Should a Church Be Led by One Pastor or a Team of Elders?

Question 09092

Whether a congregation should be led by one pastor or by a plural eldership is a question with more practical consequence than most people expect. It shapes how decisions are made, how a minister is protected from himself, and what happens to a church when its leading figure is ill, or wrong, or gone.

My answer is that the New Testament pattern is clearly plural, and that the arrangement most British churches actually have is a single pastor with a group of deacons. I want to explain the pattern, be honest about the practical difficulties, and suggest what a smaller congregation can realistically do.

The New Testament Pattern Is Plural Eldership

The evidence is unusually consistent. When Paul and Barnabas appointed leaders in the churches they had planted, they appointed elders, plural, in every church (Acts 14:23). Paul sent to Ephesus and called for the elders of the church, plural again for one congregation (Acts 20:17).

The letters follow the same pattern. Paul writes to the saints at Philippi with the overseers and deacons (Philippians 1:1). Titus is left in Crete to appoint elders in every town (Titus 1:5). James tells the sick believer to call for the elders of the church (James 5:14). Peter addresses the elders among you (1 Peter 5:1).

There is no example anywhere in the New Testament of a single individual leading a local congregation on his own. That is a striking silence in a document so full of practical instruction, and it is the foundation of the case for plural eldership.

The Words Describe One Office

It is worth clearing up the vocabulary, because much confusion here is linguistic. Three words are used of the same men. presbuteros, elder, speaks of maturity. episkopos, overseer, speaks of function. poimen, shepherd or pastor, speaks of care.

Paul uses all three of the same group in a single passage at Miletus, calling for the elders and then telling them that the Spirit has made them overseers, to shepherd the church of God (Acts 20:17, Acts 20:28). Peter does the same in 1 Peter 5:1-2. One office, three descriptions, and no hierarchy among them.

That has an immediate implication. A pastor is an elder, and elders are pastors. The common arrangement in which one paid man is the pastor and the others are something lesser has no foundation in the vocabulary of the New Testament, whatever practical distinctions of time and training may exist.

Why Plural Eldership Protects Everybody

The practical arguments follow the biblical one rather than replacing it, and they are considerable. A shared leadership means no single man is unaccountable, and unaccountability is the soil in which pride, harshness and moral failure grow. Every serious ministerial collapse I have known involved a man who had become answerable to nobody in practice.

It protects the minister as well as the church. The weight of decisions, difficult pastoral cases and criticism is genuinely heavy, and carrying it alone is a slow crushing. Where there is a plural eldership, the load is shared, the mistakes are caught earlier, and a man has somewhere to be honest.

It also protects the congregation’s future. A church whose entire spiritual life runs through one personality discovers its fragility the day he retires or falls ill. Where there is a team, continuity is possible and the congregation does not experience every transition as a crisis.

What About the Angels of the Churches?

Those who argue for single leadership point to the messengers or angels addressed in Revelation 2 and 3, and to figures such as James in Jerusalem and Timothy in Ephesus. The arguments deserve an answer rather than a dismissal.

On Revelation, the Greek word is angelos, which most naturally means a heavenly messenger, and the identification with a single ruling minister is an inference rather than a statement. On James, he plainly had prominence at the Jerusalem council, and the council was still conducted by the apostles and the elders together (Acts 15:6). On Timothy and Titus, both were temporary apostolic delegates sent to appoint elders, which is the opposite of a case for permanent single rule.

It is fair to say that leadership among equals is normal and that some men carry more weight, through gift, time or years. Plural eldership does not mean interchangeable men or leadership by committee. It means a genuine team in which one may lead without ruling.

Where the Congregation Fits

Elder leadership is not the same as elder rule, and the distinction matters in a Baptist setting. In my own congregation, spiritual oversight belongs to the leadership and final authority in the church’s decisions rests with the gathered membership. We bring recommendations with our reasons, the members are free to decide otherwise, and we are bound by what they decide.

Some find that arrangement uncomfortable, and I understand why. It is slower and it can be frustrating. But the New Testament shows congregations involved in significant decisions, choosing the seven in Acts 6:3 and acting corporately in the discipline of a member. Accountability that runs only upwards is not accountability at all.

I have written more fully on the different systems in what church government is and what congregational government involves.

The Honest Difficulty in a Small Church

Now let me be candid about my own situation, because ideals stated without the practical difficulty are not much use. Mine is not a large congregation, and qualified men are not always available. My deacons presently function in both an elder and a deacon capacity, which is a pragmatic accommodation rather than a fulfilment of the pattern.

That is the reality in a great many British churches. Where there are forty members, twelve of them men, and half of those new in the faith, appointing a plural eldership by next spring is not a matter of willingness. The qualifications in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 are not negotiable, and appointing an unqualified man in order to satisfy a principle would do more harm than the delay.

So the right response is not to pretend, and not to give up. It is to acknowledge the gap, to pray for the Lord of the harvest to raise men up, and to be deliberately training the ones He has already given.

Moving Towards It Wisely

For a church wanting to move towards plural eldership, some counsel from watching others do it. Teach the biblical material first and let the congregation see it in the text, so that the change is understood rather than imposed. Never rush an appointment; a wrong elder is far harder to remove than to appoint.

Look for character before ability, since that is what the qualification lists overwhelmingly emphasise. Look at a man’s home, because managing his own household well is listed as the evidence for whether he can care for God’s church. And watch him serve for years rather than months, since Paul warns against appointing a recent convert who might become puffed up with conceit.

Meanwhile, do what can be done now. A minister with no formal eldership can still build genuine accountability with mature believers and with ministers elsewhere. The principle behind plural eldership can be honoured in substance long before the structure exists on paper.

The Danger at Either Extreme

Two failures wait at the edges. One is the strong man who gathers a compliant team around him, so that the plural eldership exists on paper while one voice decides everything. That is worse than an honest single pastorate, because it wears the appearance of accountability without the substance.

The other is a leadership so cautious that nothing is ever decided, where every question is deferred and the congregation drifts for want of direction. Leadership that leads nowhere is not humility; it is a failure of the office. Peter’s balance is exact. Exercise oversight willingly and eagerly, and do not domineer (1 Peter 5:2-3).

So, now what?

If you lead a church alone, ask who can tell you that you are wrong and be heard. If the honest answer is nobody, that is the most urgent item on your agenda, whatever your church constitution says.

If you are a member, start praying for men to be raised up and be willing to be one of them if God calls you. Plural eldership does not appear because a church decides it should; it appears because faithful men have been growing for years in ordinary service. Read the role of elders and the role of deacons alongside this.

Who in your congregation is being quietly prepared for this, and what part could you take in preparing them?

The pattern is not an ideal for large churches with resources. It is the ordinary arrangement the apostles left behind them, and it is worth working towards patiently.

And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they had believed.

Acts 14:23 (ESV)