About elders and church governance

Q: How did elders fit into the structure of house churches in the first century?

TRW: Before responding to this question, I think we all need to clear our minds of many preconceived notions about “elders” and “churches” in the first century.

The NT documents indicate that, in the first century, the normal church leadership model was to “appoint elders for them in every assembly” (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5). Instead of having a single leader over a gathering of Christians, a plurality of elders/shepherds is mentioned frequently. See Acts 15:22; 20:17; 21:18; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:17; Titus 1:5; Jas. 5:14; 1 Pet. 5:1; Heb. 13:17; 12x in Revelation.

So, I think we first need to reorient our minds to consider that the common “house churches” of the first century were each led by a plurality of elders, not just one “pastor” as is common today.

About Bishops and Pastors

Where do bishops and pastors fit in? Acts 20:28 is a key verse that indicates that an elder (presbuteros) served the role of overseer (bishop) and shepherd (pastor). When Paul spoke to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:17), he said “the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God” (20:28).

It’s likely that these three terms—elders, bishops, and pastors—were interchangeable in the first century. The Greek word for bishop (episkopos) literally means “overseer” (epi = “over”; skopos = “see”) and the word for pastor (poimēn) means “shepherd.”

Peter also uses these three terms as if they refer to the same function. He says, “I urge elders among you, as your fellow elder (presbuteros) … (to) shepherd (poimainō) the flock (poimnion) of God among you, exercising oversight (episkopeō) …” (1 Pet. 5:1-2). In other words, we do well to view elders, shepherds/pastors, and bishops as the same function in the first-century church.

Working in a Gathering not a Building

When modern Christians read the phrase “elders in every church,” it’s important to recognize that a better translation is “elders in every assembly.” (See my video on “One-Anothering in the Ekklesia.”) Today, we tend to understand ‘church’ as a formal institution or even as a sacred building. But in the New Testament, the Greek word for ‘church’ never refers to a building but primarily means “assembly.” Consequently, the work of these first-century elders focused on a gathering not a building, as they shepherded a congregation not a corporation as we understand these terms.

These first-century elders were not a board of directors who only worked behind the scenes to make decisions on hiring and firing staff and on maintaining the physical plant of church property. Rather, these elders served a visible role as teachers, guides, and role models in the assemblies of the disciples in a given area.

Pastor-Teachers

As such, these elders must be “skillful in teaching” (1 Tim. 3:2) and “able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it” (Titus 1:9). Paul also said that “double honor” should be given to elders who work hard in speaking and teaching (1 Tim 5:17).

Paul promoted a conscious effort to train faithful people who could teach others (2 Tim. 2:2). After all, there was an expectation that, after a certain period of time, many Christians would become teachers (“by this time you ought to be teachers” Heb. 5:12). As Christians gradually developed their knowledge and abilities, the gathering would have an increasing number of people who can be regularly involved in a teaching role in each assembly. I suspect that the respected teachers who had shepherding skills were prime candidates to become elders.

In Eph. 4:11-12, the only time in the NT when the noun ‘pastor’ is used to refer to a church leader, Paul uses it in conjunction with the noun ‘teacher’. He says, “And He gave some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the building up of the body of Christ.” 

The Origins of the Sole-Leader Model

Even though ‘pastor’ is a common term today that refers to the sole authority figure in modern churches, the first century was different. The noun ‘pastors’ (poimēn) is found only in Eph. 4:13, where it basically refers to the “shepherds” over the flock of God’s people.

Throughout the first three centuries of vast Christian literature, the term ‘pastor’ was rarely used as a technical term for church leaders prior to AD 300. Yet, today, ‘pastor’ is the dominant term, and it refers to the sole leader of a congregation.

The idea of elevating one person to be the dominant congregational leader developed after the apostolic period. But it’s alarming how quickly it developed. Early church scholars such as Michael Holmes and Everett Ferguson have rightly identified the emergence of the single bishop system of church governance (Holmes, Apostolic Fathers (2007): 3; Ferguson, Early Christians Speak (1999): 170].

The Problems of Power and Prestige

The writings of Ignatius (ca. AD 105-110) reveal a church structure of a single bishop who had ultimate authority over elders and deacons. The bishop was so powerful that others were not allowed to partake of the Lord’s Supper without his presence (Smyrnaeans 8.1-2).

In time, the power and prestige of this single leader only grew. By the time of the Apostolic Constitutions in the late fourth century, the bishop was viewed as “the mediator between God and you … he is, next after God, your earthly god” (2.26). I think that our modern pastor-over- congregation model has more in common with this bishop system than with the first century system of multiple teacher-elders.

This elevation and exaltation of the bishop runs against the grain of Jesus’s teaching: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles domineer over them, and those in high position exercise authority over them. It is not this way among you, but whoever wants to become prominent among you shall be your servant, and whoever desires to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many.” (Matt. 20:25-28 NASB)

Peter, for example, definitely got the message. When he offered advice to other elders, he did not perceive himself as the dominant and premier elder. Rather, Peter addressed the others as “fellow elders,” urging them not to be “domineering over those assigned to your care, but by proving to be examples to the flock” (1 Pet. 5:3).

Problems with the One-Pastor System

Because of the overwhelming NT evidence of a plurality of elders “in every church,” I think that our common modern system of one pastor or preacher running the church is an aberration of the typical first-century practice. On a practical level, such a monarchical model is subject to the potential abuses of having one leader who has no substantial offsetting or balancing influences.

Our modern system also fails to encourage and implement a constant flow of teachers and mature leaders within the body. Since we’ve hired someone to do all the teaching, essentially no one is encouraged or motivated to step up and exercise their God-given speaking ability and wisdom.

Having said all that, I hesitate to label such one-pastor systems as “apostate” or “sinful,” as some have done. Such a system could work with a sole elder who is a mature, humble, spirit-led, skilled teacher (1 Tim 3; Titus 1) who “equips the saints to do the work of ministry” (Eph. 4:12). Paul, Timothy, and Titus, for example, seem to have operated as solo leaders. However, in our modern culture, a monarchical system tends to produce an ego-filled celebrity culture with toomuch authority vested in one person.

It must also be recognized that Paul’s team of solo leaders focused on constantly finding “faithful people who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2). In our typical system today, our solo leaders are hired to be the only primary teacher until they are replaced by another solo leader. This system stifles the constant development of the talents and gifts that God has richly supplied within any congregation of believers.

Elders in House Churches Today

Some have asked me whether elders are needed in house churches today. Regardless of what I think, I suspect that each assembly will determine for itself its need for elders. House churches are often gladly independent.

In the first century, house assemblies needed elders to “oversee” and “shepherd” the group so that they stayed consistent with practicing Christian lifestyle and teaching the fundamentals of the gospel. At that time, Christian thinking and practice were so new, each congregation needed guidance and monitoring.

Today, it’s possible that some house assemblies may have little need for appointed leaders (i.e., elders). Since a house gathering usually has no property, has little or no paid staff, and has abundant access to biblical texts and resources, leaders (elders) may not be needed except in cases where the group is filled with new believers who need guidance.