info@9marks.org | http://www.9marks.org

Contents

Editor’s Note

Jonathan Leeman

DEACONS: UNDERSTANDING THE OFFICE

Deacons: Shock-Absorbers and Servants

Deacons don’t just get things done, they build unity in the church. How? By being shock-absorbers and servants.

By Jamie Dunlop

The Biblical Qualifications and Responsibilities of Deacons

Who should be a deacon? What does the Bible say deacons should do? A New Testament professor combs through the slim but significant biblical teaching on deacons’ qualifications and responsibilities.

By Benjamin Merkle

Must We Use the Titles “Elder” and “Deacon”?

Does it matter what we call our churches’ leaders? It does, if we want accountability for the leaders and clarity for the congregation.

By Benjamin Merkle

DEACONS: PUTTING IT INTO PRACTICE

The Committee-Free, Task-Specific Deacon

Here’s one way to get deacons out of meetings and straight to work in our churches.

By Matt Schmucker

Moving From a Deacon-Led to an Elder-Led Church

You’ve become convinced that your deacon-led church should be led by elders. How should you make the transition?

By Phil Newton

How to Separate Deacon Work from Elder Work

Satan loves to divide, especially along lines of authority. How do you keep the church from dividing over who does what?

By Matt Schmucker

A Deacon on a Deacon’s Reward

A deacon speaks! And he tells the story of how he was “blessed to serve.”

By John Ingold

BOOK REVIEWS

Book Review: The New Tesament Deacon: The Church’s Minister of Mercy

By Alexander Strauch

Reviewed by Bobby Jamieson

Book Review: Liberating Ministry from the Success Syndrome

By Kent and Barbara Hughes

Reviewed by Ken Barbic

AUDIO - LEADERSHIP INTERVIEWS

The Reformation, Then and Now with Michael Reeves

Is the Reformation over? Does it matter today? Michael Reeves unpacks the story and theology of the Reformation and exhorts Christians to study the Reformation for the sake of the gospel. *Listen online Now »

Posted on May 1, 2010

Evangelical Christians and Modern America with Os Guinness

Os Guinness explores doubt, evil, modernity, the new atheism, evangelical obsession with the present, and more. *Listen online Now »

Posted on April 1, 2010

* This audio might not be supported by your particular device

Jonathan Leeman

Editor’s Note

Jesus came to deacon (Mark 10:45; Rom. 15:8).

So did Paul, Apollos, and Tychicus (1 Cor. 3:5, 6; Eph. 3:7; 6:21; Col. 4:7). And the greatest among us will be deacons (Mark 10:43). It’s not a bad label to wear, apparently.

The New Testament only mentions this unassuming office two, maybe three times (Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:8-13; cf. Rom. 16:1). But pay attention. It also seems to direct the deacon’s attention to the church’s physical good, which in turn will serve the church’s spiritual good. The deacon is a unity builder—and shock absorber! There should be nothing unspiritual about a deacon.

What about your church? Do you officially recognize anyone as a deacon? Doing so publicly holds forth models of Christian love and service. We hope these articles will stimulate you to consider why and how to employ such individuals in your congregation.

By Jamie Dunlop

Deacons: Shock-Absorbers and Servants

The position was designed to alleviate tension in the church, but the office of deacon sure seems to provoke remarkable controversy. Elders butt heads with deacons over decision-making authority. Deacons are accused of being “turfy.” Staff treat deacons as irrelevant. And so on.

“According to the New Testament, a deacon is two things: a shock-absorber and a servant.”

Is there a way to alleviate these unfortunate realities in your church? Yes. What’s needed is a positive, theological definition of what it means to be a deacon.

WHAT IS A DEACON?

According to the New Testament, a deacon is two things: a shock-absorber and a servant.

Deacons are shock-absorbers: the seven men chosen by the church in Jerusalem to care for widows, who seem to be precursors to deacons, were chosen to preserve unity at a time when botched administration was creating fissures in the church (see Acts 6:1-7).

And deacons are servants: their very name means servant, and their precursors in Acts 6 were chosen to handle the practical needs of the church. That way, the apostles could devote themselves to leading the church through prayer and the ministry of the Word.

DEACONS AS SHOCK-ABSORBERS

God has always intended to display his glory to the nations, in part, through the unity of Jews and Gentiles within the church (Eph 3:10), and yet it was exactly at this juncture that disunity was erupting in the early Jerusalem church.

The Greek-speaking Jews began to complain “against” the Hebrew-speaking Jews concerning the distribution of food. The church therefore chose seven men to distribute food equitably, yes, but, more than that, to restore unity where there was division. Unity-building was their primary goal; good administration was the means.

This has several important implications for how we view deacons:

Selection: It’s notable that, when laying out qualifications for deacons in 1 Timothy 3, Paul focuses on issues of character rather than administrative skills. Accordingly, our churches should select deacons primarily for their track record of peacemaking, and only secondarily for administrative expertise.

In my church, we have passed over individuals with specific skills that would be beneficial in a deaconship (building management, finances, computers, and so on) in favor of less skilled individuals who are better peacemakers. Then, we have encouraged the new deacon to disciple the skilled individual as part of a volunteer team.

Control: The idea of deacons as shock-absorbers stands in stark contrast to deacons running their own ministry fiefdoms in the church.

How can churches avoid raising up deacons who have territorial fiefdoms? Consider giving deacons limited terms of service (say, three years), after which another individual must rotate into the position. This discourages ministry monopolies and forces deacons to be continually training their replacements.

In addition, elders should teach deacons that they do not “own” areas of ministry; rather, deacons facilitate congregational ministry under the leadership of the elders.

Communication: Elders can also equip deacons to be shock absorbers by regularly communicating with them. They should communicate with them concerning their specific areas of ministry. They should communicate with them concerning the direction the elders are leading the church generally.

For instance, elders might consider reviewing a members meeting agenda with the deacons beforehand, or preparing the deacons on Saturday with the news of a significant Sunday morning announcement.

In both cases, communicating with the deacons ahead of time prepares them to work for unity as the elders lead the congregation through changes.

DEACONS AS SERVANTS

The elders are called to “direct the affairs of the church” (1 Timothy 5:17), and deacons are called to support that direction. In our churches, then, elders should make directional decisions while deacons facilitate congregational involvement to make that vision a reality.

This yields an interesting dilemma: how do we encourage deacons to be entrepreneurial unity-builders without encroaching on the elders’ leadership of the church, and so cause disunity? Here are a few ideas:

Deacon Meetings?: If the goal of deacons is to support the directional decisions made by the elders, then deacons do not need to meet as a deliberative body—especially if your deacons each facilitate ministry in one specific area, such as childcare or hospitality (as they do in my church).

Certainly there is no biblical model of deacons “sharing power” with elders, as do the House and Senate in the U.S. legislature.

Committees: When standing diaconal committees begin to feel that they “own” specific ministry areas of the church, it becomes difficult for them to avoid making direction-setting decisions that should be left to the elders. After all, even things as “worldly” as the building or the budget have highly spiritual dimensions in their administration.

As such, churches should consider making any committees task-focused and time-limited, chartered to complete a task assigned by the elders.

“Elders lead ministry, deacons facilitate ministry, the congregation does ministry. That, I believe, is the New Testament model, and that biblical clarity in deacons’ role and function is invaluable for promoting peace and unity in our congregations.”

Communication: Most diaconal ministries will at least occasionally run up against direction-level decisions that need to go to the elders. At our church we have found it useful to assign each deacon to an elder who regularly communicates what the elders are deciding in their meetings. The elders can then take direction-level issues in the deacon’s work back to the larger body of elders as needed.

Elders lead ministry, deacons facilitate ministry, the congregation does ministry. That, I believe, is the New Testament model, and that biblical clarity in deacons’ role and function is invaluable for promoting peace and unity in our congregations.

About the author:

Jamie Dunlop is an associate pastor at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC.

By Benjamin Merkle

The Biblical Qualifications and Responsibilities of Deacons

Who should be a deacon? What does the Bible say deacons should do?

THE TWO BIBLICAL OFFICES: ELDERS AND DEACONS

Comparing the office of deacon to the office of elder will help us answer these questions. The primary spiritual leaders of a congregation are the elders, who are also called overseers or pastors in the New Testament. Elders teach or preach the Word and shepherd the souls of those under their care (Eph. 4:11; 1 Tim. 3:2; 5:17; Titus 1:9; Heb. 13:17). Deacons, too, have a crucial role in the life and the health of the local church, but their role is different from the elders’. The biblical role of deacons is to take care of the physical and logistical needs of the church so that the elders can concentrate on their primary calling.

“Like the apostles, the elders’ primary role is one of preaching the Word of God. Like the seven, deacons serve the congregation in whatever practical needs may arise.”

This distinction is based on the pattern found in Acts 6:1–6. The apostles were devoted “to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (v. 4). Since this was their primary calling, seven men were chosen to handle more practical matters in order to allow the apostles the freedom to continue with their work.

This division of labor is similar to what we see with the offices of elder and deacon. Like the apostles, the elders’ primary role is one of preaching the Word of God. Like the seven, deacons serve the congregation in whatever practical needs may arise.

THE QUALIFICATIONS OF DEACONS

The only passage that mentions the qualifications for deacons is 1 Timothy 3:8–13. In this passage, Paul gives an official but not exhaustive list of the requirements for deacons.

The similarities of the qualifications for deacons and elders/overseers in 1 Timothy 3 are striking. Like the qualifications for elders, a deacon must not be an addict (v. 3,), not greedy for dishonest gain (v. 3), blameless (v. 2; Titus 1:6), the husband of one wife (v. 2), and an able manager of his children and household well (vv. 4–5). Furthermore, the focus of the qualifications is the moral character of the person who is to fill the office: a deacon must be mature and above reproach. The main difference between an elder and a deacon is a difference of gifts and calling, not character.

Paul identifies nine qualifications for deacons in 1 Timothy 3:8-12:

1. Dignified (v. 8): This term normally refers to something that is honorable, respectable, esteemed, or worthy, and is closely related to “respectable,” which is given as a qualification for elders (1 Tim. 3:2).

2. Not double-tongued (v. 8): Those who are double-tongued say one thing to certain people but then say something else to others, or say one thing but mean another. They are two-faced and insincere. Their words cannot be trusted, so they lack credibility.

3. Not addicted to much wine (v. 8): A man is disqualified for the office of deacon if he is addicted to wine or other strong drink. Such a person lacks self-control and is undisciplined.

4. Not greedy for dishonest gain (v. 8): If a person is a lover of money, he is not qualified to be a deacon, especially since deacons often handle financial matters for the church.

5. Sound in faith and life (v. 9): Paul also indicates that a deacon must “hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.” The phrase “the mystery of the faith” is simply one way Paul speaks of the gospel (cf. 1 Tim. 3:16). Consequently, this statement refers to the need for deacons to hold firm to the true gospel without wavering. Yet this qualification does not merely involve one’s beliefs, for he must also hold these beliefs “with a clear conscience.” That is, the behavior of a deacon must be consistent with his beliefs.

6. Blameless (v. 10): Paul writes that deacons must “be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless” (v. 10). “Blameless” is a general term referring to a person’s overall character. Although Paul does not specify what type of testing is to take place, at a minimum, the candidate’s personal background, reputation, and theological positions should be examined. Moreover, the congregation should not only examine a potential deacon’s moral, spiritual, and doctrinal maturity, but should also consider the person’s track record of service in the church.

7. Godly wife (v. 11): It is debated whether verse 11 refers to a deacon’s wife or to a deaconess. For the sake of this discussion, we will assume the verse is speaking about the qualifications of a deacon’s wife. According to Paul, deacons’ wives must “be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things” (v. 11). Like her husband, the wife must be dignified or respectable. Secondly, she must not be a slanderer or a person who goes around spreading gossip. A deacon’s wife must also be sober-minded or temperate. That is, she must be able to make good judgments and must not be involved in things that might hinder such judgment. Finally, she must be “faithful in all things” (cf. 1 Tim. 5:10). This is a general requirement which functions similarly to the requirement for elders to be “above reproach” (1 Tim. 3:2; Titus 1:6) and for deacons to be “blameless” (1 Tim. 3:10).

8. Husband of one wife (v. 12): The best interpretation of this difficult phrase is to understand it as referring to the faithfulness of a husband toward his wife. He must be a “one-woman man.” That is, there must be no other woman in his life to whom he relates in an intimate way either emotionally or physically.

9. Manage children and household well (v. 12): A deacon must be the spiritual leader of his wife and children.

In general, if a moral qualification is listed for elders but not for deacons, that qualification still applies to deacons. The same goes for those qualifications listed for deacons but not for elders. For example, a deacon should not be double-tongued (v. 8, ESV). Paul does not explicitly say this about elders, but no doubt it applies to elders since Paul has said that elders must be “above reproach,” which would include this prohibition.

Still, we should observe the differences in the qualifications, since they either signify a trait that is particularly fitting for the office-holder in order to accomplish his duties, or is something that was a problem in the location to which Paul writes (in this case, Ephesus). This should be more clear as we turn to considering a deacon’s responsibilities.

THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF DEACONS

Whereas the office of elder is often ignored in the modern church, the office of deacon is often misunderstood. Based on the New Testament, the role of the deacon is mainly to be a servant. The church needs deacons to provide logistical and material support so that the elders can focus on the Word of God and prayer.

The New Testament does not provide much information concerning the role of deacons. The requirements given in 1 Timothy 3:8-12 focus on the deacon’s character and family life. There are, however, some clues as to the function of deacons when their requirements are compared with those of the elders. Although many of the qualifications are the same or very similar, there are some notable differences.

Perhaps the most noticeable distinction between elders and deacons is that deacons do not need to be “able to teach” (1 Tim. 3:2). Deacons are called to “hold” to the faith with a clear conscience, but they are not called to “teach” that faith (1 Tim. 3:9). This suggests that the deacons do not have an official teaching role in the church.

Like elders, deacons must manage their house and children well (1 Tim. 3:4, 12). But when referring to deacons, Paul omits the section where he compares managing one’s household to taking care of God’s church (1 Tim. 3:5). The reason for this omission is most likely due to the fact that deacons are not given a ruling or leading position in the church—that function belongs to the elders.

Although Paul indicates that a person must be tested before he can hold the office of deacon (1 Tim. 3:10), the requirement that he cannot be a new convert is not included. Paul notes that if an elder is a recent convert “he may become puffed up with conceit” (1 Tim. 3:6). One implication concerning this distinction could be that those who hold the office of elder are more susceptible to pride because they possess leadership over the church. On the contrary, it is not as likely for a deacon, who is in more of a servant role, to fall into this same sin. Finally, the title “overseer” (1 Tim. 3:2) implies general oversight over the spiritual well-being of the congregation, whereas the title “deacon” implies one who has a service-oriented ministry.

Beyond what we can glean from these differences in qualifications, the Bible does not clearly indicate the function of deacons. Yet based on the pattern established in Acts 6 with the apostles and the Seven, it seems best to view deacons as servants who do whatever is necessary to allow the elders to accomplish their God-given calling of shepherding and teaching the church. Just as the apostles delegated administrative responsibilities to the Seven, so the elders are to delegate certain responsibilities to the deacons so that the elders can focus their efforts elsewhere. As a result, each local church is free to define the tasks of deacons based on their particular needs.

What are some duties that deacons might be responsible for today? They could be responsible for anything that’s not related to teaching and shepherding the church. Such duties might include:

• Facilities: The deacons could be responsible for managing the church property. This would include making sure the place of worship is prepared for the worship service, cleaning up, or running the sound system.

• Benevolence: Similar to what took place in Acts 6:1–6 with the daily distribution to the widows, the deacons may be involved in administrating funds or other assistance to the needy.

• Finances: While the elders should probably oversee the financial business of the church (Acts 11:30), it may be best left to the deacons to handle the day-to-day matters. This would include collecting and counting the offering, keeping records, and so on.

• Ushers: The deacons could be responsible for distributing bulletins, seating the congregation, or preparing the elements for communion.

• Logistics: Deacons should be available to help in variety of ways so that the elders are able to concentrate on teaching and shepherding the church.

CONCLUSION

Whereas the Bible charges elders with the tasks of teaching and leading the church, deacons’ role is more service-oriented. That is, they are to care for the physical or temporal concerns of the church. By handling such matters, deacons free up the elders to focus on shepherding the spiritual needs of the congregation.

Yet even though deacons are not the congregation’s spiritual leaders, their character is of utmost importance, which is why deacons should be examined and held to the biblical qualifications laid down in 1 Timothy 3.

About the author:

Benjamin L. Merkle is Associate Professor of New Testament and Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina. He is the author of 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons (Kregel, 2008) and Why Elders? A Biblical and Practical Guide for Church Members (Kregel, 2009).

By Benjamin Merkle

Must We Use the Titles “Elder” and “Deacon”?

Do we need to use the titles “elder” and “deacon”? While the titles “elder” and “deacon” are not essential to the church’s ministry, there are several good reasons why churches should use these biblical titles.

“Using scriptural titles demonstrates that we are following God’s directions, not taking it upon ourselves to decide what the church’s leadership structure should be.”

First, it demonstrates that Scripture is our authority, not human wisdom. Using scriptural titles demonstrates that we are following God’s directions, not taking it upon ourselves to decide what the church’s leadership structure should be. God has provided the church with a basic structure that we should closely follow. To stray from that structure, or to decide that we don’t need to call our leaders what Scripture calls them, is to say that we know better than God.

Second, it helps the congregation to know what to expect from the leadership. When a church uses the terms “elder” and “deacon” like the Bible does, a church member can easily look to the Scripture to see their “job descriptions.” They can look to Scripture and know exactly what to expect from their leaders.

Third, it holds leaders to biblical qualifications. There are no biblical qualifications for trustees, council members, “leadership teams,” or other titles of our devising. There are, however, biblical qualifications for elders and deacons. Using the biblical terms for these offices is necessary in order to ensure that the biblical standards for leadership are being upheld. This is especially important in the case of elders, who must be able to teach God’s Word (1 Tim. 3:2). It immensely benefits the church when those who oversee the church’s affairs have a solid grasp on Scripture and are able to teach Scripture. In this way the church will be consistently, practically shaped by God’s Word, not by human wisdom.

About the author:

Benjamin L. Merkle is Associate Professor of New Testament and Greek at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina. He is the author of 40 Questions about Elders and Deacons (Kregel, 2008), and Why Elders? A Biblical and Practical Guide for Church Members (Kregel, 2009).

By Matt Schmucker

The Committee-Free, Task-Specific Deacon

British politician Joseph Chamberlain once quipped, “On every committee of thirteen persons there are twelve who go to the meetings having given no thought to the subject and ready to receive instructions. One goes with his mind made up to give those instructions. I make it my business to be that one.”

“Let me put this even more starkly: committees don’t work!”

My own experience with church committees would lead me to add one more individual to Chamberlain’s cast of committee characters: the one or two individuals who come to thwart progress. They can’t or won’t articulate a positive agenda; they simply know the articulated agenda is wrong.

Let me put this even more starkly: committees don’t work!

Really?

Technically, I’m on solid ground. Committees don’t work, individuals on committees work. And if we’re honest, our experience is probably like Mr. Chamberlain’s: most committee members haven’t thought about the committee’s agenda since the last time they met. It’s only the committee chairman who feels the pressure to get something done.

Committees can be inefficient, slow, and discouraging. If you doubt my word, go join your first church committee!

Before I dig this hole too deep, I’ll admit I’m not anti-group on everything. I think families should eat together, elders should meet together, and church members should worship together. But how about deacons? Should the office of the church that is charged with doing the spiritual work of giving physical care meet together in a committee?

SHOULD DEACONS MEET AS A BOARD OR COMMITTEE?

First, a disclaimer. I don’t think this is a matter of obedience or disobedience to Scripture. I want to make it very clear that here I think we’re swimming in the waters of prudence. That said, here are three arguments for not having the deacons meet together as a board:

1. Boards, like committees, are inefficient. How many important tasks in a church go undone because the deacon board has to meet first? It is a mistake not to grant authority to a deacon to act on behalf of the group. So instead of having every decision filter through a committee, empower a trustworthy deacon to act and watch how much good happens.

2. Getting clogged in committees can discourage a deacon. Why should a qualified deacon who is competent to manage the facilities have to run the gauntlet of a deacon board and seek the approval of less qualified commentators? Again, it is a question of efficiency, but not only efficiency. It is encouraging when a gifted deacon is able to exercise his gift, and it is discouraging when the gifted deacon gets trapped in the administrative labyrinth of a committee. Further, when a church or committee doesn’t grant a deacon the authority to act independently, it seems to communicate distrust, which can also discourage a deacon.

3. A deacon board can be easily pitted against an elder board. Scripture does not set up elders and deacons as two separate legislative bodies (as with the House of Representatives and the Senate in the United States Congress) with the executive branch (the senior pastor) signing into law a negotiated piece of legislation. Scripture designates elders as the shepherds of the church, while the deacons are to support the elders’ work through caring for the church’s physical needs. Having the deacons meet as a board can tend toward this unbiblical and potentially paralyzing “bicameral legislature” type of structure.

IF NOT A BOARD OF DEACONS, WHAT? TRY TASK-SPECIFIC DEACONS

If deacons do not meet as a board or committee, what should they do?

Assuming you have a qualified board of elders giving oversight to the church, I would suggest appointing “task-specific deacons.” That is, don’t appoint a general board of deacons who then share all deacon-related responsibilities, but appoint a deacon for a specific task that helps keep the church in good order.

“The bottom line? I would suggest that the church find qualified deacons and then put them to work in areas where they have interest and expertise, unhindered by a committee”

Types of task-specific deacons could include:

• A deacon of buildings, who is responsible for maintaining any buildings the church owns and physically preparing for worship.

• A deacon of grounds, who is responsible for grounds, organizing volunteers for cutting grass, removing snow, and so on.

• A deacon of weddings, who is responsible for the physical preparation related to all weddings. This person does not coordinate the wedding, but represents the church in the care and use of the building during weddings, and relieves the church staff from long weekend hours spent on weddings.

• A deacon of child care, who is responsible for implementing a child protection policy as well as forming teams of teachers and care-givers.

• A deacon of library/book table, who is responsible to order and maintain access to good reading approved by the elders/pastors.

• A deacon of ordinances, who is responsible to set up baptism and the Lord’s Supper, as well as recruit volunteers for distribution and clean up.

• A deacon of sound, who is responsible for microphones, sound boards, recording sermons, and so forth.

These are just a few suggestions for task-specific deacons. You may also need a deacon for parking or legal matters or college ministry.

Do such task-specific deacons ever need to meet together? Not necessarily. What about the church budget? Should the deacons or a finance committee pull together the budget? Instead, why not appoint a deacon of budget who interviews each task-specific deacon regarding his area of oversight and asks him about his financial requirements for the next year? Then let that deacon of budget present his first take on the budget to the elders, who will then prepare the budget and present it to the congregation.

The bottom line? I would suggest that the church find qualified deacons and then put them to work in areas where they have interest and expertise, unhindered by a committee. Let each deacon form and lead teams of volunteers who love serving Christ’s church together.

About the author:

Matt Schmucker is executive director of 9Marks, is an elder at Capitol Hill Baptist Church, and has sat on one too many committees.

By Phil Newton

Moving from a Deacon-Led to an Elder-Led Church

In one of my early pastorates, two deacons did something unusual: they actually shepherded the congregation. Apart from those two men, the church had a typical mid-twentieth-century Baptist polity: eight deacons served as a board of directors, and the congregation as a whole voted on virtually every decision affecting church life at monthly business meetings. The deacons generally focused on property, finances, and occasional squabbles.

ELDERS BY ANY OTHER NAME?

Yet in both character and practice, these two men did the work of elders. They simply lacked the title. They kept watch over and shepherded the church (Heb. 13:17; Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 1:2), taught sound doctrine (Titus 1:9), exercised spiritual oversight (1 Peter 5:2), and set an example of faithful Christian living (1 Peter 5:3).

I seriously doubt that either man thought of himself as an elder. But that’s precisely what the church should have recognized. Instead, the church confused the biblical offices, which are important for the church’s health, and expected deacons to act like elders without the necessary qualifications, gifts, or authority.

Could the problem have been settled by merely changing all the deacons’ title to elders? Absolutely not! While two men already fulfilled the office, the rest clearly did the role of deacons—servants of the church—with occasional elders’ responsibilities foisted upon them.

How can such a “deacon model” church—or any church in a similar situation—move toward recognizing the qualified men as elders? First, you, the pastor, would need to address the obstacles in the way of implementing the biblical model.

OBSTACLES IN THE WAY OF TRANSITIONING TO ELDERS

1. The congregation probably doesn’t understand the Bible’s teaching on elders. In moving to recognize men as elders, you are asking a congregation to understand and implement a biblical practice. This requires the patient exposition of Scripture—engaging the congregation, small groups, and individuals in interpreting and applying God’s Word. Many objections to changes in polity lose their sting when Christians think biblically.

2. Many congregations have a long history with a bloated, unwieldy congregationalism. Rather than a healthy, robust congregationalism, this church that I mentioned above practiced congregational micromanagement. Nothing got done without laborious business meetings, which often ended in hurt feelings and bruised egos. Changing this, again, requires patient teaching and dialogue on the New Testament and the historical ideas of congregationalism. Maybe teach the church about its own doctrinal confession (if it’s a good one), explaining what it says about the offices of elders/deacons, while also showing how congregationalism developed in this particular setting. Such a study provides a platform for setting forth a portrait of biblical and effective church polity.

3. When moving from a deacon model to an elder model, the deacons who are not selected to become elders may become jealous. Such jealousy can splay into massive division, often scuttling any chance for the church to transition their leadership structure. How can this be addressed? By taking a long-range view of elder and deacon leadership. Concentrate on biblical qualifications for current deacons (1 Timothy 3:8-13), thus raising the bar. This thins the number of deacon candidates. Also, labor to show the biblical distinction between the two offices’ responsibilities. A man who simply desires a title has no business acquiring one. Lay out expectations for deacons and elders so that the church anticipates their biblical practice. A few may continue to harbor jealousy, but the church will likely be wise to it.

4. Perhaps no current deacons are qualified to serve as elders. Merely transitioning one title to another with more intense duties will not help. Rather, men must be cultivated with a view toward serving as elders. Begin by recognizing men that appear to be “above reproach” (Titus 1:6). Help them develop greater consistency in their walks with Christ.

Nurture them in God’s Word and sound doctrine. Do they show love for the Word? Can they articulate sound doctrine? After a period of regular dialogue over the Scriptures, give them opportunities to teach. Critique, encourage, and evaluate them. Are they teachable and eager to help the body understand God’s Word?

“How can a pastor lead the transition from deacons to elders as the spiritual leaders in the church?”

Take them with you on pastoral visits. Do they delight in shepherding the flock? Recognize that some rightly belong in the office of deacon. However, a few may evidence the qualities needed in elders. Continue investing in these men. Give them responsibilities for shepherding the church so that the congregation can begin to see the value of having non-staff elders.

LEADING THE TRANSITION

Beyond all these obstacles is the actual transition. How can a pastor lead the transition from deacons to elders as the spiritual leaders in the church?

Speed Kills

As the bumper sticker puts it, “Speed Kills.” So does an impatient move to turn qualified deacons into elders. Trying to do this without adequate preparation will likely create chaos if not the sudden loss of a pastorate!

How much time is adequate for the transition? That will vary, but I tend to think a minimum of eighteen months to three years is necessary to transition the leadership structure of a church. Why so long? Because most churches lack biblical clarity. They have lived with their polity structures without scrutinizing them in light of Scripture, and you, the pastor are calling on them to uproot long-held positions.

So if you want this to change, you must patiently teach biblical polity, layering through different venues: the pulpit, Bible study, small group, men’s meetings, one-on-one, and so on. Layering serves the church better than offering a crash course in polity. More important, however, than changing polity is teaching the church to think biblically. The better a pastor teaches his congregation to rightly interpret Scripture, the better they’ll be able to understand biblical church leadership and desire the change themselves, which will lead to a far smoother transition.

Be Intentional

Be intentional. Give the congregation space to work toward a biblical understanding of polity. Perhaps you, the pastor, had to work through polity issues over several years. The church will likely need the same amount of time, if not more. Few react well to new concepts crammed down their throats.

CONCLUSION

So set goals, but be patient. Teach, preach, and pray until the church delights in the gospel. As the congregation begins to grasp the nature and mission of the church, connect the structural dots for them. In time, they will hopefully begin to respond to the Word. Then lay out a plan to nominate qualified men to serve as elders. Following the method prescribed in the church’s governing documents, revise the polity to reflect elder leadership in the congregation. And throughout the transition, seek to move forward humbly and patiently for the glory of Christ and the good of your church.

About the author:

Phil Newton is the senior pastor of South Woods Baptist Church in Memphis, Tennessee, and the author of Elders in Congregational Life: Rediscovering the Biblical Model for Church Leadership (Kregel, 2005).

By Matt Schmucker

How to Separate Deacon Work from Elder Work

The Evil One loves to divide, and he often divides most effectively along the lines of authority: husband and wife, parent and child, boss and employee. This is true in the church as well. Whether between the pastors and the congregation or within the church’s leadership, division causes Christ’s church to suffer.

One way this division creeps into the church is when issues arise that don’t clearly fall to either the elders or the deacons.

The goal of this article is clarify how to separate deacon work from elder work. This will help to minimize division between elders and deacons and thus preserve unity among the church’s leaders.

WHERE’S THE RUB?

Fights occur over issues that don’t clearly fall to either elders or deacons. If it’s clear to all parties who’s responsible for something, there’s no cause for dispute. But trouble occurs when it’s less clear: Is this deacon work? Is it elder work? How much should the elders comment on the deacons’ work? Can the deacons weigh in on the elders’ conclusions?

My answer is a rock solid, “It depends.”

No deacon should object to the elders’ ability to pick Sunday School teachers. No elder should argue with the deacons about the furniture polish used on the communion table. If you have this level of disputes in your church, you need to do some basic teaching about what an elder is, and what a deacon is. Your elders should know they are responsible for the spiritual oversight of the church, and your deacons should know they are responsible for the physical and material needs of the church. If both parties don’t know that, start there.

On the other hand, the tough cases are tough because the issue falls on the boundary line between the spiritual oversight of the church and its physical and material care, or the issue involves both domains.

In order to try to sort some of these struggles out, let me give you three brief scenarios where the jurisdiction issue is fuzzy, two suggestions for bringing clarity, and two encouragements for the road ahead.

THREE FUZZY SCENARIOS

Here are three scenarios that seem to fall on the line between elders’ and deacons’ responsibilities:

1. Babies are being born and the nursery needs to be expanded. Whose job is it, the elders’ or deacons’? You might think this is deacon work, but if the elders are doing their job well, they will have seen the growing need in the natural course of their shepherding. If you take in fifty new members over the course of two years who are single, the elders should expect to need an expanded nursery in five years or so! This matter will finally be resolved by the deacons through a construction project, but it should be initiated by the elders as they give oversight to the congregation.

2. Ninety-year-old Mrs. Spandler turned her car keys over to her daughter and can’t get around like she used to. You might think the responsibility for getting her to church falls to the elders, but we would encourage the deacons to step up here. Consider appointing a “deacon of member care” who focuses on the physical needs of especially needy members such as elderly shut-ins.

3. It’s September and the church’s budget needs to be passed before December 31st. Who leads? Finances sound like a deacon matter, right? In part. A budget is one picture of a church’s vision. Show me the money and I’ll show you the heart of the church. Therefore, elders should take the lead and give direction. That doesn’t mean the deacons cannot help by submitting estimates and listing needs for their areas of service. And a deacon of budget can pull the entire spreadsheet together and propose a budget for the elders to begin working with. But the elders should apportion and balance the budget, weighing, for example, local needs (such as buildings and salaries) against international missions. I would recommend that the elders present the budget to the church with the support of the deacons.

TWO CLARIFYING SUGGESTIONS

How should elders and deacons decide which issues are or are not primarily their responsibility?

Here are two suggestions that should help clarify matters:

1. Elders should be careful to keep administrative (deacon) matters from dominating their agenda. The work of the elders can easily be overwhelmed by a church’s unending stream of seemingly urgent physical matters, yet this is not their main task. Consider forming an administrative sub-committee among the elders that can address more deacon-oriented concerns before they get to the elders. This can keep administrative concerns from clogging up the agenda of the elders as a whole. Give that sub-committee authority to act on behalf of the elders. On the flip side, elders can quickly take the legs out from under the deacons and thus discourage them by too much oversight. Instead, elders should delegate responsibilities to faithful servants and trust them to capably handle such matters.

“Elders: Labor to build trust with the deacons. Don’t assume they trust you by the mere fact that you hold an office.”

2. Elders should model good communication. How? First, they should seek counsel from the deacons before making certain decisions. Consider Proverbs 15:22: “Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed.” Second, they should make sure the deacon are never be caught off guard by any of the elders’ decisions. Therefore, keep the lines of communication open between the elders and the deacons. Consider planning one-on-one conversations between elders and deacons, as well as having a periodic gathering of both groups in which the elders inform deacons about decisions the elders have made before they put such matters before the whole church.

TWO ENCOURAGEMENTS FOR THE ROAD AHEAD

Finally, here are two encouragements to elders and deacons to press on in your work and labor for unity:

1. Elders: Labor to build trust with the deacons. Don’t assume they trust you by the mere fact that you hold an office. Work overtime to communicate with deacons and carefully consider their counsel. As the deacons’ trust and confidence grows, you will defeat the evil one’s divisive ways.

2. Deacons: Assume a posture of support without an attitude of “playing second fiddle.” According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 the gift of “administrating” is right up there with apostles, prophets, miracles, and healing. If you have a gift for administration and the qualities of a deacon (1 Tim. 3:8-13) you are a gift to Christ’s church. You have been given a particular “manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.” (1 Cor. 12:7) Use your gift to put down division and build up Christ’s body.

In short, be aware of the overlapping areas of responsibility that elders and deacons may have, and work to clarify which group should handle different issues. Fight against turfiness. Communicate openly and thoroughly with each other. In doing so, you will fight off division and model godly unity among the leaders for all the flock to see, profit from, and imitate.

About the author:

Matt Schmucker is executive director of 9Marks and is an elder at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC.

By John Ingold

A Deacon on a Deacon’s Reward

From January 2005 to January 2008, I was blessed to serve as “deacon of bookstall” at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC.

Blessed to serve is a phrase that rolls off the tongue readily enough, though often with less consideration than it deserves. I must have used the phrase dozens of times while I was a deacon, but it was not until after my term that I actively counted the many ways God had rewarded my service.

ONE DEACON’S REWARD: BEING TAUGHT AND ENCOURAGED

The “bookstall” is what our church calls its bookstore. As deacon of bookstall, my responsibilities included ordering books approved by our elders, preparing them for sale, and maintaining a roster of volunteers to staff the bookstall after services. These are modest tasks that did not require special skill, but they placed very real demands on my time while I was also working to finish law school, prepare for the bar exam, and reenter the workforce.

My service was not always offered joyfully or faithfully, but God incommensurately rewarded my efforts by teaching and encouraging me in a number of ways.

Through Others’ Actions

First, God taught and encouraged me through the actions of many fellow believers. My occasional service often gave me opportunity to see the more demanding and sacrificial efforts of others. When I received a couple of book orders on a Thursday night, I left the church building just as the elders were assembling to spend hours praying for and shepherding our church. When I shelved a few books before the Wednesday night Bible study, there were several single women boxing up 9Marks materials to ship to pastors and others around the globe.

Seeing others’ faithfulness exposed my own heart’s faithlessness and encouraged me to greater selflessness.

Through Others’ Words

Second, God taught and encouraged me through the words of my brothers and sisters. On many occasions, someone would buy a book, and then explain that the book was headed to an unbelieving roommate, or to a country closed to the gospel. At other times, a brother would share how a particular book helped him understand that he was cultivating a sin that was damaging his relationships with others.

One elder’s purchases were usually accompanied by thequery “Have you read this?” followed by an explanation of how he or the person who recommended it to him had benefited from it. This openness encouraged me to pray for those sharing their lives with me and to more readily open my life to others.

Through Others’ Writings

Third, God taught and encouraged me through the words and actions of brothers and sisters I have never met. My work with the bookstall placed at hand centuries of Christian wisdom and faithfulness.

In the biography section, I learned of the constancy of Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley, and others—even to martyrdom. John Murray spoke up from the theology section and provided a greatly needed, Scripture-saturated lesson on redemption. Jerry Bridges uncovered a whole category of unacknowledged sin in my heart.

Dozens of others took me by the hand and generously shared the fruit of their diligent and faithful work in Scripture.

Through Reflecting on God’s Blessings

Fourth, God taught and encouraged me as I reflected on his blessings. Thinking of the way he used the words and actions of his people increased my faith and joy in him.

“These abundant rewards that I received were undeserved. They are a testimony not to me, but to God’s faithfulness and to the amazing way he works through us, his people, to benefit one another.”

Even as I write these words, I wonder at the marvelous way the church reflects the glory of God. It strengthens my faith to see the fruit of the Spirit in the life of an older brother or sister who has followed Christ many decades. It fills me with joy to see a new Christian develop a thirst for knowledge of God. And it fills me with desire for eternal communion with the entire body of Christ when I consider the faithfulness of those who have already entered God’s rest.

CONCLUSION

These abundant rewards that I received were undeserved. They are a testimony not to me, but to God’s faithfulness and to the amazing way he works through us, his people, to benefit one another.

Other deacons may have different responsibilities, but they all are positioned to see God’s people interact with one another. They all have a front row seat to see the faithfulness of others. They can see God use their own imperfect service to encourage other saints. They can learn from other Christians who share their joy in the Lord. The specific rewards may differ, but for all of us it is a joy to serve the living God by serving his people.

About the author:

John Ingold is a member of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC. He lives on Capitol Hill, where he works on policy issues related to operational risk.

Book Review: The New Testament Deacon: The Church’s Minister of Mercy

Reviewed by Bobby Jamieson

Alexander Strauch, The New Testament Deacon: The Church’s Minister of Mercy. Lewis and Roth, 1992. 191 pages. $12.99

What are deacons supposed to do? Are they to serve as the church’s executive board to whom the Pastor-CEO reports? Are they to be the church’s spiritual leaders?

“Who should be a deacon? Is a deacon simply a long-serving member whom the church honors with a title, like a politician receiving an honorary doctorate?”

Who should be a deacon? Is a deacon simply a long-serving member whom the church honors with a title, like a politician receiving an honorary doctorate?

If these questions were merely hypothetical, Alexander Strauch’s book The New Testament Deacon: The Church’s Minister of Mercy would be wholly unnecessary. But given that in many churches the role of deacon is defined more by tradition or corporate culture than by Scripture, Strauch’s solid treatment of the biblical teaching on deacons is more necessary than many church leaders may realize.

SOLID, EVEN-HANDED EXPOSITION

In this book Strauch simply walks verse-by-verse through Acts 6:1-7, Philippians 1:1, and 1 Timothy 3:8-13. The latter two passages are the only passages in the Bible where the term “deacon” is used of an office in the church (except possibly Romans 16:1). Acts 6 is generally regarded as setting forth a prototype of deacons, since the same division of labor between the ministry of the Word and caring for the church’s practical needs seems to apply to both the apostles and the seven and to elders and deacons.

Strauch’s book is filled with straightforward, even-handed exposition. He shows through Scripture that deacons are not a board of directors or the church’s spiritual leaders. Rather, deacons are to care for the “needy, poor, and suffering” members of our churches (11) and relieve the church’s elders of “many practical needs…so that the shepherds can attend more fully to teaching, guarding, and leading the whole flock” (12). In the first part of the book, Strauch highlights the division of labor between the ministry of the Word and caring for the church’s physical needs which Acts 6 and the qualifications listed in 1 Timothy 3 seem to imply. Then, after discussing the two offices seen in Philippians 1:1, he amply expounds both the meaning and importance of the qualifications for deacons Paul lays down in 1 Timothy 3.

Pastor, are you looking for a biblical primer on the role, responsibilities, and qualifications of deacons? Strauch’s book is a good place to start.

If you’re not looking for a biblical primer on deacons—and who is, really?—let me ask you, are your deacons more like a corporate board or like the biblically qualified servants of the church’s physical needs? Could it be that the biblical teaching on deacons is something that deserves further study for the sake of your own church’s health? If so, I commend Strauch’s book to you.

A FEW MINOR DISAGREEMENTS

That said, I’ve got just a few minor disagreements to register.

The first is that Strauch slightly reduces the biblical picture of deacons by referring to them as “ministers of mercy.” He speaks of the work of deacons almost entirely in terms of caring for the poor and needy within the church. His basis for this: the seven in Acts 6 were put in charge of the daily distribution of food, which apparently was the Jerusalem church’s benevolence ministry to its needy members. This left the apostles free to devote themselves to the ministry of the Word and prayer (see Acts 6:2-4). And Strauch argues that the division of labor between the apostles and the seven also applies to elders and deacons today, which seems legitimate in view of the differences in their titles and qualifications.

Yet Strauch seems to go just slightly astray here by assuming that because the seven in Acts 6 were put in charge of benevolence, caring for poor members is more or less the only responsibility deacons should have.

But what happens in a contemporary church in which there are many more time-consuming administrative matters than distributing food to poor members? Does the same division of labor apply? Can deacons be put in charge of sound systems and child care? If not, what protects the elders ability to devote themselves to the Word and prayer? The rationale of using Acts 6 as instructive for an elder/deacon division of labor seems to be lost. If the deacons are to handle the church’s physical needs, the job descriptions of deacons in many churches will need to extend far beyond caring for poor church members.

While Strauch doesn’t explicitly argue that deacons shouldn’t have more responsibilities than simply caring for the poor, his label “ministers of mercy” and his discussion of the role of deacons seem to limit deacons’ work to something narrower than what Scripture warrants. If the office of deacon was born (or at least foreshadowed) when a need arose that saddled the Apostles with too much administrative responsibility, it seems best to view deacons as servants who should handle all such administrative matters, rather than simply as “ministers of mercy.”

A second, related matter is that Strauch frequently treats Acts 6 as if it provides an exact description of the office of deacon. While I agree with Strauch that the seven in Acts 6 were prototypes of deacons, I think that we should be careful about seeing a one-to-one correspondence between them and the biblical office of deacon.

One final matter is that Strauch’s arguments against women deacons are not entirely persuasive. In part this is because he fails to make a compelling case that Paul’s prohibition of a woman exercising authority over a man in 1 Timothy 2:12 applies to the work of deacons.

A GOOD PLACE TO START

These minor disagreements aside, Strauch’s book is a solid overview of the Bible’s teaching on deacons. If you want to understand the Bible’s teaching on deacons, this is a great place to start.

About the author:

Bobby Jamieson is assistant editor for 9Marks.

Book Review: Liberating Ministry from the Success Syndrome

Reviewed by Ken Barbic

Kent and Barbara Hughes, Liberating Ministry from the Success Syndrome. Crossway, 2008 (originally published by Tyndale House, 1987). 208 pages. $14.99

Biblical, practical, and anecdotal. That’s not a bad combination of characteristics for a book on ministry. Yet Kent and Barbara Hughes’ book Liberating Ministry from Success Syndrome is all three. In it, this faithful biblical expositor calls on a lifetime of ministry experience to reorient his readers’ understanding of success in ministry.

Indeed, the book is grounded in Kent Hughes own story, since he speaks as one whose understanding of success underwent profound transformation. Many readers may be aware of his years of service as pastor of the College Church in Wheaton, Illinois, but fewer will know of his early years as pastor of a small congregation in southern California. In the book, the Hughes speak honestly and frankly about those early days. The Lord used these days, they say, to reveal a heart that understood ministry success in worldly terms.

AN EVANGELICAL CLASSIC

A classic in conservative evangelical literature, Liberating Ministry has been in print for over twenty years. It’swritten with a transparent, personal, and pastoral tone that is accessible and applicable to pastors and church members alike. I read Liberating Ministry for the first time as a sophomore at a conservative Christian college that was far removed from the predominant “mega-church” philosophy of the nineties which the book seems to be addressing. Yet I was and continue to be challenged by the way the Hughes go after the heart.

For instance, the Hughes enlist the example of Jesus ministering to the Samaritan woman at the well in order to make the point that we must tirelessly pursue faithfulness. They write,

In his exhaustion it would have been so easy for him to mutter, ‘I’ve been ministering to thousands. I’ve got to have time to rest. I’ll just keep my eyes shut and ignore her.’ Not Jesus! He went for her soul in one of the most beautiful displays of gracious aggression in all of Scripture. He continued to minister when necessary, even at the point of exhaustion. And we, if we are faithful, will do as our Master did!” (42)

“In other words, Liberating Ministry challenges church leaders who may be orthodox in doctrine and biblical in ecclesiology to watch not just their doctrine but their life!”

Church leaders who have rejected a pragmatic, church-growth philosophy may be tempted to assume they have a solid grasp of what success in ministry looks like. Yet the Hughes go beyond forms and structures to aim at the motivations of such leaders anyway. I read Liberating Ministry years ago, as I said, and agreed with it then. But still, rereading it now helped me to see afresh how my sinful heart gently and constantly urges me to misconceive of success in ministry.

In other words, Liberating Ministry challenges church leaders who may be orthodox in doctrine and biblical in ecclesiology to watch not just their doctrine but their life!

No doubt, Liberating Ministry is an excellent work that deserves to be read and applied.

A FEW DEFICIENCIES

There are a couple matters I think could use some tweaking. They might have given a fuller treatment of the importance of prayer, particularly understanding “success” when prayers seem to go unanswered. They also might have either re-titled the section on holiness “purity,” since it focused principally on sexual purity, or they might have given a fuller treatment of personal holiness beyond the sexual arena.

A little more substantially, the book seems to assume that its readers rightly understand and know how to apply the gospel. So the Hughes provide an excellent redefinition of success, which focuses on the seven characteristics of faithfulness, serving, loving, believing, prayer, holiness, and attitude. But at the root of a wrong understanding of success in ministry is an inherent contortion of misapplication of the gospel. Perhaps the discussion could have begun there and then proceeded to these well-chosen characteristics?

Finally, the Hughes treatment of attitude seems to equate joy and hope with optimism. For instance, they write,

There is a sense in which attitude is everything. Our physicians tell us this is so when they remind us that a high percentage of illnesses are produced by unhealthy mind-sets and attitudes. The influence of positive mental attitude is not limited to medicine. Today ‘attitude’ is virtually a sports cliché. Attitude, we are told, separates the greats from the also-rans. Similarly, educators, marriage counselors, corporate managers, military brass—all assert the importance of attitude. (96)

It’s true that an optimistic attitude is helpful, but there is a difference between an optimistic attitude and biblical hope and joy. One is a supernatural gift of the Spirit, and one isn’t. As such, it is possible for a Christian minister to struggle throughout his life with a less than optimistic perspective and still have a Spirit-given hope. It’s also possible for an optimistic person to not walk by faith.

AN EXCEPTIONAL SUCCESS

The book doesn’t claim to be an extensive treatment of the cultural forces driving wrong views of ministry success. Nor does it mean to be a manual for biblical practices within the church. For these topics, one should consult, respectively, The Courage to be Protestant by David Wells or The Deliberate Church by Mark Dever and Paul Alexander.

Instead, Liberating Ministry attempts to bring refreshment to the soul of anyone that has been laboring in the desert of ministry drought. It attempts to biblically reshape the heart of the Christian minister, and in these attempts it is exceptionally successful.

About the author:

Ken Barbic works as the Director of Federal Government Affairs for the Western Growers Association and is a member of Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C.

May/June 2010

©9Marks

Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format, provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you do not make more than 1,000 physical copies. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be explicitly approved by 9Marks.

Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: ©9Marks. Website: www.9Marks.org. Email: info@9marks.org. 