The Selection and Appointment of Elders
The Selection and Appointment of Elders THE SELECTION AND APPOINTMENT
OF ELDERS
(Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5)
By Paul C. Witt
Little is said in the word of God about the selection and appointment of elders. Enough is said, however, to let us, know that a congregation of saints was not completely set in order according to divine pattern, and could not fully function, without elders. In any congregation it was necessary that there be direction or oversight, and instruction or nurture. It was God’s intention that the bishops or elders should supply these needs. In Acts 14:21-23 we read, “And when they had preached the gospel to that city (Der- be), and had made many disciples, they returned to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch, confirming the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God. And when they had appointed for them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they had believed.” Again, in Titus 1:5, we read from Paul, “For this, cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge; . . .” In the first of these Scriptures it is said that Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in every church. In the second it is recorded that Paul instructed Titus to appoint elders in every city. When the saints in the Gentile church at Antioch sent relief to their needy Jewish brethren in the church at Jerusalem, they sent it, “. . . to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30).
Likewise, when Paul wrote to the congregation of saints at Philippi he directed his message, “. . . to all the saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons” (Php_1:1).
It is thus made clear that completeness, of order and efficiency of functioning depended upon the ap-pointment of elders in every church or in every city.
Concerning the selection of elders two things seem very evident. In the first place, they were chosen from among the men of the congregation which they were to serve. In the second place, they were chosen according to very special and exacting qualifications,. If it had been possible for the same group of elders to serve from church to church, or from city to city, there would have been no need to appoint elders in every church or in every city. Furthermore, such qualifications as “without reproach,” “given to hospitality,” “good testimony from them that are without,” and so forth, could only be evidenced by long- residence and service in a given comnpinity. These same qualifications indicate, too, that the men who were to be appointed as elders were selected by their fellow saints. How could one know whether or not another possessed such qualifications as those enumerated in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, and Titus 1:5-9, without being intimately and extensively associated with him?
How else could such qualifications be demonstrated than by social interrelationships and service? The Scriptures reveal no specific examples or di-rections in connection with the selection of men to be appointed as elders. There is recorded for us, however, an example which many believe reveals to us a procedure in principle. When the seven were selected and appointed to serve the congregation in Jerusalem in connection with the “daily ministration” the twelve gave the instruction, Acts 6:3, “Look ye out therefore, brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom ye may appoint over this business.” That this suggestion met the approval of all concerned is indicated in the words of Acts 6:5-6, where it is recorded, “And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus a proselyte of Antioch; whom they set before the apostle: . . .” In this instance, those to be served were instructed to choose, from among themselves, according to specified qualifications, those who should become their servants. According to the same principle, and in harmony with the laws of expediency and fairness, men may be selected for appointment as elders.
Concerning the appointment of elders we have more definite information in the Scriptures. We have the instance where Titus was left in Crete to appoint elders according to Paul’s charge, and we have the example of the appointment of elders in the churches at Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch. We know, too, from the statement made by Paul to Timothy, in 1 Timothy 3:1, that the office or work to which the elders were to be appointed is very sacred. In the words of the apostle, “If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work."
Other references to the elders indicate that the work or office is very comprehensive and exacting, and the discussion of the duties of an elder will make this point clearer.
According to the word of God, the appointing of elders either accompanied, or was preceded by, a “setting in order” of the churches involved. This would indicate that elders were to be appointed after an established congregation had come to a certain stage of development or organization. How long a congregation of saints should be permitted to remain without elders we do not know. Neither do we know exactly what a “setting in order” consisted of. We do find some very vital suggestions in the passage already quoted from Acts 14:21-23, where reference is made to “confirming the spuls of the disciples,” “exhorting them to continue in the faith,” and to suggesting to them “that through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God.” In this instance there was a strengthening or reassurance, ac-companied by an exhortation or encouragement, and an admonition concerning the patience and steadfastness, necessary if one would enter God’s eternal kingdom. It doesn’t take any stretch of the imagination to see a parallel between a “setting in order” and a “strengthening, assurance, and admonition.”
After the selection of men possessing the qualifi-cations demanded of those appointed, and after having “set in order the things that were wanting” in the congregation in point, the actual “ordaining” or appointing would be in order. Just what constituted this act of formally bringing those chosen into their work, and just who had the authority to consummate the act of appointing, has been the subject of much discussion. In the cases in point the appointment was made by men outside of the congregations involved, for in the churches in Lystra, Antioch, and Iconium, Paul and Barnabas “appointed for them elders.” In Paul’s charge to Titus he instructed Titus to do the “setting in order” and the “ordaining” in every city. Following the same principle today would enable us to avoid, on the one hand, the unwarranted and undesirable assumption of the office and work by one peeking to impose himself on the congregation, and to avoid, on the other hand, the imposition of the office and work on an unwilling or unqualified person by a congregation.
Concerning what constitutes the act of ordination or appointment we shall consider first the case referred to in principle—the appointment of the seven, in the church at Jerusalem, to attend to the daily ministration. In this case the consecration s.ervice was accomplished by prayer and the laying on of hands. Then, in the case of the appointment of elders in the churches in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, fasting and prayer were associated with the service but the laying on of hands is not mentioned. In the directions given by Paul to Titus no specific details are mentioned but Paul did say that the appointment should be, “ ... as I gave thee charge; ...” It is not illogical to presume that Titus, would use the same procedure that Paul and Barnabas had used, and if he had not understood what to do it looks reasonable that Paul would have given him the necessary specific directions along with the charge. The contention that the laying on of hands was always for the purpose of imparting to the recipient s.ome special blessing or some added ability or qualification may be dismissed as without sufficient foundation. In the first place, only those were to be selected who already possessed the necessary qualifications., and, in the second place, we have cases on record where those of inferior rank or qualifications laid hands on those of superior rank or qualifications (Numbers 8:9-10; Acts 13:3). The laying on of hands was an act of consecration or dedication; a sign of a covenant between the servant and those whom he should s.erve. From the beginning of the restoration until the present time many have contended that prayer, fasting, and the laying on of hands should be the procedure in appointing selected men to the office or work of an elder. Others have maintained, however, that any procedure that is orderly, and significant, and reverent, is acceptable.
All are agreed that the appointment of properly qualified elders in each congregation is a part of the divine economy, and, as such, demands such solemnity and procedure as will impress the saints to be served and the elders appointed with the gravity and sacredness of their mutual relationships and responsibilities. If such an ideal with reference to the appointment service is attained it will not be difficult for the members of the congregations served to respect the appointed elders, “ . . . and to esteem them exceeding highly in love for their work’s sake” (1 Thes:s. 5:12); “ . . . and submit to them” (Hebrews 13:17). Neither will it be difficult for the elders to realize that they are, “ . . . exercising the oversight, not of constraint, but willingly, according to the will of God” (1 Peter 5:2).