OFFICERS AND THEIR DUTIES
By George I. Butler
Thoughts on Church Government.—No. 5.
OFFICERS AND THEIR DUTIES.
In the prosperity of the local church, much depends upon the proper selection of officers. Therefore, great care should be used in choosing them. Especially is this true in regard to the elder. Our General Conference has recommended that in the selection of an elder for the church, a committee of three shall nominate a candidate for office, the committee to consist of the officiating minister and two other persons named by him. This, perhaps, is the best course which could be pursued. The church is left free to act, and the probabilities are, that the nomination will be as satisfactory as any which could be made. It would be well for the same committee to nominate a deacon and clerk. The church, of course, are not obliged to sanction the action of the nominating committee, unless they think best. The Bible has very clearly set before us the qualifications which an elder should possess. They are principally contained in 1 Tim. 3:1–7 and Titus 1:6–9. The words bishop and elder are here translated from different words, but signify about the same, as appears from Titus where the words are used interchangeably. They refer to those who oversee and take charge of the church. The qualifications referred to above are very high, and the great difficulty is to find those who possess these qualifications. We have to use such material as we have at our command. But in some instances the deficiency is so plain that the church cannot be fully organized by the election of officers, but a mere leader has to be appointed temporarily. This is always detrimental to the prosperity of the church. No church will prosper as it should without an efficient elder. There is much important work to be done by an elder in every church, which, however, in most cases is sadly neglected; hence, we do not see all that prosperity that should exist. In morals as much depends upon one who has ability to teach and direct as in education. A school cannot prosper without an efficient teacher. Hence the apostle says, “apt to teach.” Not only must he possess a good moral character and have ability to teach, but he must have ability to govern. “One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity.” “If he know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?” No one will ever fully succeed as a minister, or an elder, who most lacks in family government. If he has not sufficient judgment to manage a small family circle of children, how much more difficulty he will find in managing a large number of grown people. The same faculties will be called into exercise in both cases. In the selection of elders, these points should always be closely considered. After their election, they may be ordained by an ordained minister, and are then prepared to enter upon the duties of their office. They may baptize and administer the ordinances, and may do any of the duties proper to be done by those in offices lower than themselves in the church. Let us notice briefly some of the duties of the elder, as set before us in the Bible, toward those under his care. In Acts 20:28–31, Paul speaks to the elders of the church of Ephesus: “Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseer, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood; for I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things. Therefore watch, and remember that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.” This scripture sets before us the duty of “taking heed,” of “watching,” and “feeding the flock of God.” These were local elders over the church of Ephesus whom he was addressing. The apostle also gives us a wonderful example of faithfulness in this scripture, and intimates that elders should follow it. For three years he watched over the welfare of the church, night and day with tears. He did not cease from this. We do not know of a more eminent example in the Bible. No elder will ever see prosperity follow his labors who has not some of this faithful spirit. He is an “overseer.” The flock are under his charge. If he has not interest enough in them to carefully watch over them for their good, to warn the unruly, to strengthen the weak, and earnestly work for the good of all, he will doubtless see very little accomplished by his eldership. Many local elders act as if they had wholly done their duty when they have met with the church in meeting, opened it by prayer, given a short exhortation, and closed the meeting at the proper time, administered the ordinances occasionally, and possibly baptized some. But these things are a very small part of his duty. He is to “feed the flock of God.” He is to watch over them, warn them of danger, plead with them even with tears when going astray. What is it to feed the flock of God? It is to take God's word, and draw from that great fountain, such instruction as will build them up, and make them grow spiritually. It is not merely to talk theory. It is not to argue and contend over points of faith, but to give such practical instruction as will develop in those who accept it, the graces of the spirit—love, joy, peace, faith, meekness, longsuffering, forbearance, honesty, temperance, godliness, patience, and, in short, those characteristics which were seen in Jesus Christ. The flock must become like him if ever saved to reign with him. It is the elder's business to feed such provender as will make the flock grow in these very directions. It is none of his business how much of this kind of provender they are willing to eat. It is his duty to furnish it, for the scripture says so. Their duty comes in afterward. He is not responsible for their part of the work if he only does his faithfully. But he will be responsible for their eternal ruin, if he accepts such a position as overseer and makes no reasonable effort to do the plain duty which the position demands. He is either a slothful, lazy servant, or one who presumptuously accepts a position, the duties of which he knows nothing about. He should know its duties. They are plainly pointed out. That is his very business. But they will require of him an individual experience in the things of God, because he cannot instruct another in things he does not himself understand. Peter also gives instruction to elders. 1 Pet. 5:1–4. “The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed; feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.” The same general ideas are here expressed by Peter that Paul expresses in the other text. Elders are “overseers” or under shepherds, the Lord Jesus himself being chief Shepherd. The relation of shepherd to the flock is a beautiful and expressive one. The shepherd is personally interested in every one of the flock. It is his greatest interest to see every one thrive. His all is invested in their well-being. He sees that the tender lambs are carefully nursed. When the storm beats violently, he even carries them in his bosom. He watches lest the wild beast should tear and destroy. When one goes upon dangerous ground, he warns him back. He holds in check the strong and unruly, and gives the weaker their proper chance. He does not drive, but leads. The sheep hear his voice and follow him. He goes in advance, and gives the proper direction. They follow in implicit confidence, having learned from experience that his watchcare is the truest safety. So should it ever be with the elder. The shepherd is the inspired illustration of his office. He should not therefore sit down in idleness, and let the flock go as they please, and where they please, without any effort on his part; but should have a true and faithful watchcare over them, always remembering that his power extends only to advice, reproof, and admonition. He is not a “lord over God’s heritage,” but an example to the flock. But he should faithfully warn the erring, lest their blood be found in his skirts. If the watchman see the danger of those under his charge, and make no effort to let them know it, he is as really guilty of their blood as he would be to see a person in unconscious danger of temporal death, and make no effort to warn him. What would we think of a man who saw his neighbor about stepping over a precipice, and should make no effort to save him? Would he not be a party to his death? Why does not this same principle apply to those seeing one in danger of eternal death? especially to those acting as “overseers,” whose very duty it is to watch for their good?