“Congregationalism is from Satan.” This was the title of an attention-grabbing blog article from now former pastor James MacDonald. MacDonald argued congregations voting gets in the way of progress and he suggested that elders should be responsible for the primary decisions of a church. When MacDonald said elders, it turns out he really meant just himself. Christian journalists eventually exposed that MacDonald ruled over other church leaders alongside his family members with what seems like an iron fist. MacDonald would literally print out pictures of people in his church that were obstacles to his rule and would use those pictures as targets in his personal shooting range. James MacDonald may have not been the only pastor on staff at his megachurch, but he was effectively “the pastor” and when MacDonald was “the pastor” the pastor got his way.
“The pastor” getting his way is not really a new concern even though such domineering has recently become the subject of controversies. The Roman Catholic Church has long treated the clergy as a top-down authoritarian structure. For centuries only priests (the pastor) could receive communion and today a Catholic church is only church when the priest shows up. Protestantism with its affirmation of the priesthood of all believers as well as the rediscovery of Biblical plurality of leadership has long taught whoever could be seen as “the pastor” doesn’t always get what he wants. John Calvin and Martin Luther both had the denominations and churches they founded make decisions contrary to what the Reformers personally preferred. Despite this Protestant vision, the growth of non-denominational churches has seen an escalated version of “the pastor gets his way” model. Many of the prominent Jesus Movement churches advocated a “Moses Model” where one pastor is chief, and all others function as advisors. Some fundamentalist movements in the United States also elevated one pastor into essentially popes over their local churches.
None of this “pastor gets his way” model is biblical, healthy, or even pastoral. If one cites the call to submit to pastors, such calls are always to submission to multiple elders rather than one specific pastor. In 1 Timothy 5 Paul commends elders who rule well in one of these few passages to come close to spelling out pastoral authority. Even in 1 Timothy 5 we see multiple elders are “ruling together.” Apart from Jesus, the New Testament never models a man on top in the leadership structure of churches. Individual elders (like everyone else) submit to the elders of a local church.
Each elder in a Christian church is primarily called to walk alongside fellow believers, helping them refrain from drifting as any good shepherd would. When elders do make decisions on behalf of the body they do so patiently and with a desire for the unity of the flock rather than to promote their own agendas. The primary instruments of an elder’s authority are in fact the influences of teaching others the word. In this capacity, we do see a sense in which one pastor may have a greater influence. The pulpit changes, convinces, and inspires people and thus the elder who most often occupies the pulpit may see his values especially embraced by the body. Even in the power of the pulpit, every pastor knows their congregation won’t and often shouldn’t embrace all the preacher asserts.
Over time a healthy ministry of the word has an effect and those long exposed to one particular preacher will reverberate his focus. Even still, long-established pastors will find themselves advocating the minority position in real elders’ meetings and will likely find some matters the church votes on they end up voting for the losing side. Mark Dever started a helpful ministry called 9Marks focused on bringing about certain biblical principles in churches just as he led the way for them in his church. Despite Dever’s home church being a training center in these nine particular church emphasizes, Dever routinely is outvoted by other elders and he chooses to honor the decisions of his elders. Additionally, Dever continues to advocate things to his members that they end up not voting for. Ironically James MacDonald castigated Dever’s people not following him perfectly. Dever celebrates pastoring a people who know “the pastor” doesn’t always get his way.
I love it when church members refer to “their church.” This kind of covenanting is beautiful and Godly. When people refer to a church as pastor “so and so’s” church they often mean something very different. It’s common to define a church by the particular pastor who most often occupies the pulpit. If one identifies Poland Baptist as Pastor Tony’s church the implication can be the official theology of our church is what I believe at any particular moment. I think this is part of why turnover happens far more when the primary preacher of a church changes than when a church decides to substantially change its theology. Attenders and members can also believe “the pastor gets his way.”
No individual gets to rule over any particular local church other than our Lord Jesus. Godly pastors should expect to have to compromise on things just like every other church member and every other elder. When this attitude is embrace the elders of a church will stop being simple yes men and even in the context of elders meetings iron will sharpen iron.
This means church members should follow their elders equally, even when they know their elders disagree with each other respectfully. This can be very good for the spiritual health of church members. Abusive church leaders want the members of their church to become their theological clones, embracing every small position they take. When the elders in a church are welcome to have different opinions on the authorship of Hebrews, meaning of Revelation 20, or the nature of tongues and those elders are even liberated to teach those different views members may become Bereans. In a church where “the pastor” doesn’t always get it’s way, members are free to interpret the Bible for themselves and will surely come to a variety of conclusions. Knowing all believers are priests, in such a context the primary preacher may even be blessed by a member feeling free to persuade him to the Biblical interpretation they embrace.
Christian maturity can sometimes most be displayed in a teachable willingness to hear out views you do not yet embrace. This kind of teachable nature should mean that when our pastors preach to us or teach us we open our minds and open our Bibles. As the Bible is taught minds should change and the congregation should be conformed to such Biblical teaching. Nevertheless, this does not mean “the pastor” gets his way. Every pastor is tasked with the wonderful but challenging task of persuasion through teaching scripture. This kind of convincing teaching is powerful. Let us never take the shortcut around such power by simply building churches where “the pastor” gets his way.
Redeemed Reed 