The Priesthood of Every Believer and How Churches Should Be Governed

The Priesthood of Every Believer
and How Churches Should Be Governed

Introduction
As a sometime pastor, and as a scholar of the church (in training), I have an intense interest in what the Bible says about church governance. Does the Bible support the notion of a church governed by the pastor, a board, or the congregation? This post argues for congregational government, tying it to the doctrine of the indwelling of every believer, which is often overlooked in this discussion.

Definitions and Dynamics
Preliminarily, I should define some basic elements of the various types of church governance, with relevant commentary. First there is episcopal government in which an individual has sole authority in the church and rules by fiat. This is seen in Roman Catholicism in which the Pope rules the churches through his bishops and priests, but is also exemplified in the Episcopal and Methodist churches. Since the 1960s (more or less), this type of church governance has (ironically) become increasingly popular within the independent Fundamentalist Baptist churches in the U.S., following the model of people such as Bob Jones, John R. Rice, and Jack Hyles.

Second, a presbyterian model puts church governance into the hands of a board. Although the board is traditionally referred to as an elder board, it might also be called any other number of titles, such as trustees or even deacons (!). But perhaps the most important aspect of presbyterian governance is that this board controls the church and is self-perpetuating. That is, when an elder resigns, dies, or rotates off the board, the church does not choose his replacement, but rather the board chooses his replacement.

Third, a congregational or baptistic model puts church governance into the hands of the congregation which appoints leaders to various positions to facilitate the decision making/implementation process. The pastor may have more or less authority, and likewise other church leaders such as deacons and trustees, according to the previously defined limits outlined in the church's by-laws which were drawn by the congregation.

Plurality of Elders in the New Testament

Before making my argument for congregational government, I should address the claim that the Bible teaches a church governance of a plurality of elders, since this gets stated so often and gets little analytical scrutiny. Yes, to be sure, we know that there were elders in the early church and that the elders surely would have wielded leadership authority. However, this does not automatically mean that such elders reflected a presbyterian model in which they had unilateral control over the church and were self-perpetuating.

We also know that the apostles or their delegates appointed church elders in new churches. But again, this does not necessitate the notion that such elders, in turn, appointed their own replacements or had unilateral authority over the church.

On the contrary, there is reasonably good evidence to suggest that once a church became self-governing, it was the church itself which designated its own leaders, rather than the apostles or their delegates. A case in point is, of course, 1 Timothy, where the church was in leadership crisis, in part, because Hymenaeus and Alexander had been excluded from the church, necessitating Paul's extensive instructions about the church choosing their replacements. This assumes that the list of 1 Tim 3 was not written for the sake of Timothy. In fact, Timothy had just previously discussed the Ephesian situation with Paul at an undisclosed location as Paul was on his way to Macedonia (1:3). If it were Timothy's task to appoint elders, Paul and Timothy would have simply resolved the issue face to face, with the letter disclosing additional words of encouragement to those whom they had already chosen. Instead, the list appears designed to help the congregation figure out whom they should choose as their new leaders.

Doctrine of the Priesthood and Indwelling of Every Believer
Historically, episcopal government dominated the later years of the early church, as churches modeled their governance after the dictators of Rome. Many centuries later, in the Reformation era, the church came to understand the doctrine of the Priesthood of Every Believer, along with the Spirit's indwelling of every believer. This raised serious questions about episcopal governance and ultimately re-distributed or devolved authority from an individual bishop or priest to an elder board.

Baptists, however, took this doctrine more seriously and applied its implications more consistently in terms of church governance. If every believer really is a priest and is indwelt by the Spirit, then it is possible for even the lowest maidservant to be led by the Spirit of God. As such, the input of each person was cherished in the decision making process, at least in theory. (One wonders how freely Baptist women were permitted to contribute in those early years of the movement.) Consequently, while presbyterians were willing to devolve authority away from the monarchical bishop to a small group of elders, Baptists devolved authority all the way to the individual members of the church so that the congregation formed its own governance.

Conclusion
Earlier I said in a sideward comment that it is ironic that so many independent Fundamentalist Baptist churches have retroverted back to a papal model in which the pastor has all authority. Someone referred to these pastors as "protestant popes." What is so ironic about this trend is that this is a wholesale discarding of deeply considered convictions which our Baptist forebears held, and it is done without much serious thought. Baptists ought to embrace the doctrine of the Priesthood and Indwelling of Every Believer since they have traditionally held to this doctrine moreso than any other Christian movement.

This doctrine of the Priesthood and Indwelling of Every Believer puts congregational governance on a solid biblical basis. I'm not aware of any biblical text which speaks against the notion that the church congregation chooses its own leadership and defines the limits of leaders' authority, nor am I aware of any text which suggests that a board or an individual is supposed to have unilateral authority over the church. On the contrary, there are texts which seem to assume that the congregation determines its own leaders, and the doctrine of the Priesthood and Indwelling of Every Believer makes congregational governance the most biblical approach to this important issue.

Background Analysis of 1 Timothy

Background Analysis of 1 Timothy

James M. Leonard, PhD

A Statement Verse

On any reading of 1 Tim 3:14-15, Paul clearly states his reason for having written this epistle, and so the verse is extremely important for the exegesis of the epistle:

“Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that, if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household....”

The passage indicates that Paul’s letter is, in large part, a corrective to the people of the church, although he does give words of personal encouragement to Timothy.

Timothy Sent to Fix the Church at Ephesus

We must remember that the church at Ephesus was practically in full revolt against Paul.  Paul had heard of the problems at Ephesus.  So, he dispatched his “go to” man Timothy to fix the problems (maybe Paul and Timothy were traveling through Ephesus, discovered the problem, and Paul left Timothy behind).  Note how often Timothy is given the most difficult tasks in Paul’s missionary work; he must have been an incredibly dependable man, worthy of Paul’s comment “I have no one else like him” (Phil 2:20). 

Timothy’s Initial Failure

After some time in ministry at Ephesus as Paul’s itinerant representative, Timothy had had enough of the church at Ephesus.  (He sounds like some of the beleaguered pastors I know!)  It seems that Timothy excused himself from Ephesus, and traveled some distance to meet Paul at some location as Paul was journeying on to Macedonia in northern Greece (1 Tim 1:3).  In reporting to Paul on his hardships at Ephesus, it seems that Timothy broke down and wept uncontrollably over his inability to get the church headed in the right direction (or at least, we might think this is a likely explanation of Timothy’s tears in 2 Tim 1:4).  We infer that the church leaders had refused to submit to Timothy’s leadership and exchanged the gospel for a bunch of meaningless talk, myths, and insipid controversies (1 Tim 1:3-6, etc.). 

Radical Feminism

Not only was Timothy having severe problems with the church’s male leadership, but also with the women as well.  Ephesus, in its socio-historical context, specifically with its Artemis cult (KJV: Diana) may well have had a society in which some women wielded and modeled a feminine abuse of power that was unusual for the ancient world. The Artemis cult was a religion dominated by the daughters of influential families, and projected a disdain of marriage. The cult provided midwife priestesses and promised delivery and deliverance of women in childbearing, a practice which perhaps invoked Paul’s sideward and otherwise bizarre comment that “women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety” (1 Tim 2:18).

The abuse of power by women in Ephesus seems to have been a practice carried into the church by certain women. Paul points to certain women who were often idle and gossipy, “going from house[church] to house[church] saying things they ought not to” (5:13).  They dressed gaudily (2:9) to show their wealth to the false leaders of the church who were themselves motivated by greed (6:3-10).  During worship, these women seemed to have constantly wrangled with Timothy, undermining his authority (2:11-12).  It seems fairly sure that the false leaders and these domineering women were working in tandem with each other.

Timothy’s Despair

I get the impression from Paul’s reference to Timothy’s tears (2 Tim 1:4), that Timothy may have even asked Paul to release him from his ministry in Ephesus.  Some of us have been there and can sympathize with Timothy’s situation.  I’m sure Paul himself was grieved to have heard all these problems and to see his “true son in the faith” brought to tears.  However, he nonetheless returned Timothy back to Ephesus.  He writes, “As I urged you when I went to Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus and command certain men not to teach false doctrine...” (1:3).

Timothy Sent Back to Ephesus

Before sending Timothy back to Ephesus, it seems that Paul came up with a plan to help Timothy regain control of the church.  First of all, practical things such as prayer between Paul and Timothy and some useful words of wisdom would have been in order.  Next, Paul decided that it was necessary to excommunicate Hymenaeus and Alexander (1:18-20).  Third, Paul would write a letter to the Ephesians. 

Paul Addresses the Church through the Letter to Timothy

This third part of the plan, however, would have to modified somewhat.  If Paul wrote the epistle to the church, the church leaders would not even bother reading it, especially when they got to the part about Hymenaeus and Alexander.  So Paul sent Timothy back to Ephesus, promising to send a letter shortly.  To assure that this letter would actually be read, however, Paul addressed it not to the church, but rather to Timothy.  Timothy, of course, would announce that he received a letter from Paul and that he would read it to the church at Ephesus.

Meanwhile, Timothy did indeed excommunicate Hymenaeus and Alexander, under Paul's apostolic authority, and implemented other advice items while he awaited the letter.  When the letter did arrive, Timothy read it to the congregation.  On the surface, it sounded as if Paul were addressing Timothy directly.  Paul’s words, however, would constantly speak beyond Timothy to the members of the church themselves.  The transparency would have been quite thin!

Qualifications of Church Leaders as Case Specific

Note how much discussion Paul gives to qualifications of overseers, deacons, and deaconesses.  See how some of the qualifications directly reflect the failures of the church leaders at Ephesus.  The reason for this lengthy discussion is not so much to give us a set of ministerial qualifications for the 21st century North American scene, but rather because Paul had just excommunicated two of the church leaders, and there were some vacancies that needed to be filled.  How often it is that a pulpit committee interviews a pastoral candidate in light of the weaknesses and failures of the last pastor! So, much of 1 Timothy primarily addresses the specific situation at Ephesus, although we must not overlook the general principles which might apply to comparable situations in the modern church.

Epilog

In the end, we're not sure if Timothy's mission succeeded or failed. Certainly, Timothy was recalled and Titus was sent as his replacement, but this may not imply failure. It is possible that Timothy did as much as was expected, and like an interim minister, may have been recalled so that another specialist might take over the church.  In later years, John the Revelator took up residence in Ephesus and wielded great influence there.  In his address specifically to the Ephesians in Rev 3, he no longer needs to chide them for false doctrine.  Instead they had forsaken their first love.  The message seems to have been heeded, for early Christianity is attested in Ephesus well into the following centuries.

Timothy as a Model for Keeping the Faith

Nonetheless, one’s heart goes out to Timothy, who stood alone for God against a wayward, difficult church, despite severe opposition and lack of personal respect (1 Tim 4:12).  His stellar example should inspire future generations to keep Paul’s charge:

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.  

But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness. Keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.  Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called when you made your good confession in the presence of many witnesses.

In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage--with great patience and careful instruction.  Keep this command without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which God will bring about in his own time--God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever.  Amen” (a collage of texts from 1 and 2 Timothy).