This question is often asked of me by visitors from other congregations. I was told once that one preacher warned against visiting us because we don’t have elders. (I am sorry that the good brother felt that way, and I would ask him to produce the Scripture that quarantines us as he has done.) In fact, many of our own members have asked about this situation, and from time to time we have been called upon to explain things in private and public Bible studies.

We need to understand what the Bible teaches about having elders. It is God’s intention that every congregation have elders. Nobody here disputes this. Luke writes of Paul and Barnabas, "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" (Acts 14:23). The clear implication is that each church is to have elders. Paul wrote Titus, "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge" (Titus 1:5). Where congregations exist without elders, something is lacking.

Nobody I know argues seriously that congregations are better off without elders. At the same time, we cannot Scripturally argue that churches without elders should be put under the ban without considering why. Usually when this condition exists, it is the business of the local church that is so deprived, and congregational autonomy will take care of the worry of others. But when churches don’t have elders as a matter of doctrinal objection, it becomes the peculiar interest of others nearby that might be effected. But not until then.

The truth of the matter is that there were congregations that existed Scripturally without elders in the New Testament. The churches in Crete and the ones that Paul and Barnabas visited on the way home in Acts 14 are good examples. Those churches existed without elders up until that time for good reason. We may not know what that reason was, but they were not described as sinful, unscriptural, or even unworthy of the fellowship of others. They were "sound," but they were lacking; that is, they were disadvantaged.

From a Biblical standpoint, can we justify our not having elders? I believe we can, or I would be preaching more on it. As the "baby-boomer" generation gets older, I am afraid that a lot of churches are in the same situation that we are in. Some take a different course. We cannot.

The Bible gives qualifications for elders. A Christian does not have to possess all of these to get to heaven. But elders have to possess ALL of them to be Scriptural elders. For those who are interested in seeing what these qualifications are they are found in 1 Tim 3:1-7: "Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach; no brawler, no striker; but gentle, not contentious, no lover of money; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) not a novice, lest being puffed up he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have good testimony from them that are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil." Paul elaborates in Titus 1:5-9: "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge; if any man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having children that believe, who are not accused of riot or unruly. For the bishop must be blameless, as God's steward; not self-willed, not soon angry, no brawler, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but given to hospitality, as lover of good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled; holding to the faithful word which is according to the teaching, that he may be able to exhort in the sound doctrine, and to convict the gainsayers."

Now we might spend the whole day arguing about each one of these qualifications and what they mean. But that would distract from the point of this article. In simple truth, to appoint men who are not qualified would be no better than baptizing men who are not qualified, that is, those who are unrepentant or skeptical. When God gave qualifications, he gave a pattern, a blue-print that he expects us to follow. The Lord must be obeyed, his will shall reign supreme.

Almost immediately someone will say, "David, you are looking for perfection. You are not going to find perfect men. You just don’t want elders!"

First, I understand that perfection comes through forgiveness, which is only in Christ. All of us ought to be striving for perfection (Phil. 3:12), but it is a foolish man who demands it in his brother, or even in himself.

No, I am not looking for perfection, or the perfect man. I am looking for the qualified man, the man who possesses ALL of the qualifications. He may slip and sin. He may not have all of the qualifications to a perfect degree. The temperate man, may from time to time, contrary to his character, loose his temper and still be temperate. But he still must be temperate.

From which of the qualifications would YOU excuse a man if he has all the others? Believing children? No lover of money? Given to hospitality? Apt to teach? Which qualifications would you demand be met more than another? The answer is mostly, "Well, I couldn’t excuse him from any of them, really." But the fact is that congregations, being pressured to have elders at any cost, have appointed men who love money, who are brawlers and contentious, whose children are no better than Hophni and Phineas, who are so ignorant of what the Bible teaches that they not only cannot convict the gainsayer, but they throw in with him. That is one of the reasons the church is having so much trouble with issues like divorce, creation, institutionalism, discipleship, and open fellowship (The Romans 14 issue).

We don’t have elders, not because we don’t want them, but because we don’t want men who are not qualified in the position. They always do as much damage as they do good, and it takes generations to undo that damage if it can be done at all.

Do we want elders? Yes, it has been the constant yearning and prayer of everyone in this congregation. The subject is brought up all the time, and I don’t mind that. It is good for us to continue study that we might continue in the pattern (2 Tim. 1:13). Those who possess the temerity to judge us in this matter simply don’t know what they are talking about.

We have a young congregation with a lot of good young people. We have some older folks, some who have served as elders in the past, who for some reason cannot serve now. What we don’t have sometimes is patience. It is important that men are developed as Christians so that one day they might serve as qualified elders. We hope that we have some who will be qualified someday.

In the meantime, if one of our number sees in his or her brethren that the qualifications are met, let them put their names before the church for consideration (Acts 6). Nothing would give the good people in this place more joy than to serve God under the leadership of qualified elders.