Church Elections

Acts 1:12–26 ESV

Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day’s journey away. And when they had entered, they went up to the upper room, where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the son of James. All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers. In those days Peter stood up among the brothers (the company of persons was in all about 120) and said, “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was numbered among us and was allotted his share in this ministry.” (Now this man acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness, and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their own language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.) “For it is written in the Book of Psalms, “ ‘May his camp become desolate, and let there be no one to dwell in it’; and “ ‘Let another take his office.’ So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us—one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection.” And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also called Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.” And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Scripture: Acts 1:12-26

Belgic Confession Article 31

Message Title: Church Elections

           As we turn to the Belgic Confession tonight, we are returning to the topic of the church’s government, specifically, the offices of the church. The CRC and RCA differ a little in this respect. Each of them has four offices that are recognized as different in mandate and task, but not in dignity and honor. The CRC has ministers of the Word, elders, deacons, and commissioned pastors. The RCA recognizes ministers of Word and Sacrament, elders, deacons, and the fourth office, which is found at least as far as back as John Calvin’s writings, is the office of professor—one who is typically involved with the training of students for ministry

            I really appreciated Pastor John Gorter getting us into church government and leadership last week. With Article 30 he helped us to look at the different forms of leadership among Christian churches, including our Presbyterian elder-governing polity. We also heard the responsibilities of leaders and the responsibilities of congregations to their leaders. This evening we continue by looking at how these leaders come into their offices or positions within the church. 

           Brothers and sisters in Christ, when you hear the word election in the context of selecting a person for something, a lot of different things can come to mind. Political elections might be first—elections defined by lengthy campaigns, strategies, lots of money, some name-calling and degrading, digging into an opponent’s background for any sketchy moments. As you can tell, I’m a little bit cynical about the whole deal, and don’t like a lot of that election talk. Though I remember hearing in college that South Dakotans have somewhat of a history of electing those who spend the lesser amount of money. If that’s true, that’s was kind of refreshing.

           Other elections take place, too, though. When Classis Iakota met this week, we had to vote for one of two candidates for a denominational board. If elected, this person would serve on behalf of quite a large region; the two candidates were from southwest Minnesota and, I think, Orange City. There was a little biography so that we could find out a little bit about them and what kinds of things they’re involved in. I remember the Christian schools I went to having a similar flyer whenever there were school board elections. Who was running, who was their spouse and children, where did they attend church, what was their occupation—things like that. 

           But now we get to an even smaller election that we are instructed to participate in, smaller not in significance but in being very local: the election for the offices of the church. It’s an election that typically looks very different from others in that there’s minimal formal campaigning—if any at all. Hopefully there’s not money changing hands or lots of lobbying, but rather as we read, officebearers “ought to be chosen to their offices by a legitimate election of the church, with prayer in the name of the Lord, and in good order, as the Word of God teaches.” This is how we are to get our ministers, our elders, and our deacons.

           That sounds good, but what does it mean? What does Scripture teach? How do Joseph and Matthias come to this point where Matthias is chosen to become the new 12th apostle? And the bigger question, how did the early church, which we aim to pattern ourselves on, get their leaders? We’re aiming to get back to the basics tonight, not assume that we just know based on our current practice. So, we start by looking at who is right for serving in an office?

           We do find in several places qualifications or requirements to serve in one of these early official offices. In Acts 1, our passage, the Eleven were looking for someone, it does seem at least on this occasion to be a male rather than a woman, who had been among them the whole time Jesus had been ministering. This person, who would join them in witnessing about the resurrection, should also have seen and been committed to Jesus throughout his whole ministry. That was a qualification, and a sensible one. 

           But now we live quite a long time after Jesus was on earth, and so that qualification is not one that directly continues to elders, deacons, and ministers. So, are there other qualifications for the kinds of leaders we recognize today? You should have received a handout as you came in, that lists several major passages with qualifications and duties for elders and deacons. 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 highlight elders being above reproach, devoted to their spouse, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, teachers, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not lovers of money, able to be a good parent, mature in their faith, having a good reputation, holy and disciplined, holding firmly to the trustworthy message. Deacons, we find out about their qualifications in Acts 6 as well as 1 Timothy 3. They must be full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine or pursuing dishonest gain, keeping hold of the faith’s deep truths, tested, devoted to their spouses and managing their families well. 

Quite a list of character requirements. Church leaders are not perfect by any means—let that be clear. But there was an expectation of godliness and disciplined living set forth in Scripture for those that would lead God’s church. And yet character alone does not seem to have automatically made a person an elder or deacon, but rather there should be gifts as well. I think I’ve used it before, but we turn to Ephesians 4 verses 11 and 12 again, “It was [Christ] who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service so that the body of Christ may be built up.” 2 Timothy 2:2, “And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.” There are spiritual and practical qualifications that God gives in aiding the serving of the body, which is the task of these offices. 

If these behaviors and giftings we’re expected of the leaders of the early church, I imagine they were true of the 12 disciple-apostles and others like them as well. So, before we can get to any type of choosing or election process, the lives of would-be candidates ought to be considered. 

Let’s move on and turn our attention to that. If we have our candidates, those who are qualified for an office, how do we choose? Again Article 31 says by a “legitimate election of the church, with prayer in the name of the Lord, and in good order.” In Acts 1 the disciples cast lots, which may have looked like having some object that was marked differently, and whoever ended up with that was chosen. We’re told in places like Acts 14 and Titus 1 that elders were “appointed,” and there’s no further detailed description of what that looks like. 

You may have heard different writers or church leaders say, “There is freedom as far as what we do with elders and deacons, because the Bible doesn’t tell us much.” What they’re likely referring to is a designated choosing or election process. Most churches today tend to either cast lots—more and more churches in the CRC and RCA are starting to do that again, picking names out of bowl is what that may look like, or they vote like our churches traditionally have done. 

However, the election is done, the assumption that ought to be held is that God has a significant part in this. Deacons, ministers of the Word, and elders are not just stepping into their roles as people who feel like it. No, as we find in Acts 20:28, elders are instructed to “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.” A person isn’t only entering that role potentially because they have good character and might be qualified and gifted, but the Holy Spirit will have made them a person fit for that. 

The reason why elections are done by ballot voting or at least with nominations is that in the body of Christ we would be aware of who is gifted and willing to serve. Church elections aren’t meant to turn into popularity contests or resemble political campaigns. But we ought to be aware with what’s often called the external call—someone is recognized by others to be in this position.

The final thing I want to say on the election or choosing process is that it should not be absent of prayer. As much as we like having a say and making decisions, ultimately we want God’s will to be done, and we want who God would deem best to be in a position of authority or service. The disciples’ prayer in our reading was this, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen to take over this…ministry.” I’m going to leave that as a short piece of this message, but don’t let that take away from how important it is—both before and following—committing those that hold office to the Lord.    

           So far, we’ve looked at who is right to serve in an office and how do we choose—what is a good, godly, and biblical process. Now one more question, how do we treat the election results? I mentioned at the beginning how I’m not a big fan of elections, part of that is our human mentality declaring winners and losers. Maybe you just think that makes me soft, but in the church that’s not how we’re supposed to look at this process. If we go back to the early church and Jesus picking the original Twelve, everyone else that was not chosen to be a disciple and now apostle was not a loser in a negative-light. God had chosen these specific men with his specific purposes in mind. Maybe others could have done just as well, maybe some back then thought they would have done even more and been more successful, but that’s not the point. These men were who Jesus chose. 

           So too was the case in this process with Joseph and Matthias. When the lot fell to Matthias and he became the new number 12, Joseph was not a loser. He was not chosen by God, at least not at this point and in that location for this role of apostolic ministry, but he was not a loser. Yet I wonder if there were mixed emotions. Maybe there was some relief, realizing how big of a calling that would have been—a great and exciting calling but requiring a major commitment. But maybe there was a little hurt in having to let go of a dream or a hope.

The same may happen today in our typical election process. Things are a little different, in particular with terms—elders and deacons do not necessarily need to remain active past 2 or 3 years. The Reformation, which was just before the writing of the Belgic Confession, might play into this. The Roman Catholic Church had gotten to the point where people were buying their offices, their positions, and could even sway power by holding several offices. So, we’ve set terms—a practice that’s not necessarily found in Scripture, but it’s a reactionary measure to avoid the abuse of an office. The RCA polity calls for a “great consistory,” which means that any elder or deacon who has ever served can have an advisory voice to the current consistory made up of elders and deacons. But let’s get back to looking at the results.    

Usually I don’t hear a whole lot of pain when someone is not elected that was on the ballot, but we could understand if someone was. It is a high calling, a significant calling when we think of what Scripture tells us and what’s included in the ordination forms and vows. To be put forth as a candidate for the position of elder and deacon, means that you are willing to take up the mantle, all that the office entails. If you ready yourself, “God, if it be your will for me to serve you in this office, I will do it,” then you may be somewhat let down if not elected or chosen. Not getting elected may mean though not necessarily we’re not qualified, or now may not be God’s timing.

           What about for those who are chosen or elected, though, what is the response? We’re not told in Acts 1 or right after what kind of response there was to Matthias’ appointment, so we don’t know on that occasion. But we can conclude from other passages that the response for the new pastor, elder, or deacon is to get to work. Pastor John made a similar point last week, that leaders are to work hard. 

           This is what we find in Acts 6, the appointing of formal deacons. The Twelve would not neglect their ministry of the Word of God to manage the daily distribution of food to the widows impartially, and so they had 7 men chosen. They prayed for and laid hands on them, but then those deacons had a job to do. In Acts 20 verse 31, Paul writes, “Be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears.” They had a continuing and important task, and they were to keep at it.

           There are others, but I’ll conclude with Hebrews 13:17, “Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account: Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.” The work of church leaders is a position of authority, as members of a congregation you are under your leaders. But understand that what they are to be involved in, if they are following the Lord’s leading, is to keep watch over you. They are under-shepherds to the chief Shepherd, the only Head of the church, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

This is the work that those chosen or elected get welcomed into. It’s not easy work. It’s not just meant to be showing up for meetings once a month or less often. It is caring for the flock, and as one of our elders said recently, that’s an all the time task. This is the role your ministers, your elders, and your deacons take up whether teaching or administering or comforting or showing mercy. This is what we are elected to, and our duty to respond to, please pray for us. Amen.