# SBC & Demoratic Government?



## thistle93 (Jul 14, 2012)

Hi! I have been pastor of a small rural SBC church for almost 4 years and one of the sticking points seems for some to be that before most any decision can be made there need to be a congregational business meeting and vote and that majority determines outcome. Now I am not opposed to congregationalism. In fact I believe it most Biblical model, if balanced with elder rule. Not a oxymoron (See Phil Newton's book " Elders in the Congregational Life"). I do think there are times when the congregation as a whole needs to make certain decision. But I also think there is a time when the leaders (elders) need to lead and make decisions regardless of majority opinion. I think I found part of the problem is what is stated in the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 under The Church. Here it is for you to read: 


VI. The Church

A New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ *through democratic processes.* In such a congregation each member is responsible and accountable to Christ as Lord. Its scriptural officers are pastors and deacons. While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.

The New Testament speaks also of the church as the Body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.

Matthew 16:15-19; 18:15-20; Acts 2:41-42,47; 5:11-14; 6:3-6; 13:1-3; 14:23,27; 15:1-30; 16:5; 20:28; Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:2; 3:16; 5:4-5; 7:17; 9:13-14; 12; Ephesians 1:22-23; 2:19-22; 3:8-11,21; 5:22-32; Philippians 1:1; Colossians 1:18; 1 Timothy 2:9-14; 3:1-15; 4:14; Hebrews 11:39-40; 1 Peter 5:1-4; Revelation 2-3; 21:2-3.

Now For the most part I agree with all that was stated above. But the portion underlined I do not think is Biblical or could give a wrong impression. Rather I think it is more a modern American independent mindset too prevalent in the church today. The interesting thing is I believe the Founding Fathers believed not in pure democracy but in a representative democracy, which I think is the Biblical model of the church (the church elects those who will represent them and lead them). 


Agree or disagree? What are your thoughts? Any books you can recommend that touch on topic? Obviously if you are not a congregationalists you will disagree with this whole discussion. So I am mainly looking from response from those in a congregational setting. Sorry my Presbyterian, Anglican, ect... brothers. Thank you! 

For His Glory-
Matthew


----------



## yeutter (Jul 14, 2012)

I have one major concern with Baptist congregational meetings. Why do the congregational meeting among Baptists include the ladies. Conservative Lutherans have historically restricted participation in their congregational meetings to confirmed males.


----------



## rbcbob (Jul 14, 2012)

thistle93 said:


> the church elects those who will represent them and lead them



I believe that a careful look at the relevant biblical texts will reveal that even here most congregational churches lack the New Testament support for the members electing the elders.


----------



## Edward (Jul 14, 2012)

thistle93 said:


> I believe the Founding Fathers believed not in pure democracy but in a representative democracy



No, the founding fathers set up a republic, not a democracy. 



> I also think there is a time when the leaders (elders) need to lead and make decisions regardless of majority opinion.



If the congregation can't be counted on to reach the right decision, it may reflect inadequacies in their teaching. It may be something that the current pastor hasn't had an opportunity to get to yet, but that gets to the next point. 

It doesn't matter if the church is congregational or presbyterian. If the pastor and/or session is trying to herd the congregation rather than lead them, it's not likely to turn out well. So if you know there is a majority opposed to it and you try to cram it down their throat anyway, you probably should be well on your way toward seeking your next call.


----------



## PointyHaired Calvinist (Jul 14, 2012)

Most Baptist churches that I know of consider the office of elder/overseer to be the same as that of pastor. They do not believe in "ruling elders" or multiple elders in a congregation, certainly no "representative" government. Am I correct that this is the norm?

Also, Congregationalists as I understand DO have elders, but are "congregational" because they have no higher church court or hierarchy. (The confusion over what is "congregational" is a good reason the churches used to be just called "Independents" in England.)


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Jul 14, 2012)

PointyHaired Calvinist said:


> Most Baptist churches that I know of consider the office of elder/overseer to be the same as that of pastor. They do not believe in "ruling elders" or multiple elders in a congregation, certainly no "representative" government. Am I correct that this is the norm?



The baptist churches I was part of until I went to college would argue very passionately AGAINST "representative government" in the Church. The Pastor basically ruled by fiat, with a monthly business meeting for the congregation to "rubber stamp" what the Pastor had decided.


----------

