phil. 2:3,4).

When bishops get the idea that they are to ignore the wishes and good will of the congregation in their decisions respecting matters of judgment they are in violation of this passage. They are headed for unrest and trouble with and within the congregation when they decide that they have such ABSOLUTE authority in expedient matters; and are looking to their own things rather than to the things of others.

We need humble men, godly men, unselfish men, qualified men; who will oversee the congregation in the path of purity and service in matters of faith; who will oversee the congregation for peace and harmony in matters of judgment; who will be examples going before the flock; who will feed the flock; who will watch in behalf of the souls of the flock. Such men are the kind of elders in whom the flock can repose confidence; under whom they are glad to labor and worship; unto whom they are happy to render submission; unto whose rule they are glad to submit (Heb. 13:17.) Such elders are the kind to whom an enlightened membership will look for decisions in matters of judgment.