How Should The Church Be Governed? Congregationalism vs. Plurality of Elders
I have had many discussions with my fellow brothers in ministry regarding the Scriptural basis for church governance. There are several modern church governance models; however, our primary concern as pastors and members of the church should be to represent that which most reflects what is outlined in Scripture. We all must first understand that the Church does not belong to us. She belongs to Christ, who purchased her with His own blood (Acts 20:28). Our task is not to innovate but to obey. When questions about governance arise, the right move is to open our Bibles and listen. What follows is a straightforward case for elder-led and elder-governed churches, with meaningful congregational participation. This is the pattern we see in Scripture and the earliest Christian witnesses. I am writing this to help give clear Scriptural guidelines on what this does and does not mean.
I grew up Southern Baptist and have always seen the typical Pastor led, deacon served model that is voted on by the congregation; however, it wasn’t until I began to study the pattern that is observed in the New Testament that I realized that model would be and is entirely foreign to the pattern observed. I am not writing this to criticize any church that adheres to this model; instead, I am presenting a biblical case for why I believe in and adhere to the plurality of elder-led/governed churches. I think that often we are unaware as to “why” we do certain things within the context of the local church, and often chalk it up to, “Well, this is how I have always seen it done.” Or “This is what I am most familiar with.” Tradition has its place, but as Christians, our aim should be to honor God in every aspect of the Christian life, and in particular, how the church is to be governed.
In the New Testament, oversight and governance of the local church are entrusted to a plurality of qualified elders (also called overseers or pastors). At the same time, the congregation participates meaningfully in recognizing leaders, guarding the gospel, receiving and restoring members, and advancing mission. Scripture does not present the congregation as a standing legislative body that directs elders. Early post-apostolic sources confirm this basic pattern.
In this article, I will spend the majority of my time presenting a biblical case for the elder-led-elder-governed model. I will outline the responsibilities of both the elders and the congregation, and also help dispel any misunderstanding that may be associated with this model. However, before I begin, let me quickly provide the working definition of what I mean when I reference a Congregationalist model and an Elder-led-elder-governed model. I will do my best to represent both sides, and end with the conclusion as to why I see the elder-led-elder-ruled as a better and biblically stronger case
Congregationalism
In congregationalism, pastors and elders lead by teaching and shepherding, and deacons serve the body, but the congregation makes major decisions. The church meeting functions as the highest court of appeal in that local body. Day-to-day ministry is often delegated to pastors, elders, deacons, and committees. Yet, those leaders remain accountable to the members, who can appoint or remove them according to the church’s governing documents.
Key Features
Local autonomy: No outside bishop, presbytery, or synod has jurisdiction over the church.
Member authority: The congregation approves or removes elders, pastors, and deacons.
Doctrinal and constitutional control: The congregation adopts statements of faith and amends bylaws.
Membership and discipline: The congregation receives members and renders final decisions in discipline and restoration.
Stewardship decisions: Budgets, property, and significant initiatives require congregational approval.
Voluntary cooperation: Associations or conventions are partnerships, not authorities.
Biblical Texts Often Cited by Congregationalists
Matthew 18:15-17: Final appeal “to the church” in discipline.
1 Corinthians 5; 2 Corinthians 2:6–8: The gathered church acts to remove, then restore, a member.
Acts 6:1–6: The church selects qualified servants for ministry needs.
Acts 15:22: “The whole church” assents and sends representatives after leaders deliberate.
These passages are read as showing that the congregation bears corporate responsibility for the church’s witness and order.
Common Variations
Pure congregationalism: The church meeting decides nearly all significant actions.
Elder-led congregationalism: Elders lead and recommend; the congregation retains final authority on defined matters such as membership, discipline, officers, doctrine, budget, property, and bylaw changes.
Single‑pastor congregationalism: A senior pastor leads with committees, yet the congregation still renders final decisions.
What Congregationalism is Not
Not presbyterian polity: Authority is not shared with regional courts beyond the local church.
Not episcopal polity: Authority is not vested in a bishop outside the congregation.
Not leader‑rule: Elders or pastors do not possess unilateral authority over the church.
Is Congregationalism Historically Supported?
Biblically: No passage assigns ongoing legislative authority to a church meeting over its elders. The congregation participates in decisive moments. Elders are charged to lead, teach, and oversee.
Historically: Formalized congregational polity as a system appears much later, especially among English Separatists and Puritans in the 16th and 17th centuries. The earliest sources do not present the congregation as the standing governing body.
Common Problems That Arise from Congregationalism
I have broken them down into four major categories for your consideration:
Politicization and Factions
Decision-making drifts toward campaigning, caucuses, and block voting. Unity frays and the loudest groups steer outcomes, not biblical wisdom (Phil 2:1–4).Paralysis in Mission
Ministry slows down because meetings and votes delay key actions. Windows for outreach close, staff lose momentum, and urgent needs languish (Titus 1:5; 1 Cor 14:40).Doctrinal Drift by Popularity
The room’s preferences eclipse Scripture. Complex judgments fall to those unprepared to make them, which pressures teachers to please hearers rather than guard truth (2 Tim 4:3–4; Titus 1:9).Erosion of Shepherding Authority
The church meeting becomes the functional board. Elders spend energy winning permission instead of watching souls, which breeds burnout and confuses the dynamics of Hebrews 13:17.
Now that you have a working definition of congregationalism and all that is involved, let’s look into the elder-led-elder-ruled model so you can see the differences.
Elder-Governed
In this model, pastors/elders shepherd, teach, and oversee the flock. Deacons serve the body by leading ministries of mercy and administration. Members actively engage in worship, discipleship, mission, and accountability. Elders make final governance decisions and are accountable to Scripture, to one another in plurality, and to the church through transparent biblical processes for correction when needed. Elders often seek congregational affirmation on weighty matters for unity and transparency, while retaining the charge to lead and rule well.
Key Features
Plurality of elders: multiple qualified elders share oversight and mutual accountability (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5–9; 1 Pet 5:1–3).
Real oversight: elders “rule,” “lead,” and “keep watch” over souls, and will give an account to God (1 Tim 5:17; 1 Thess 5:12–13; Heb 13:17).
Teaching authority: elders guard sound doctrine and refute error (1 Tim 3:2; Titus 1:9).
Discipline leadership: elders lead the Matthew 18 process and bring final steps to the congregation for corporate witness when appropriate (Matt 18:15–17; 1 Cor 5).
Meaningful congregational participation: members recognize elders and deacons, receive and restore members, and affirm major initiatives as elders judge wise for unity (Acts 6:3–6; 2 Cor 2:6–8).
Local autonomy with cooperation: the church is self-governed by its elders and may partner with other churches without external jurisdiction.
Biblical Texts Often Cited for Elder-Led, Elder-Ruled Polity
Acts 20:17, 28: The elders of Ephesus are made overseers to shepherd the church.
1 Peter 5:1–3: Elders shepherd the flock, exercising oversight among them.
1 Timothy 5:17–21; 3:4–5: Elders who rule well are honored; they manage the household of God and are subject to discipline if they sin.
Hebrews 13:7, 17: The church remembers, imitates, obeys, and submits to its leaders who will give an account.
Titus 1:5–9; Acts 14:23; James 5:14: Elders are appointed in every church and city to teach, correct, and care.
Acts 15:6, 19–22: Elders (with the apostles in that era) deliberate and judge theological questions; the congregation assents and sends.
Common Variations
Elder‑ruled with congregational assent: elders possess final authority yet regularly seek member affirmation on defined matters for unity.
Elder-led with limited congregational votes: elders govern; members vote on a short list such as recognition of officers, admission and removal of members, final steps of discipline, and adoption of confessional or constitutional changes.
First‑among‑equals model: a senior pastor provides primary preaching and directional leadership within a genuine plurality of elders.
What Elder‑Led, Elder‑Ruled is Not
Not congregational rule: the congregation does not serve as a standing legislature that directs elders.
Not presbyterian courts: there is no binding regional session or synod over the local church.
Not episcopal control: there is no external bishop who appoints or removes local leaders.
Not unchecked authority: elders are discipline‑able under Scripture; accusations are tested with witnesses and handled openly and justly (1 Tim 5:19–21). Plurality, qualifications, and transparency provide safeguards.
Contrast in One Glance
Congregationalism: Members hold final authority on defined matters; leaders lead and recommend.
Elder-led, elder‑ruled: Elders hold final authority for doctrine, discipline, and direction; the congregation participates meaningfully without functioning as the governing legislature.
Now that you have been presented with both church governance models, let's dive deeper into the elder governance model for a deeper explanation as to why I believe this is healthier for the church in matters of how she is to be governed.
What The New Testament Assigns to Elders
One office, three titles. The NT uses elder (presbyteros), overseer or bishop (episkopos), and pastor or shepherd (poimēn) for the same leaders and task (Acts 20:17, 28; Titus 1:5–7; 1 Pet 5:1–2).
Plurality in each church. Elders are appointed in every church and city (Acts 14:23; 20:17; Titus 1:5; Jas 5:14).
Their charge and responsibilities:
Lead and Govern: “The elders who lead well are to be considered worthy of double honor” (1 Tim 5:17, LSB; cf. 1 Thess 5:12; 1 Tim 3:4–5).
Exercise Oversight and Shepherd: “The Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God” (Acts 20:28; cf. 1 Pet 5:2–3).
Teach and Guard Sound Doctrine: Elders must be able to teach and refute error (1 Tim 3:2; Titus 1:9).
Give an Account to God: “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account” (Heb 13:17, LSB).
Implication: Elders possess real authority under Christ and real accountability to Christ, to Scripture, and to the church’s discipline. Elders are not exempt from removal, nor are they not held accountable to each other in particular and to the entirety of the church as a whole.
What The NT Gives to the Congregation (Robust but Not “Rule”)
We must understand that the congregation is not just simply idle bodies regarding the direction of the church, and that they have no role in its model. However, it is essential to note that the whole body acts at key moments:
Recognizing Qualified Servants: The church selects the Seven under apostolic direction and installation (Acts 6:3–6).
Receiving, Removing, and Restoring members: Jesus places a final appeal “to the church” in discipline, and the body later restores the repentant (Matt 18:15–17; 1 Cor 5:4–5; 2 Cor 2:6–8).
Participating in Mission Decisions: The congregation assents and sends, while the doctrinal deliberation in Acts 15 is led by the apostles and the elders (Acts 15:6, 19–22).
Implication: Congregational voice and witness are essential. Scripture does not depict the congregation as a permanent legislature that manages elders. This is important as many churches state they have “elders” but call them advisory boards; however, this is simply not the biblical model we see demonstrated as to the roles and responsibilities assigned to elders.
Texts Often Cited for Congregational Rule: Read in Context
Acts 6: The apostles set qualifications and installed. The congregation selects. This is congregational participation within elder leadership, not congregational rule over it.
Acts 15: The church is present and pleased. The theological judgment is reached by the apostles and elders. The church then assents and sends (Acts 15:6, 19–23).
1 Cor 5 and 2 Cor 2:6: The body acts in discipline by majority. This shows meaningful congregational action, yet the process is directed by apostolic and elder authority. A majority vote in discipline does not create a standing legislative board for all matters.
Conclusion
The NT pattern is elder-led and elder-governed with congregational participation, not congregationally ruled. There is a distinct and noticeable difference when you recognize participation versus a ruling governing authority as it relates to the congregation and her responsibilities.
The Earliest Churches After the Apostles Followed Elder Governance
I believe it is helpful to take a look into the past as it relates to why we do what we do in the church and to reflect on where things changed, and why. Looking into our past helps us understand where we came from and also serves as additional evidence of how the church has historically been governed. While terminology develops over time, the early record assumes pastoral oversight rather than congregational rule.
1 Clement (Rome to Corinth, c. AD 96). Corinthian factions deposed presbyters. Clement rebukes the act, reminds the church that the apostles appointed overseers and deacons and provided for successors, and urges submission and restoration. This is a clear check against the congregation overthrowing elders.
Ignatius of Antioch (c. AD 110). Repeated appeals to follow the bishop, respect the presbytery (elders), and work with the deacons. The expected norm is pastoral oversight that unifies the church.
Didache 15 (late 1st or early 2nd century). The community appoints bishops (elders) and deacons, which shows congregational recognition, yet those offices lead and serve in teaching and discipline.
Shepherd of Hermas (2nd century). Speaks of “presbyters who preside over the church,” language that assumes elder leadership.
Didascalia Apostolorum (3rd century). A church-order manual that expects bishops and elders to instruct and direct the people, with believers subject to their pastoral care.
Historical takeaway: The primitive and early pattern is elder or overseer leadership with congregational participation, not congregational legislative control. As mentioned previously, these three words (elder, pastor, bishop) are used interchangeably to describe the same office of governance.
Guardrails That Keep Elder Governance Biblical (And Healthy)
Sadly, there are many church leaders who abuse this position, so there must be a clear understanding of how a plurality of elders are to govern biblically to be held accountable by the congregation. Elder governance must never drift into authoritarianism, and congregational involvement must not become micromanagement. Healthy churches make the following clear.
Elders govern and shepherd:
Doctrine and teaching
Membership care and discipline steps are brought to the body at the right time
Staff oversight and day-to-day leadership
Guarding the gospel and setting direction under Scripture
(Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:1–3; 1 Tim 5:17; Heb 13:17)
The congregation meaningfully participates:
Recognizes and affirms qualified elders and deacons (Acts 6:3–6; Titus 1:5; 1 Tim 3)
Receives and removes members, and affirms final steps of discipline and restoration (Matt 18; 1 Cor 5; 2 Cor 2:6–8)
Affirms significant matters elders bring for the church’s witness, such as confessional statements, bylaw amendments, or substantial financial commitments
Accountability for leaders:
Serious accusations against an elder require careful, biblical process in the presence of witnesses, and if proven, must be handled openly and justly (1 Tim 5:19–21).
This is elder-led and elder-governed with congregational assent, which protects the flock and honors the Word.
Modern Items for Consideration
For a church that seeks to govern in a manner that honors the Lord and serves the people, here are a few items for consideration.
Bible First: The church is not chasing trends. In the NT, elders govern, and the church participates in real ways (Heb 13:17; Acts 15; 1 Tim 5:17).
Plurality Protects: A team of qualified elders with mutual accountability is safer than personality-driven leadership or parliamentary control.
Members Still Matter: Members recognize leaders, guard the gospel, and act in discipline and restoration. Your voice is vital, but Scripture does not task the congregation to run the church as a legislature.
Early Church Precedent: From Clement to Ignatius to the church orders, the assumed norm is pastoral oversight with congregational participation.
Elders do not replace the congregation. They equip the saints for the work of ministry, and they keep watch as men who will give an account (Eph 4:11–12; Heb 13:17). The congregation does not replace elders. The body receives the Word, recognizes qualified leaders, and bears witness to Christ in discipline and mission. This shared life, under the headship of Jesus, is the beauty of the church.
Why The Church Should Desire the Elder-Governed Model
The church should desire an elder-led, elder-governed model because it most closely reflects the New Testament pattern, protects unity and sound doctrine, speeds faithful decision‑making, and frees members to pursue ministry rather than parliamentary control. The congregationalist (congregational) model affirms member participation, yet it often shifts final authority to the room, which tends to politicize decisions and blur shepherding.
1) Biblical Responsibility Lands on Elders
Scripture assigns oversight, governance, and teaching to a plurality of qualified elders.
Elders are appointed in every church and city (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5).
They shepherd and exercise oversight (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:1–3).
They rule/lead well and will give an account (1 Tim 5:17; Heb 13:17).
They must teach and refute error (1 Tim 3:2; Titus 1:9).
Why this matters: When the Bible puts the weight of doctrine, discipline, and direction on elders, the church is wise to structure itself so that those men can actually carry that weight.
2) Plurality Provides Safety and Accountability
The New Testament expects multiple elders, not a single personality.
Wisdom in many counselors (Prov 11:14).
Elders hold each other to the qualifications and can be corrected when needed (1 Tim 5:19–21; Gal 2:11–14).
Why this matters: Plurality is a guardrail against authoritarianism. It is also more stable than rule by shifting majorities.
3) Clear Roles Reduce Confusion and Conflict
In the elder model, lanes are defined.
Elders oversee doctrine, direction, discipline, and shepherding.
Deacons lead ministries of service and care (Acts 6:1–6).
Members meaningfully participate by recognizing officers, receiving and removing members, and affirming final steps of discipline and restoration (Matt 18:15–17; 1 Cor 5; 2 Cor 2:6–8).
Why this matters: People flourish when they know their responsibilities. The church spends less energy on procedural fights and more on prayer, the Word, discipleship, and mission (Acts 6:4).
4) Unity And Peace Are Easier to Keep
Congregationalist processes often produce campaigning, caucuses, and block voting, even with godly people. Elder governance lowers that temperature.
The church is urged to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Eph 4:3) and to do nothing from selfish ambition (Phil 2:1–4).
Why this matters: Fewer floor fights. More shepherding. Healthier relationships.
5) Stewardship And Mission Move Faster
Needs rarely wait for the next business meeting.
Titus was left in Crete to “set in order what remains” and appoint elders (Titus 1:5).
All things should be done decently and in order (1 Cor 14:40).
Why this matters: Crisis benevolence, discipline care, staff and facility issues, and outreach opportunities are handled promptly and wisely by men already tasked to oversee.
6) Doctrinal Clarity Is Guarded
Elders are charged to teach sound doctrine and silence what contradicts it (Titus 1:9–11).
Why this matters: Theological decisions are not left to the mood of the room. Teachers are protected from popularity pressure and freed to be faithful (2 Tim 4:3–5).
7) Discipline And Restoration Stay Pastoral
Jesus gave a process that ends “tell it to the church,” yet the steps require careful shepherding.
Elders lead the process and bring final steps to the congregation for corporate witness when necessary (Matt 18:15–17; 1 Cor 5; 2 Cor 2:6–8).
Why this matters: Cases are handled consistently, confidentially, and redemptively, not as a spectacle.
8) Members Are Equipped for Ministry, Not Parliament
Christ gave shepherd‑teachers to equip the saints for the work of ministry (Eph 4:11–16).
Why this matters: The energy of the body goes to evangelism, discipleship, mercy, and hospitality rather than procedural maneuvering.
What the congregation still retains (and should)
Even under elder governance, the whole church retains weighty responsibilities:
Recognize and remove elders and deacons according to biblical qualifications.
Receive and restore members and affirm final steps of discipline.
Adopt confessional and constitutional standards and, when prudent, affirm prominent stewardship initiatives that elders present for the church’s unified witness.
This is meaningful participation, not legislative control. This is a critical item to make clear and to be understood by the church body.
Guardrails that keep elder governance healthy
To prevent misuse and to build trust, put these in writing:
Plurality of qualified elders with staggered terms or regular reaffirmation.
Transparent processes for elder selection, evaluation, and removal (1 Tim 5:19–21).
Published lanes: what elders decide, what the congregation affirms, and what deacons lead.
Regular Q&A and open forums for member feedback.
Financial accountability with independent review and clear reporting.
Doctrinal guardrails are established through a confessional statement that all officers must uphold.
Common Objections, Brief Replies
“Won’t this silence the congregation?” No. It clarifies the congregation’s biblical moments of voice and keeps those moments weighty rather than routine.
“Isn’t this pastor‑rule?” No. It is a plural elder rule with Scripture and the church holding elders accountable.
“What if elders go astray?” Scripture gives a process to confront and remove sinning elders publicly (1 Tim 5:19–21).
“Don’t we see congregational votes in the NT?” We see congregational action at key moments, but Scripture assigns governance and oversight to elders.
Why should a church desire this form of governance? Because it is biblical, peace-preserving, mission advancing, and soul protecting. It honors Christ’s design: shepherds who keep watch as those who will give an account, deacons who serve, and members who actively bear witness to the gospel together.
Final Thoughts
Christ owns the church, and He appoints a plurality of qualified elders to shepherd, teach, and oversee (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:1–3). The congregation bears real responsibility to recognize such men, to receive and restore members, and to bear corporate witness in discipline (Matt 18:15–17; 1 Cor 5; 2 Cor 2:6–8). An elder-led, elder-governed model best reflects this New Testament pattern. It preserves unity, guards doctrine, maintains pastoral care, and advances ministry, whereas a standing congregational legislature often breeds politicization and delay. Elder governance is not unchecked authority; plurality, clear lanes, and transparent processes keep leaders accountable (1 Tim 5:19–21; Heb 13:17). For the good of Christ’s flock, churches should order their bylaws and practices so that elders oversee and shepherd, deacons serve. Members participate meaningfully at the moments Scripture assigns. This is simple obedience to the Word, and it keeps the mission of the church in view.