Before Transitioning to a Plurality of Elders, Know Your Church’s History
September 10, 2026
September 10, 2026
Abstract: Zach Kilpatrick offers counsel to pastors who are leading a church to transition from a single-pastor polity to a plurality of elders. In this first of a three-part series, Kilpatrick urges pastors to get to know their church’s history so that they can be aware of potential hazards in leading through this significant change. There’s pastoral wisdom in knowing your people and the factors that have shaped them in the past.
Many pastors begin their ministry in churches that need reform. Unfortunately, many can also tell the tale of having proceeded with change without understanding where the church has been and how it got into the state it is now in. Brother pastor, knowing your church’s history is of great value no matter what your state of play is, but it is especially helpful to know if you’re looking to bring change.
This article is the first in a three-part series meant to help you consider some practical steps to lead a transition from a single-pastor polity to a plurality of elders.11 .I’m using the terms “pastor” and “elder” interchangeably. It is born out of personal experience, as I’ve had the privilege of leading such change in a two-hundred-year-old, traditional Southern Baptist church.
The three steps we’ll explore for making this change include: (1) Evaluation (how to use church history as a hazard map), (2) Education (helping members see the change that’s needed), and (3) Execution (taking the necessary steps to lead the transition). In this first article, we’ll consider the “Evaluation” step.
Knowledge of your church’s history is less like a treasure map and more like a hazard map. Engineers use hazard maps to identify areas where they are likely to encounter threats or problems, such as floods, landslides, and earthquakes. This gives them a forewarning and allows them to plan adequately. Knowing where your people have been before you showed up works in a similar way.
My pastor friend has served his church for years. Over that time, he has been faithful and his people trust him. He seems primed to lead them to having a plurality of elders. The problem is that the pastor before him had tried to force that very change on the church before they were ready for it. The church almost split as a result, and the people remain sensitive and even edgy when it comes to the topic of elders.
Knowing the wounds caused by that man’s zeal absent wisdom informs how my friend should approach this change. Rather than assuming agreement and proceeding quickly, he should be patient, give himself to overexplaining, and strain to listen carefully to objections. His church’s history doesn’t bar him from implementing a biblical model of church leadership, but it should color how he goes about it.
So how do you identify hazards from your church’s history? Consider these diagnostic questions.
I’m not just referring to the big ones like dissolving the deacon board and having a plurality of elders. Ask yourself: Did the congregation joyfully receive some of the contemporary hymns you introduced back when you became the pastor? Were they united 25 years ago when they built a new building? If so, you might feel more confident that they can embrace the next change like they have the past ones.
If, however, change has historically spelled division, then you will need to be cautious, doubling down on patience as part of your strategy.
If you pastor a five-year-old church, no one is more than five years invested in the current polity. This means they probably hold it more loosely.
However, if you pastor a one-hundred-year-old church, you probably have members who have done it a certain way longer than you’ve been alive! They likely feel that whatever you’re trying to change is part of the church’s identity. Don’t make the mistake of thinking an issue weighs five pounds when, to your people, it weighs more like a hundred.
If you are in a smaller, rural “family church,” then it is likely that some of the members have had fathers, grandfathers, uncles, or other men whom they deeply admired who served as the pastor. In such cases, the introduction of a different model may feel to them like an attack on family values.
You will probably need to introduce a change with a lot of grace, being careful to avoid speaking harshly or overcritically of your forebears. Just because they’re not there doesn’t mean the people don’t defend them. Most importantly, you must help your people understand how the change you’re making is rooted in Scripture. Help them see how this change will increase the church’s spiritual health, like encouraging someone to add leafy greens to their diet.
Be brutally honest with yourself here. How long have you served the church? How does your tenure stack up to the tenure of the five previous pastors? Have you led well during your time there, or have you made some shaky leadership decisions?
An honest assessment in this area will help you understand how the church views your leadership. If they are still getting to know you or haven’t seen you lead well, then you likely need to give it some more time.
But if you’ve pastored the church for seven years and the average pastoral tenure for the previous few pastors was 3.5 years, then they might be poised to follow you through a change in leadership structure.
Remember, you aren’t just leading an institution; you are leading people—God’s people! Taking time to understand their story isn’t just prudent; it is pastoral. You’re not only preparing to lead a change in polity but also showing care and concern for brothers and sisters in Christ.
The evaluation step isn’t glamorous. After all, we aren’t talking about a teaching series on Acts 14 or implementing congregational voting yet. Nonetheless, evaluation will inform everything that comes next, so be honest and thorough. Talk to longtime members, mine the minutes, and let what you find shape how you lead.