In June of 2019, the Village leadership presented a proposal to the membership to modify our current leadership structure. In short, we have suggested changing how pastoral leadership works by introducing Lay Pastors to our pastoral team, and altering how our deacons function. This page is designed to be a resource for Village membership, detailing the proposal itself, along with an ongoing record of the conversations surrounding this proposed change.
Over the course of four weeks, we hosted a series of question and answer sessions. Below, you will find a summary list of questions asked at those sessions, in addition to other questions raised and answered over the past few months. Some of the answers provided were not adequately answered at the sessions, but are addressed in greater detail below.
Have a question that’s not answered here? We want to hear from you. You can email Pastor Bob or Pastor Brian. Have a comment or suggestion for improvement? We’d also love to hear from you, or have you attend one of our discussion meetings.
CONTINUE TO GENERAL QUESTIONS | SKIP TO PASTORS | SKIP TO DEACONS
What triggered this change and why now?
This is something that Pastor Bob has been thinking about for a long time. He had more time to study and research once he finished school and took his sabbatical. The simple reason for the “why” of the change is we want to bring the practices of Village more in line with scripture.
Our current practice is neither unwise nor sinful. But just because something is not morally wrong doesn’t mean it’s the most biblical or the wisest course of action. Elders are called to be shepherds of the church. These are to be qualified men who can adequately care for the church, pursue its growth, teach, rebuke, correct, etc. Since the founding of Village, that role has been a vocational one; sometimes singular in number, other times a small plurality. But there is no limitation of the pastoral role to a vocational one.
There is precious little information about what it means to be a deacon in Scripture. The little we do have suggests that they serve in a primarily hands-on spiritual service capacity. While their responsibilities are not clearly articulated in Scripture, their role is clearly differentiated from the elders by virtue of nomenclature and qualification. They seem to care for the physical, material needs in a spiritually-sensitive way, in a manner that complements the elder’s work, making their own jobs more effective and focused on spiritual leadership.
I believe our current model, while functional, can be improved upon. Currently, our deacons serve as a decision-making board, alongside the pastors. This has had the advantage of a kind “separation of powers,” but the elevation of deacons to a “board of directors” is extra-biblical. Furthermore, we often ask our deacons to take on shepherding tasks, to assist with the care needs of ministry. We desire to clarify these roles and call men to help shepherd the church who are both gifted and qualified as pastors, and to provide our deacons with greater focus in specific ministry roles. We believe this proposal will better serve the church.
Is the proposal an “all or nothing” proposal? For example, if someone was in favor of the idea of female deacons but not in favor of the idea of lay pastors, could we approve that one part of the proposal we are in favor of, but not the entire thing?
It’s possible that we could take a piecemeal approach. However, the proposal is tightly interconnected, and such an approach would raise additional challenges. If we decide to make changes, we want to do so with the integrity of the whole in view.
Are either of these roles (Deacon or Lay Pastor) available to non-members?
No, you must be a member to be a deacon or lay pastor.
If an individual who is currently a deacon is approached to enter into the pastor training program, would that person vacate their deacon position? Can someone be both a deacon and pastor?
We won’t have anyone who is both a deacon and a pastor.
Would setting up our leadership structure like this affect our association with our affiliation with the GARBC? Do any other GARBC churches have a leadership model like this?
Within the GARBC yes, there are other churches that are elder-led with deacon roles as we are proposing. There is no reason this would change our relationship with the GARBC.
How do you connect the changes being proposed to our actual church (meaning Village) to the global Church?
When we start looking at changing organizational structures within the church, it’s easy to simply fall into preference by denomination, etc. We need to think about how to anchor our own church—Village Baptist Church—to God’s design. While not ignoring church tradition and history, we are seeking to take a fresh look at Scripture and make sure that our organization and practices are as closely aligned to Scripture as possible.
What are the translations of the Bible we have that translate the word “wives” to “women” in 1 Timothy 3:11? And why isn’t the word “spouse” used in 1 Timothy 3:12 if the word “wives” is referring to women in general?
The NASB is one translation that uses the word “women” instead of “wives”. To the second question, it is one of the reasons why this passage is contested. There are several arguments as to the interpretation of this passage and good points on both sides. We recommend you see pages 29-39 of the Leadership Proposal for further insight into the interpretation we have taken.
What are the next steps from here?
We will schedule additional opportunities for discussion and dialogue, giving Village time to process what we’ve heard and read. The Q&A sessions held this summer were just one step.
If there’s significant feedback of something that needs to be changed, we will address that.
Eventually, we will present proposed by-law changes to make clear how the papers would be changed.
We desire your feedback, as we want to know where the church stands on this, and have no intention of “pushing through” this proposal through force of vote. We want to work collectively to end up with a proposal that we all approve of.
What will lay pastor nominations look like?
There is not a formal nomination process. At any time, potential Lay Pastors might be identified by the current pastors or recommended by the congregation. From there individuals are vetted, trained, called, examined and finally approved by the congregation. (Leadership Proposal pgs. 14-15).
Would lay pastors have a time frame they’d serve?
Lay Pastors will serve indefinitely, contingent upon three-year reaffirmations by the congregation. At the end of three years, the lay pastor will be reaffirmed by the other pastors and a 75% congregational approval with a 50% quorum at a Members Meeting. (Leadership Proposal pg. 16).
Is there a certain number of lay pastors we need? Can you add more as time goes on?
While we don’t have a set number of roles we are trying to fill, we’d like to call at least three lay pastors at the time we approve the leadership proposal. This will be in addition to the current two staff pastors. See the Leadership Proposal page 16, point 7 for more information on how the pastoral team would be structured.
What kind of training will the lay pastors receive?
Training for lay pastors will be an in-house program. There will be books to read, homework to complete, training modules to attend. It will operate as a small group study of sorts. Training does not guarantee someone becomes a pastor, however, it is a requirement to be approved. (Leadership Proposal pg. 14-15).
What safeguards are in place to make sure the lay pastors are continuing to be discipled and developed once they’re approved?
The staff pastors will continue their normal discipleship methods, and include the lay pastors. In addition, the same training and conference opportunities, for example, could be offered to our lay pastors. This, of course, is in addition to a pastor’s own personal discipleship and spiritual rhythms. Finally, lay pastors will be required to be reaffirmed by the congregation every three years. (Leadership Proposal pg. 16).
Can you explain the practical role of lay pastor? What will the lay pastors actually be doing?
Lay Pastors are pastors, and as such are called to essentially the same overall role as staff pastors. At the same time, staff pastors are compensated so that they don’t have to work full-time jobs to support their families. Lay pastors will not be expected to fulfill the same hours that staff pastors work.
The pastors will work together as a team. Many other churches call this role “elder”. Men who are qualified will share in this shepherding role. This will allow for gifted, qualified men in the church to be trained up in the role of pastor. Ultimately, we believe this will provide everyone at Village with better pastoral care.
I feel like we already have pastors and I can’t be friends with them. Between deacons, then lay pastors and staff pastors, I feel like the layer separating us is just going to get bigger.
Pastors are called to have authority, yet the gospel is a leveling ground. In forming a plurality, we want to reduce the possibility of great distance between staff pastors and the church. The decision making, shepherding and care of our people will be spread out equally among the pastors. It’s not a hierarchical leadership structure. In other words, we desire that all pastors are equally connected to the congregation, and equally accessible by the congregation.
Is it your intention to license or ordain the lay pastors?
We are leaning toward licensing as a formalized designation of the church’s calling of these individuals as pastors. In GARBC tradition, licensing may be termed; we will employ a similar strategy.
We have considered ordination, but have ruled it out as ultimately unnecessary for our purposes. As Baptists, we understand ordination to be bestowed by the local church. It is a mark of authorization and approval of the individual’s competency in doctrine by the church. Typically it is sought after in equipping a pastor to be able to serve in other contexts. Some churches will require ordination for a pastor to serve as a pastor in their church, but typically it is viewed as a transferrable authorization, and is thereby useful for a pastor who desires to move from one church to another.
We do not see ordination as advisable in our context because 1) the pastors we call will not (most likely) be pursuing vocational ministry in other locales, 2) Village has not required ordination of its pastors in the past. Neither Brian nor Bob see ordination as necessary for continued effective ministry.
That said, we do see the congregational affirmation process as requiring some level of investigation such that their approval is done so in confidence of the competency and doctrine of the elders/pastors.
Having been through difficult situations where the pastors or their wives helped me, I’m concerned that in a time of crisis, my situation would be delegated to someone (a pastor) I’m not familiar with.
We will definitely make judgement calls on whom people are comfortable with when walking alongside someone going through a difficult situation. That’s always valuable to keep in mind.
There seems to be confusion with the term “lay pastor” being used instead of “elder”. Perhaps the term “elder” would help ease some concerns since we see it in scripture.
There were a couple concerns we have with the word “elder.” At Village, it’s not a term that has been used. Many times elders function as a board of directors, rather than as pastors. We’re trying to push against that. We don’t want to give the impression that these men are simply advisors; rather this is a shepherding role. If it proves to be confusing, we would certainly consider your feedback.
Feedback included the following ideas:
The term “pastor” carries more weight
The term “pastor” indicates the amount of training these individuals will go through
The term “pastor” is more recognizable and discernable to all.
Do you have people in mind already for the role of elder or lay pastor?
The pastors do have a couple of people in mind that we want to have some initial conversations with. Our idea is that we will have some names in mind and people in the process of pastoral training so that we have done some early vetting. The plan is that a few months down the road we could tell you “we are considering these people” so it will be a little more concrete for the congregation.
Would the congregation vote on the elder/pastor role? Before they’re trained or after they’re trained?
Yes. We would do an initial training/screening process internally. Then those men would be called as pastoral candidates. That’s when we present the people to the congregation. There would be an examination process by the congregation and we’d require 50% quorum and 75% approval. This is the same approval required for staff pastors. Part of the reason of doing the initial training and screening before telling the congregation whom we are working with is to allow us a time to examine the candidate and if anything of concern comes up, it would allow us to deal with that privately. (Leadership Proposal pgs. 14-15).
If the qualifications are the same and they’re doing the same work, why do staff pastors get paid and lay pastors don’t?
The main distinguishing features between staff and lay pastors are the time commitment and therefore compensation. Currently, the church has decided to support Pastors Brian and Bob so that they can devote their working hours to focus on ministry, rather than dividing time between a secular vocation and ministry. With the lay pastors, we recognize that they have jobs, therefore the time expectation of their pastoral work is lower.
Is the purpose of having lay pastors because the staff pastors have too much work? Do you feel like you need help doing your pastoral work? What’s the real purpose of having lay pastors?
The main purpose is for the benefit of the church. The Pastors aren’t “maxed out” nor do they feel like Village is missing opportunities due to lack of time, but we see opportunities to better care for the church with a larger group than just the two pastors, to better shepherd and teach. There’s a natural diversity of gifting that will come with additional trained pastors. There is wisdom in the counsel of many. Right now, we are asking our deacons to be involved in vision-casting and authority. We’d like to train men as pastors to join us in this work.
Is there a contingency plan if the lay pastors don’t work out?
From the outset, if we don’t have suitable, qualified, trained men to call into the role of lay pastor, we won’t move forward with the proposal. It is contingent on continual development and continual training. We know our church has consistent turnover being in a mobile community. So we would likely continually have men in the training pipeline. We don’t have a “roll-back” plan.
What’s the current policy regarding training for our pastors?
We currently have no explicit qualifications (in the by-laws or other church papers) regarding specific formal training for staff pastors. There is, of course, an expectation of appropriate and applicable training, but it is not in written policy. Our lay pastors will be trained, but because they are not committing to full-time pastoral work supported by the church, we are going to do that training in-house. This training is specifically meant to equip them to serve the church adequately, competently and carefully. The goal of the church calling these individuals gives the church the chance to see that there is competency there.
After training and being voted on, is there a term of office or is this a lifetime position (for pastors)?
The way we have structured it in the proposal, lay pastors will be subject to a repeating three-year reaffirmation by the pastors and congregation. This gives the pastoral team and congregation the opportunity to affirm that the lay pastor is doing a suitable job and can continue. (Leadership Proposal pg. 16)
Is there a number of hours worked per week requirement or do the lay pastors work as needed? There isn’t a set number of hours they need to work, so while the lay pastors will work as needed, they will be needed regularly. We are very aware of the balance and accountability necessary between the various spheres of life.
Will the three-year reaffirmation allow for the lay pastors to pull back and say “I need a break”? There is language built in to allow for a three month to one year sabbatical for lay pastors. (Leadership Proposal pg. 16)
Would deacons have a time frame they’d serve?
Deacons serve on renewable three-year terms, dated from the month they were selected by the congregation to serve. Deacon terms are bound to the roles in which they are called. The role exists as long as the need exists. In the event the role is deemed unnecessary, the deacon’s term will end. (Leadership Proposal pg. 25).
As our current structure has deacons working directly with the pastors, would the deacons become a separate board? Would a pastor oversee the deacons?
Deacons would not constitute an independent board with decision-making authority. Any authority granted to the deacons remains subordinate to the pastors’ authority. All pastors are invited to attend deacon meetings, however one pastor must be present to chair deacon meetings. See pg. 21 of the leadership proposal for more information.
Will we no longer have a generic deacon role?
Correct. We will no longer be calling individuals to serve generally as deacon (Leadership Proposal pg. 20).
Would women have multiple deacon roles, as they currently do with many areas of service?
Our hope is that, by assigning specific deacon roles, we will be able to more strategically focus how our people serve, and open additional opportunities for people those who desire to serve.
What would deacon nominations look like if we are nominating for particular roles?
Pastors will determine the role to be filled. The need will be announced six weeks prior to a Members’ Meeting. The congregation nominates individuals to fill the role(s). Once nominees are vetted for availability, competency and qualifications, they are announced to the congregation two weeks prior to a members meeting. They are voted on, and their terms begin immediately. (Leadership Proposal pg. 24).
Will the deacon board be similar to the current trustee board?
The deacons will be more “person-oriented”—tasked with working under the pastors towards the care of specific areas of the church and its ministries. Our trustees have been charged with the care and upkeep of our physical property and possessions. Our trustees will likely continue under the direction of a Deacon of Property (Leadership Proposal pg. 20).
What kind of roles would the women fill as deacons?
Women wouldn’t be limited in their role as deacon. Any deacon role open to men would be open to women. Deacon roles are filled on an as-needed basis. (See pgs. 20-21 of the Leadership Proposal for examples of deacon roles).
Who will serve communion under this new proposal?
As we do currently, the pastors will oversee the preparation and distribution of communion. Additionally, as per our current practice, deacons will assist in serving communion to the congregation on Sunday morning. This includes both male and female deacons.
Would current ministry director roles just transition into deacon roles?
There would potentially naturally be individuals who transition from ministry director to deacon role, but there is no plan for an automatic roll-over.
Do you have titles or names for the deacon roles picked out yet?
We will see what the needs of the church are to determine what deacon roles Village needs to fill. But, for example, we know we would need someone overseeing our Counting Team and to assist with offering collection. That title would be something like “Deacon of Finances”. But we don’t have set titles or names yet.
Would it be better to have pastors doing the “care” of our people instead of that being a deacon role?
We can certainly clarify the role of a proposed Deacon of Care more as we go forward. If we have a Deacon of Care, our intention isn’t to “off-load” the care of our people to someone else—we’re just looking bring in others as well. We frequently hear third-hand that someone is sick, or in the hospital, or has a need. We’re looking to expand our network. A Deacon of Care would help bolster the ministry by visiting shut-ins, help us find transportation for those without...it would make the ministry more robust than it already is.
Are you looking to “downgrade” the diaconate to less of an office than before?
There is a change in terms of level of authority. The reason is because our current practice is that we have our pastors functioning as the shepherds of the church and then the deacons functioning more as a board. Our decisions currently get made in tandem: deacons and pastors. However it creates problems when we think about what the role of pastor is and what the role of deacon is in Scripture. Currently those roles are mixed together. Scripture tells us deacons should minister to the spiritual health of the church by meeting the physical needs of the church. It might be operational, administrative, physical care, etc.
Is it only deacons that can be female? If you are a deacon and needed a man’s help, is that putting me in charge of a male?
Yes. Deacons can be women. We believe that 1Timothy 2 mandate that the elder/pastor be a male. I’m hoping to do more teaching on this down the road. When Paul talks about authority and women not having the authority to teach or exercising authority, that seems to be in the context of the gathered church. If a woman is a deacon and putting together a team that includes men, we see no problem. Male-leadership seems to refer more to exercising shepherding authority over the congregation. (Leadership Proposal pgs 27-39).
Why are we going to allow women to become deacons now?
We’ve become increasingly convinced from scripture of the idea of a plurality of elders and as our deacon board currently functions with some elder-like responsibilities, we knew we needed to clearly separate the roles. As we worked on clearly defining those separate roles, we saw the necessity of defining what the function of women would be in the office of deacon, as we’ve grown in our understanding of what scripture presents. Also, this is a big process. Something like this took a long time to think on, wrestle with, testing and preparing all the pieces that would go along with this proposal. We’ve just now gotten to a place where we felt prepared, that our thinking is aligned to scripture and we were convinced in what we thought.
Can women still serve in roles without having the title of deaconess? If this is right, why haven’t other Baptist churches thought the same way?
Some churches do, it depends on the specific church. This isn’t a unique idea, there are many Baptist churches that have women deacons. It isn’t simply a label of deacon. We’re not simply renaming “volunteers” as “deacons.” The people who will be deacons must be called to that role. If you are not a deacon or you feel uncomfortable with that title, you won’t be excluded from serving in that area.
As a woman, I don’t feel like I’ve been hindered by not being allowed to be a deacon.
There is a lot of organic ministry and service that happens at Village, and that is wonderful, but there are also ministries that happen formally and some ministries that require a specific oversight and organization, and we need to make sure someone is leading that ministry well. The primary reason for the proposal—and including women as able to serve in the office of deacon—is aligning our leadership, ministry and practices in line with scripture.
