Elders - And The Congregation
Some articles have appeared within the last few months advocating that the rule of elders is excluded from matters of judgment in the affairs of the local congregation. While isolated cases now and then may be found of one contending for this position, it has certainly not been the general rule among brethren. I realize that it is possible for new truth to come to light at any time from a further study of the Word, but it hardly seems probable that truth so vital on such an important theme has been missed by the greatest minds of the ages — even within the church of our Lord. I know that it is not an uncommon thing to find errors in the realm of application from time to time. When such errors are found the practice must be altered to fit the doctrine — not vice versa. In this instance, however, if this position be true, it is not a matter of just error in application — it is a matter of error in doctrine on the part of scholars within the church through the years. Any position that calls for such a radical change in doctrine demands the greatest caution regardless of the means by which it gains prominence.
Some of what I have read has all the appearance of a scholarly article, but upon closer examination one finds an arbitrary use of ambiguous terms, inconsistencies, and a failure to recognize fundamentals. Such errors are worthy of some advocating this position. However, because I have the utmost respect for their integrity I shall take the time to carefully and deliberately expose what I believe to be error.
One basic error appearing in the articles I have read is the same error that has caused so much of the digression among brethren today. This error is a failure to recognize the fact that all matters of legitimate judgment or opinion are within the realm of faith. Such matters are circumscribed and bound by law; they are authorized by divine authority, and are, therefore, within the scope of divine revelation. Such matters are generically authorized by some generic term. That is why we continually emphasize that all expedients must first be lawful. (1 Cor. 6:12; 10:23) A failure to recognize this accounts for expressions like "Where There Is No Pattern," "We do many things for which we have no Scripture," etc. There must be Scripture for everything that we do; we walk by faith every step of the way. (2 Cor. 5:7; Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:17; 1 Cor. 10:23; 2 John 9)
In view of the above it necessarily follows that all judgment decisions may from one point of view be called "matters of faith" because they are authorized by the Word. (Rom. 10:17) When "matters of faith" is used in this sense, it stands in contrast to "matters of opinion" that are outside the scope of divine revelation.
In a different sense "matters of faith" is sometimes used to identify things specified and "matters of opinion" is used to identify things generically authorized. This is the most frequent use among brethren. It is "matters of opinion" in this sense that are under consideration concerning the rule of elders. Such opinions are within the scope of divine revelation.
Because these expressions can be used in different senses one must do more than define the terms "judgment" and "opinion." He must also make clear the sense in which they are used. This was not done in the articles I read on this subject. Yet, arguments were made based upon the use of these expressions. For this reason the articles are not clear, appear inconsistent, and in some instances are confusing.
One argument based upon Heb. 13:17 affirms that elders as watchmen are limited to matters affecting one's soul; that human judgment does not affect the soul; that only faith determines this, therefore, matters of judgment are excluded from their rule. If this argument means anything at all it means that matters of judgment are outside of faith. If by "faith" the author means God's Word, it necessarily follows that we do many things for which we have no Scripture. This is false! If by "faith" he means things specified, I deny his conclusion and call for proof.
The above argument is extended by a consideration of Ezk. 3:17, 25-27 which affirms that the watchman is limited so that "he is to act according to the revelation from God, and within the scope of that revelation." Then we are told that "this is faith, not judgment or opinion..." If so, then judgment decisions are outside the scope of revelation. Again we are forced to the conclusion that we do things for which we have no Scripture. I say this is false doctrine! If by "faith" the author means things specified, then I deny that the "watchman" in either the Old Testament or the New Testament is so limited and call for proof. It will take more than an arbitrary statement to prove it.
The same argument is made based upon Acts 20:28-32. We are told that the elders were commended to the word of God as the source of their material for warning and for building up the flock. Then follows the conclusion: "that which falls within 'the scope of the word of God,' to which they were commended, is in the realm of faith, not opinion." If so, then we must conclude again that legitimate opinions are outside of faith or the scope of the word of God. This just isn't true! Legitimate opinions are within the scope of divine revelation. A failure to recognize this fundamental always results in serious consequences. In order for the argument to have force the writer would have to prove that "the word of his grace" to which the elders were commended and upon which expression the argument is based refers only to matters that are specific. Until this is done the argument has no force.
Further efforts involving the same line of thought are made based upon Titus 1:9; I Peter 5:1-3, and Matt. 20:25-28. These efforts have the same weakness exposed in the above arguments. The answer to one is the answer to the other. I solemnly affirm that judgment decisions are within "sound doctrine" (Titus 1:9); they are "according to the will of God" (1 Peter 5:1-3), and are "as Christ gives to them." Concerning opinions outside this realm neither the elders nor anyone else have the right to act. Such opinions are not of faith (Rom. 10:17), cannot be in the name of Christ (Col. 3:17), are not lawful (1 Cor. 10:23), and are beyond the doctrine of Christ.
(2 John 9)
After making the arguments answered above, one writer based upon Acts 11:27-30 concedes that elders oversee finances; that such involves judgment decisions, and that such is within the realm of apostolic revelation. He then concludes that "Elders cannot act apart from apostolic revelation. This places the matter in the realm of faith, not opinion." Now, this concession, namely, that judgment decisions are within the realm of apostolic revelation, is contrary to all preceding arguments. Heretofore he has argued that elders are limited in their rule to matters in the realm of apostolic revelation; that judgment decisions are not in the realm of apostolic revelation, and, therefore, elders are excluded in their rule from judgment decisions. Consistency, 0 consistency, thou art a jewel!
It is true that in this connection the writer says, "Making a judgment decision must not be confused as 'rule'." Well, I am sorry, but I do just that — and for good reason. If a judgment decision is made (no matter by whom) and the congregation abides by it, they are governed, guided, or ruled by it. The restriction by the writer seems arbitrary to me.
The following passages teach that elders oversee, superintend, or rule the church: Acts 20:28; Rom. 12:8; 1 Then. 5:12; 1 Tim. 5:17; 1 Pet 5:1-3. Unless it can be shown that there is an exception which excludes from the superintendency of elders some matter in the affairs of the local church, it necessarily follows that they are superintendents of all the affairs of the local church. Those who would restrict or limit their rule must point out the exception. All of the above efforts to so limit their rule fail of their objective. The reason for their failure has been pointed out. I think that all recognize the fact that elders are not legislators — our Lord is the legislator. Elders acting under this legislation and within the scope of it superintend the flock.
The truth on the rule of elders lies between the two extremes of arbitrary rule and majority rule of the congregation. (I Pet. 5:3; Heb. 13:17) Elders by virtue of their qualifications will be considerate of sentiments in the congregation (consulting with them and determining their feelings) and with such knowledge combined with their wisdom will lead or guide the congregation in the interest of peace and harmony within the scope of God's Will. Such consideration and wisdom on their part should move all within the congregation to "submit" and "obey" according to the full and true meaning of those terms. (Heb. 13:17)
— 15 West Par, Orlando, Florida