This is the second in a series of posts during election week 2020, titled, Give to God What Is God’s: Three Rules for (Political) Engagement. Read the Introduction, Rule 2, and Rule 3. 

****

To be a good Christian you have to be a good American. Let me explain.

The Bible says that God put you right where you are. “And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place” (Acts 17:26). Assuming you are reading this in America as an American, that means God put you inside the borders of America to be an American for this period of time.

What does that mean for you? Among other things, it means that you have specific civic responsibilities as an American. It’s biblical for me to say that to you. When the Sanhedrin asked Jesus about paying taxes to Caesar, remember his reply, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” That means that a Christian can take up residence in any number of civic contexts. We aren’t tied to any one nation. It also means that our responsibility to worship God is not incompatible with our responsibilities as citizens here. If we consider the difficulty of living under Roman rule, we should be inclined to work hard at making these two allegiances work.

It’s biblical to talk about our responsibilities as Americans, but what about “our rights as Americans?” Yes, that’s biblical too. Admittedly, that doesn’t always seem like the right emphasis as Christians who are called to lay our lives down. In an age when many of our fellow Americans are contesting those rights, it even feels a little culture-warish. But what if laying down our lives includes appealing to our rights as Americans? Where are we going to get a Bible verse for that? Remember what the Apostle Paul did when he was taken before the Roman tribunal? “Is it lawful for you to flog a man who is a Roman citizen and uncondemned?” (Acts. 22:25). He knew the answer, and so did the officials, so they let him go. Paul took up his cross and followed Jesus, but that doesn’t mean he was trying to get killed as fast as possible. No, he’s the one who told us to pray for kings so that we could lead “a peaceful and quiet life” so that all people might “come to a knowledge of the truth” (1Tim. 2:2–4). In other words, Paul’s strategic appeal to his rights saved his life and made way for the gospel’s advance. It also checked the state at that point of intrusion. He was right and they were wrong.

The American preoccupation with rights is not just an American thing. It’s an American thing because it’s a human thing. Biblically, rights are tied to the basic structure of the created order that God has made in which there are humans who have inherent dignity, families that are the basic building block of society, and government, each with their own distinct role in relationship to God and one another. Paul appealed to his rights as a means to the gospel’s advance.

Here’s where I’m going with all of this: faithfulness to God as Christians means faithfulness in the civic context in which he has placed us. Which brings us to our first rule of political engagement: understand what you’re doing as an American. I am arguing that Christians in America have a certain responsibility to hold America to its promises. Not only because many of our rights as Americans precede the state, but because the state has made certain guarantees concerning those rights enshrined in the Constitution and the rule of law.

There are two other parts in this series to follow. In those posts I will get into our specific concerns as Christians and our broader outlook as the church. Here, I want to help us understand two things: our civic context and our civic responsibilities. These are important and neglected topics, so let’s settle in for a civics lesson.

Understand your particular civic context

You and I are citizens of The United States of America, along with some 328 million other people who call this home. Unless anarchy or fascism rule the day, large groups like this live together somewhere on the spectrum of personal freedom and government control. What kind of government do we have?

In a sentence, we have a beautiful, balanced, and frustrating kind of government. My goal in this section is first to inform you, since you are an American, and secondarily to make you see the wisdom in it all as a Christian.

What Is a Constitutional Federal Republic?

What form does our government take? We have a constitutional form of government. We are not ruled by a king whose authority is derived from blood or force or the words of some Lady of the Lake, but by a constitution. We do not have a ruler, but we are instead ruled by law, the fundamental law of which is the Constitution. More specifically, we are a constitutional republic, which means our representatives are democratically elected by the people. Their authority is derived from the people they lead. More specifically, we are a constitutional federal republic. Hence, we are not the United People but the United States. It’s for this reason that our election of a President is not by popular vote, but by means of the electoral college, a way of ensuring national schemes do not subsume the interests of local communities.

What is all this government machinery constructed to do? The Founders had a precise answer to this question: the government is here to secure the rights of the people, rights which are universally held and preexist government. Those inalienable rights alluded to in the Declaration of Independence were made explicit in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The Constitution has been amended many times, and the first of those are called the Bill of Rights, which guarantee our civil liberties. These amendments outline our rights in relationship to the action of our government and make explicit what the government cannot do to us or take from us. The first of these is important enough to cite, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Lose one of these and lose them all. That’s why they are collected together in one amendment. Other amendments deal with due process, ensure that we are innocent until proven guilty, and protect our right to property. At their best, these amendments are just a way of making explicit a commitment to keep government in its place as God’s servant.

Weapons and Balances

This form of government is utterly unique in human history. The history of nations is a story of tyranny, as our Founders admitted in the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence. By contrast, the theme of our constitutional system is restraint, or limited government. Several principles built into the Constitution help to limit the power of the government. For instance, we took the power usually given to one man (the king) and split it into three parts (separation of powers): a legislative branch to make laws, an executive branch to execute and enforce the laws established by the legislature, and a judicial branch to interpret the laws. Then we gave weapons (checks) to each of those branches to allow them to keep their powers balanced (checks and balances). The President can veto laws, but Congress can override the veto. The Supreme Court can declare laws unconstitutional, but Congress can impeach justices and the President can appoint new justices with congressional approval. Separation alone would not keep any one branch from dominating the government. Checks must be given to each branch to keep the others in line. All of this keeps government doing its job.

That’s a summary of the form, the structure, and the theme of our government. Now, which Americans get to run this ship? The Bible is clear that governing authorities derive their power from God (Ro. 13:1, 4). They are his minsters doing his work, whether it be patrolling the streets or signing bills. But the Bible does not speak to how this or that person comes into this authority. More must be involved than someone deciding they should be king. The process is left to prudence and the people.

What about Rhode Island?

America’s electoral process is built on John Locke’s understanding of social contract theory, an idea that is not derived from the Bible but that does not contradict it. That is, the idea that the government’s just powers are derived from the consent of the governed.

How this works out to balance a large nation’s consent involves some deliberate intricacies.

As one example, the legislative branch, or Congress, is made up of an upper and lower chamber. The lower chamber is the House of Representatives where each state elects representatives in proportion to their populations. The upper House is the Senate, where each state regardless of their size elects two representatives. This ensures that Rhode Island’s interests are not functionally irrelevant at the table because its relative size. Shorter terms in the House keep our elected officials accountable to the people while longer terms in the Senate protect against the intrusion of short-term political interests and ensure stability. The Presidency, as we know, is limited to a maximum two-term office, which keeps us from crowning a king. And justices on the Supreme Court, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, serve for life, insulated from political pressure so that they can check both the Presidency and the Congress.

Even our two-party system is very American even if it isn’t a part of American law. What is it exactly? It’s a way of facilitating a negotiation between millions of people. It gets a bad rap at times, and that’s understandable. It delivers us less than ideal candidates. We don’t generally get to vote for who we would pick if it was just us. But that again is a design feature. Because America isn’t just us. Narrowing our whole process down to just two candidates before the final pick fosters cooperation, concession, and compromise among people with differences, but with enough in common to go in together. Things can get weird, as we know. Given human nature and in the absence of true religion, these collections of interests can become a functional religion unto themselves. And we can get swept up or lumped in with the phenomena. Party slogans don’t help. Certainly, Christians must be disciplined about how we relate with our respective parties. But my point is this: there is much to appreciate in even this part of our system for how it fights our natural tendency as a large group to fragment.

Let’s bring this section in for a landing.

Difficult by Design

The American system of government is frustrating, and that’s the point. It is frustrating to human government’s time-tested tendency to totalitarianism. Rome moved from a republic to a dictatorship and that keeps happening. If ever the political process seems frustratingly slow and inefficient, that’s on purpose. Our government is designed to slow things down. It’s calculated to make power frustratingly difficult to accrue, arrest, and abuse. The purpose of government is not to perfect humanity or the human experience. The purpose of government is, among other things, to protect humanity from itself. Or, as Peter put it, “to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good” (1Pet. 2:14).

Paul knew his rights and held the officials to honor them. That’s part of what we are doing in our political process as Americans.

Understand your civic responsibility

Americans will engage in the political process in different ways and to different degrees. But voting is the thing all of us can do. I’m calling it a responsibility, which is a touch short of an obligation. You don’t have to vote, and yet I think it’s fine to say not doing so is in most cases irresponsible given our role as citizens. This responsibility is the second thing we will focus on in this piece. This is also where some of our work to this point in the series will begin to payoff.

We rightly speak of wanting a clear conscience in the voting booth. Important for a clear conscience is a clear understanding of what we’re actually doing when we vote. You don’t need to feel bad about stealing third base when you’re playing baseball. That’s because it’s baseball. I’m convinced that many of our disagreements—especially in this election—come down to prior and less obvious disagreements about what a vote does.

I’ve read a dozen articles on this subject over the last year and I’m rarely happy with how a writer outlines evangelical voting patterns and priorities. So, let me take a shot and join the club. Best I can tell, there are three approaches evangelicals take to their vote for the President.

All-In Voting

For the pietistic view of voting, what matters most is what a vote says about me before God. This view adopts a secular religious framework for the action of voting. With the receding influence of Christianity in our culture, politics and political leaders have moved into that space. Politics is how Americans, having lost their religious moorings, express their hopes and aspirations for themselves and humanity. Which is why our political discourse takes on such strident overtones. As with all religion, in this secular civil religion of politics we identify with the individual who gets our vote. Because religion requires purity, the purity of this selection is crucial to our spiritual and moral standing. Our vote is a statement of faith, so it has to be just right. True to the nature of religion, to vote for a candidate is to be all-in with that candidate, to engage in a form religious self-expression, a kind of secular sacrament.

If your candidate can do no wrong and their opponent can do no right, you may be a pietistic voter. Or, alternatively, maybe you’ve said, “I could never vote for Kandidate Karl.” Depending on the reason, you may have accepted the all-in sacramental framework that supercharges your association with the candidate with spiritual implications that lead either to personal defilement or salvation.

All Eyes on Us Voting

For the public relations view of voting, what matters most is what a vote says about me or us to others. It treats a vote as an important public statement effecting one’s reputation and, by association, the reputation of the church and of Christ. It is a signal to others of virtue. I don’t mean to say that in a cheeky way, but to describe the function of a vote in this mindset. To vote for a candidate is a decision in which all eyes are on me or us. When polls report on blocks of voters, they do so in a way that ignores the textured motives of voters. Those polls generate headlines, and those headlines generate reactions. Maybe you don’t want to be one of thosepeople.

If it is especially important for you that others know who you voted for and why—or who you did not vote for and why—you might be trying to persuade your peers, which is fine, but is is also possible that you are treating your vote as a signal to others of the kind of person you are. That focus on you and the perception of others means you may be seeing your vote in these terms. It also makes you vulnerable to manipulation, as public square opponents of your values know how to drive you away from the partnerships that would advance your interests.

Both of these voting approaches are often held together, and both can be held with good motives. In the first case, we want to honor our Lord. In the second case, we don’t want to misrepresent him before the world. Yet, our tendency to pietism in voting can be a form of worldliness. The world makes government its God, an election its sacrament, and the President its king. It divides humankind into red and blue. We don’t do any of that. That’s not the game we’re playing, constitutionally or theologically. Yet when the accusations of a compromised character follow, we easily accept this pietistic framework.

Our tendency to prioritize how others perceive our vote comes with the good intention of preserving our witness. But before which of my unbelieving neighbors? And before which generation, the one we’re in or the one fifty years from now? Today’s evangelical pundits are rightly hard on nuance before abolition or the end of Jim Crow, and yet lean into nuance when it comes to our day’s grossest human rights violations. The common theme is perception and reputation. When the accusations of an inconsistent witness follow, we easily accept this public relations framework.

My own take is that there is a better approach, an approach with more integrity. That is, an approach that is truer to the kind of game we’re actually playing, regardless of what Twitter thinks. Here’s how to vote.

All Things Considered Voting

For the principled pragmatic view of voting, what matters most is not what a vote says about me or to anyone else, but what a vote actually does. This view, also called a functional view of voting, sees a vote as a strategic move to advance the greatest good given the circumstances with a special emphasis on the role and goals of government. In other words, a matter of prudence. For a book-length treatment on this subject, read Clarke Forsythe’s, Politics for the Greatest Good: The Case for Prudence in the Public Square. Our vote gives power to some people to make and carry out and enforce laws over the rest of us. What matters is who is getting that power and what we expect them to actually do with it. If we were the only ones voting for a President, we would need to approach it like we choose a babysitter. But it is not like that at all. It is 328 million people not like that. It’s much more like blob tag, an image that has stuck with me recently. This is an all things considered approach in a system designed for concessions.

Let’s add some more p words to the argument here, which I am borrowing from Andrew Walker. Do the platform promises matter? Yes, it matters what a candidate intends to do with our support. Do their promises strengthen or undermine our constitutional structure? Do their promises honor or undermine our basic rights as humans and as Americans? So, we might carefully read the republican party platform and the democratic party platform before voting. Does the person matter, that is, their character? Yes, character matters because it matters whether they will keep those promises. We watch their life, listen to their words, consider their history, listen for inconsistencies, and don’t forget about what they intend to do with the power we give them. That’s a matter of character too. Does it matter who the alternative viable person is? For this approach, yes that’s a meaningful factor. How about the personnel they will appoint to judge’s seats, cabinet positions, etc.? Yes, also a factor. How about specific policies? Yes, those are also important. How these all fit together will depend on the moment and our unique judgments about what’s at stake. Whatever a vote is in this case it is not a sacrament or a signal of our virtue. It’s a strategy decision based on many factors, some of which we will explore tomorrow.

Okay, I’m done.

Perhaps that will help you in the voting booth this Tuesday. For all the noise of the political season, we have it pretty good.

Remember, God put you in America. Be sure to vote.

This is the first in a series of posts during election week 2020, titled, Give to God What Is God’s: Three Rules for (Political) Engagement. Read Rule 1, Rule 2, and Rule 3.

****

Don’t talk about religion and politics, they say. They can get you in trouble. Maybe that’s why the Sanhedrin asked Jesus a question that involved both, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” (Mk. 12:14). Caesar’s image was on the coin, which repulsed the Jews. The Sanhedrin had Jesus cornered. If Jesus insisted on the tax, then he was a religious idolater. If Jesus undermined the legitimacy of the tax, then he was a political revolutionary. Jesus’ reply was brilliant: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mk. 12:17). In one sentence Jesus managed to talk about both religion and politics and get himself out of trouble.

We’re Christ-followers. We talk about religion all the time. Let’s talk about politics. Based on the questions I get and the questions I have myself, I think we’re hungry for help in this area. Based on some of what I see in my newsfeeds, I am quite sure we need some help in this area—from civics to civility.

Now, before I write anything more, I need to offer two caveats. First, I write to you as a pastor. I mean to emphasize both words. I’m writing to you as a pastor, as Trent in my role as the pastor for preaching and teaching. This is not an addition to our statement of faith or a new section of our membership covenant or even a word from our elders as a group. Nevertheless, this is an attempt to lead you biblically. I’m writing this to you as a pastor. It should bind your conscience in as far as it is plainly biblical, but there is also a good measure of moral reasoning in what follows. Weigh it all as a good Berean (Acts 17:11). Second, what I’m writing is an exercise in thinking biblically about big things, which is hard and fraught with risk. Consider that preachers have to be experts at a different ancient text every week, but we also have to connect that ancient text to our modern context. The Bible makes sense of everything in the world. But I am not an expert in every field in the world. So, how about a bargain?: I’ll write carefully and you read earnestly.

This is the first in a four-post series that will run from today through Wednesday, the day after the election. This started out as an outline to use over lunch with members. It evolved into an article, and now, on the eve of the election, it has matured into a four-part series. Hey, why not? Politics has our near full attention and I’d like to channel some of that for some instruction.

Let’s talk about politics

Politics can be hard to talk about for many reasons: it’s complex, it’s hard to keep up with, and it deals with matters of great consequence. So, instead of talking about politics, I want to start by talking about politics. That is, about the thing itself. What is it? Work up front on this question will payoff later in this series of posts.

Broadly speaking, politics refers to the activities associated with large group decision-making. Because every person in a group cannot reasonably engage in every decision that effects the group, politics involves the delegation of power over people and the deliberation about the scope and purpose and administration of that authority. If you follow the etymology back, it comes from the Greek word, polis, which means, city. We are citizens of a city (state, nation, etc.) in which we engage in politics, the work of deciding things together. For our purposes we will define politics as the activities involved in human government.Naturally, when we talk about people deciding things together, we are also talking about disagreement. That’s another reason talking about politics can be hard. Politics is the art and science of navigating our disagreements to a conclusion that is both maximally good and agreeable. The quality of that outcome will depend largely on the political processes involved along the way

From God, not God

It is true that politics is messy. It is also true that human governments are responsible for carrying out many great evils. The bigger the governments it seems the greater the potential for evil. But should we think of government as a necessary evil in itself? According to Jesus and the Apostles, no we should not. In fact, it is sin to do so.

When Jesus said, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,” he recognized the legitimate authority of human government and governors (Mk. 12:17). Governing authorities, Paul writes, are “appointed” and “instituted by God” (Ro. 13:1–2). They are “God’s servant for your good” (Ro. 13:1–4). How are they for our good? As Peter put it, they are “sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good” (1Pet. 2:14). Which means we rightly honor God by honoring governing authorities. We even glorify God by pondering all of the ways in which human government makes our life good (Ro. 13:1; 1Pet. 2:13, 17). Some laws are more just than others. But there’s much to be thankful for, from local traffic laws to copyright law to federal regulations over the airline industry. It’s pretty remarkable all the bad things that never happen.

But don’t miss this: Peter probably had a second audience in mind when he wrote to Christians about the state’s job to punish evil and praise good, namely Roman civil authorities. His inspired words to the church were words for everyone concerning God’s purpose for the state, including governing authorities. That was likely Paul’s secondary purpose in his famous words to the church at Rome in Romans 13, “he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (13:4).

This dual insight is significant for how Christians approach politics. Jesus recognized both the legitimate and limited authority of human government and governors. The state is from God, but the state is not God. The state is necessary, but it is not everything. There are certain things the state must do and certain things the state must not do. We are under the state’s authority, yet, more importantly, we are together under God’s authority.

That’s important to keep in mind as we consider how we engage politically. 

Three rules for political engagement

So, how should we go about engaging in the political process? That’s what I have in mind to address in this series,Give to God What Is God’s: Rules for (Political) Engagement. I have more in mind here than tone and manner, but we’ll get to that. What I have in mind is more comprehensive: a framework for thinking about, talking about, and engaging in politics. This series comes in the context of the 2020 election, indeed right on top of it. But I mean for it to stand apart from our immediate political moment.

Here are the three rules we’ll explore over the next three days:

• First, understand what you’re doing as an American. Understand your civic context and your civic responsibilities, in particular the purpose of your vote.
• Second, engage in the process as a Christian. Engage with a primary allegiance to Jesus, with biblically ordered Christian concerns, and with expectations calibrated by his promises.
• Third, reserve your greatest energies for the most lasting society, the church. The church will last forever, so let’s be better church members than political party members.

As we work through these together, let’s avoid listening for what we think everyone else needs to hear. Doing that won’t help them hear it, and you might miss what’s in here for you. Some of us are exhausted by the noise of politics and need to hear that politics is important. Others of us are exhausting ourselves (and others) in the political process and need to hear that the church is more important by a longshot. Others are losing sleep in this unique election over what it means to vote and need some help to engage with a clear conscience. In short, I’m writing for all of us because I think all of us need this.

This three-part framework is comprehensive yet easy to remember and it grounds us in biblical priorities without getting into partisan politics.

Maybe it will make talking about politics not such a hard thing after all.

If you hang around Heritage long enough, you’re going to hear about elders. You’ll hear us talk about how there are three terms used interchangeably in the New Testament for this office: elder, pastor, and overseer. You’ll hear us talk about how some of our elders are paid and some are unpaid, some have special assignments or expertise, but our elders lead us together. You’ll hear us talk about the importance of biblical qualifications found in texts such as 1 Timothy 3:1–8 and Titus 1:5–9. We’ll tell you to know who your elders are, to pray for your elders, and to take our lead as elders (Heb. 13:17).

Elders are a given around here. But how are elders given to the church? Scripture says that Jesus “gave” pastors to the church (Eph. 4:11). How does he do it? Put differently, how do elders become elders? And what specifically does that look like here at Heritage?

That’s what I want us to explore in this post. This is a topic the elders have been discussing for many months. That work has also led to some changes in our process, which we’ve outlined at points across the last year or so. Most recently, we unhooked our process of appointing elders from a fixed point on the annual calendar each year. There are good reasons for that. Here in this post I’ll summarize the Scriptures we’ve considered and our process as it stands.

Scripture doesn’t give us a detailed process for appointing elders. But we are given some principles. Let’s start with those.

Three Principles

We’ve identified three principles in Scripture that should inform our process of raising up and appointing elders. Here they are:

1. We should appoint elders prayerfully

We want to say to our elders, “the Holy Spirit made you overseers” (Acts 20:28). That means we need to be submitted to the Spirit’s leading in our process of appointing elders. So, in addition to laboring over the Scriptures for guidance, we do what the early Christians did in these moments: we pray. “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they had believed” (Acts 14:23; cf. 6:6).

2. We should appoint elders patiently

This principle needs a little elaboration. The concern for patience comes from Paul’s admonition to Timothy, “Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands” (1Tim. 5:22). Apparently, there were reasons Timothy might have appointed an elder in haste: perhaps there was the practical need, or perhaps a man appeared ready and willing. But there are two dangers Paul specifically outlines involved with hasty appointments. First, hasty appointments multiply the effects of sin, and with it the responsibility for the damage, leading us to “take part in his sins” (1Tim. 5:22). Second, sin is sneaky and both character and doctrine take time to discern: “the sins of some people are conspicuous … but the sins of others appear later” (1Tim. 5:24). We feel the pressure to appoint men as well. But patience is an obedience we believe God will bless.

3. We should appoint elders together

Here’s an important question: from a human standpoint, who is involved in appointing elders? The importance of leadership in this process is straightforward in the New Testament. The Apostles “appointed elders” in every church they planted (Acts 14:23), and Paul exhorted Titus to “put what [remains] in order, and appoint elders” in Crete (Tit. 1:5). Less clear, but still there we believe, is the role of the broader congregation. The vocabulary for “appointment” in the New Testament is associated with voting in the context of civic assemblies. The appointment of the first deacons also points in this direction. In that instance recorded for us in Acts 6, there’s a clear sense of leadership but also congregational partnership (Acts 6:1–6). There is also a practical component to the mingling of leadership and the congregation in this process. It is not realistic for every member of a given church to have the same exposure to a prospective elder’s life and doctrine. But we can trust a process of examination together. Consider that the Jerusalem church was 3,000 strong. In summary, what we see in Scripture is a pattern of congregational agreement under elder leadership.

Four Steps in Our Process at Heritage

So, how do we intend to honor those principles we’ve just worked through? Heritage has been led by elders for most of our church’s history. But we have gone about the process of appointing elders in different ways over time.

Over the last few years we have been studying this subject and hammering out plans. In this process, we came to the conclusion that we were not adequately honoring two of those principles above. We were praying. But we are convinced that our process was not patient enough, and that we did not involve you, the congregation, thoughtfully enough. For example, in years past, our timeline allowed for two weeks between announcing a prospective elder’s name and a vote.

This period of study has led us to mature our process in some important ways. Today, our process involves four steps: cultivation, observation, candidacy, and appointment. Let’s unpack each of these in turn.

1. The first step, elder cultivation, involves nurturing a culture where men aspire to eldership, where boys grow up desiring to serve in this office, and where the congregation knows what to look for in a shepherd.

This involves instruction on biblical eldership from the Word. Formally, we do this through the preaching and teaching ministry to the church. Informally, we hope that our example and presence as elders holds out the office as a noble task. We want our overall ministry as elders to draw men to a godly life, and to godly men to the office.

In this step we also identify possible elders. As elders, we keep a look out for who the Holy Spirit may appoint to the office. We do this with your ongoing help. This invitation is always open to you: at any time, you can write to an elder or to the team at elders@heritagebiblechurch.org to commend a man for the office.

2. The second step, elder observation, is a low-stakes opportunity for a man to observe and be observed up close with the possibility of eldership in mind.

This second step is what it sounds like. This is a low-pressure, high-exposure opportunity for both elders and a prospective elder to explore the appropriateness of eldership. It is not a no-expectation process, in that reading and meeting attendance is involved, but there’s no expectation for either party that the relationship must advance to eldership. Think dating, not engagement.

This period allows us to observe his qualifications for the office, but also a few other things. Our team is aligned in ways that are narrower than our statement of faith. How we go about biblical eldership is one example. So, is he a fit for eldering at Heritage? We are also considering his capacity for the work, whether he has the energy or the time. Desire is also a consideration here. After getting acquainted with the office, does he want to elder, or will this be out of compulsion?

This process is six months because that is realistically the amount of time it takes for a man to get comfortable with our team, and for our team to get comfortable with him. There is also a bit of work that needs to be done. He will read and write on several books and papers before observation is over, on eldership, doctrine, and our church’s key documents.

3. The third step, elder candidacy, is where the elders formally examine a man for eldership with the help of the congregation.

As a man’s observation period concludes, he may be invited to complete a questionnaire and interview process with the elder team. This involves answering thirty or so questions on doctrine and character. His wife reads this and engages this material as well. If we agree as elders to bring him into candidacy, we’ll announce his name to you on a Sunday morning or at a Family Meeting.

This step takes six months as well. Why six months? There are a few reasons we settled on this. First, it allows time for a feedback loop, as the congregation offers us input on the man. If an issue of character arises, we have time to search it out and come to a resolution. Second, this timeframe allows you to hear the candidate’s name and perhaps his teaching in several venues over time.

Importantly, this period also gives the elders time to more closely examine the man’s doctrine: “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it” (1:9). At the mid-point of candidacy, the elders will schedule a one-hour doctrinal examination. This is intended to be a serious step, but not a scary step, which is why we sometimes call it a “doctrinal interview.” This is a new part of our process, but we expect that this will be a clarifying, unifying, and encouraging step.

When all this is done and there’s one month to go in his candidacy, we’ll put his name before the church again with an invitation for any final input.

4. The fourth step, elder appointment, involves agreeing together in the Lord and formally appointing a man to the office of elder.

At the six-month mark we will join for a Family Meeting and vote to affirm a man to the office of elder. If we have led you properly, and if you have engaged the process carefully, then there should be no unexamined objections to a candidate on the basis of qualification by the time of vote. That bears repeating. We are not saying that there won’t be objections raised in the process. But that if we have all taken our role responsibility, there should be no known points of disqualification. If we put in this work together, this should make for confidence instilling appointments.

Once a candidate is affirmed as an elder, we will appoint him publicly at the next best opportunity. Here’s the kind of lofty language Paul got out when he wrote about the appointment of elders: “In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you…” (1Tim. 5:21). This how we want to feel and speak when we appoint elders. In the pattern of Scripture, current elders gather around them, lay hands on them, and pray for them in front of the congregation (Acts 6:6; 14:23; 1Tim. 4:14; 5:22). This solemn and public appointment emphasizes the weighty role into which new elders step and reinforces the members’ responsibility to submit to and pray for the leaders God has given. As it was for the early church, we want this to be one of the most meaningful and memorable moments in our life together as a church family.

A Worthy Investment

That’s how elders are raised up and appointed at Heritage. Healthy biblical eldership involves a great investment of care on the part of our elders, and on your part to pray and engage in this process.

But thankfully there is one who has even more invested in our care than any of us, captured in Paul’s words to the elders at the church at Ephesus: “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood” (Acts 20: 28).

Let’s pray, let’s be patient, and let’s engage in the process together.

I’ve been asked this week for a copy of the prayer I prayed on Sunday. Here is an adapted (and thicker) version of what we prayed together this Sunday. May this prayer serve you as you pray this week. — Trent

••••

Dear Father,

A man died on the street in Minneapolis under the knee of a police officer and we saw it with our eyes. Our nation is in turmoil and our cities are on fire. Oh Lord, there are many emotions we should feel right now: sadness, anger, and grief. There are many things we should pray for this morning—for your justice, your peace, and your healing. There are also many people we should pray for.

Several come to mind.

We pray with heavy hearts for the family of George Floyd, a man made in God’s image, that you would give hope to his beloved family because of the gospel. It appears that George may have been a Christian. If his faith was in the cross the Lord Jesus, then his face is bright with his resurrected glory. Today he breathes just fine.

We pray for the officers involved in Mr. Floyd’s death and for their families. As they face the haunting prospect of a human judgment, we ask that you arrest them with the prospect of your perfect divine judgment so that they might find the full forgiveness of sins in the one who bore our judgment in himself on the cross. We do not know the motives of these men. Motives are easy for us to assign; they are far harder for us to actually discern. But you know every thought and deed. We tremble but we also take comfort in knowing that no motive will go unpunished by you.

We pray for our governing authorities, that your Word concerning human government would be honored by our nation’s president and governors, our mayors and our police chiefs. May each of them do their jobs, as hard as that may be. May they do their jobs well, as impossible as that may seem. May wise decisions win out and the best policing practices prevail.

We pray for law enforcement officers in our major cities, in particular. Protect them from harm, from disillusionment, from closing in on themselves, and from giving up on us. We thank you for the safety that we are so predictably afforded through the honorable work of these public servants. Yet they are sinners, and every instance of police-misconduct betrays our trust and undermines our peace. For this reason, we pray for the removal of problem cops from the profession, for the courage and for the policies to make that easier to do. In the face of these riots and risks to their own lives, Lord, use them to protect peaceful protestors and the vulnerable populations that need them most. Grant restraint where that is right. Protect their lives this coming night.

We pray for those whose communities are on fire. We think especially of the poor, whose pharmacies and grocery stores have been looted, who may have no means of transit. We pray for pregnant women, for single mothers, for the elderly, and for children. We think also of business-owners whose lives and livelihoods are on fire today. Make yourself known to all of these people through the tangible and timely love of churches down the street and neighbors down the hall.

We pray for those citizens entrusted with the responsibility of carrying out our process of justice, for attorneys and judges and for juries. We ask that your Word would be honored in the process of human justice that unfolds in the weeks and months ahead. Keep us mindful that while injustice happens in moments, the best of our human justice takes time. Because of our limitations as humans, and our sinful tendency to multiply injustices, help us see patience and due process as a means to the justice we rightly demand. May the truth concerning Mr. Floyd’s death be plain, and may justice be served.

We pray for minority communities who for any number of reasons—including tragic encounters with the police, past and present—know a troubled relationship with law enforcement. Lord we ask that vulnerable populations would have good reason to trust that their law enforcement serves their best interests. Restore trust wherever it has been broken in our community and abroad.

We pray for peaceful protestors, that they would be understood and heard, and that their goals would be noble and clear. We thank you, Lord, for our constitutional freedom of peaceful protest. While we may disagree on the cause of one protest or another, we pray that the importance of this freedom would not be among our disagreements.

We pray against those with nefarious purposes—those who kill, steal, and destroy. We have been confused and frustrated at the number and complexity of bad actors this past week. Some are organized and cruel, others are selfish and opportunistic. While so much is so unclear, we know who stands behind every menacing design.

We pray for our country and for peace between neighbors. The killing of Mr. Floyd has opened old wounds and enflamed old hatreds. May the truth that we are all made in your image prevail over every sinister idea that undermines our shared dignity as humans. May the truth the we are sinners humble us all to acknowledge our shared propensity to boasting, selfish ambition, envy, partiality, unlistening ears, and lying lips. When sin tears neighbors apart, remind us of the only one who can truly bring any of us together: Jesus.

We pray for the local church in the city of Minneapolis, and for the saints at Bethlehem Baptist Church in particular. Strengthen Jason Meyer who will preach this morning, and Andy Naselli, a friend of this church, along with the rest of their elders. Unite Bethlehem’s members in faith, hope, and in love as they organize themselves to care for their neighbors in tangible ways even this afternoon.

We pray for our church here in Greenville. We need your gentleness, your self-control, and your reconciliation. We need your joy, your forgiveness, and your faithfulness. We need your long-suffering, your patience, and your goodness. We need faith, hope, and love. Grow us in all of these things by your Spirit.

We long to see your justice, to know your peace, and to experience your healing. Even more, we long to see Jesus’ face. May it shine on us today, and may he shine forth from us until the day he comes.

It’s in his name we pray,

Amen

Editorial comment: As you read this piece, consider how you have found these words to be true in your life, or how you’ve found them true in the life of another believer or our church. Then email me at trent@heritagebiblechurch.org. I’d be so glad to hear and might circle around in a few months with a follow-up post.

****

A few months ago I didn’t know the first thing about the coronavirus. Now, everyone knows the first thing about it. It’s bad. Let’s start there.

There are some real ways in which this whole thing is bad for us. It’s a killing machine, especially for our older population. That’s bad. We can’t gather and that’s bad. The economy is halting and that will be bad in ways that we are only starting to understand. Yesterday at 5 p.m., one of our members let me know he was not available Friday night. A friend was getting married. By 6 p.m., he followed up to let me know the wedding was canceled. Just try to imagine being that couple.

But then there is that famous promise we have been given. The reference, Romans 8:28, is as famous as the verse: “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” Those are unqualified words. In fact, they are abundantly clarified words. “All things” here include all the “sufferings of this present time” (8:18), all the “futility” and “groaning” of this present creation (18:20, 22)—even “tribulation,” “distress,” “persecution,” “famine,” “nakedness,” “danger,” and “sword” (18:35).

We must not minimize the pain here. Our Lord never does that. But let us not miss the good in the midst of that pain. For our encouragement in hardship, and our prayers over the coming weeks and months, here are five reflections.

First, the coronavirus will be good for our faith.

I have observed you on social media, and we have talked here and there. Some of you might have bought too much toilet paper—that’s between you and God—but my read is that your hope is settled because your faith is genuine. There’s a reason for that. Peter tells us that we have been born again unto a living hope, and that our various trials serve a specific purpose: “so that the tested genuineness of your faith—more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire—may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1Pet. 1:3, 7). This trial, friends, will prove our faith and it will purify our faith. This trial will not let us be tricked into placing our hope in this perishable, defiled, and fading world. That’s a good thing.

Second, the coronavirus will be good for our Sunday gatherings.

Wait, didn’t we cancel our Sunday gathering? We’re hosting an online service (more on that tomorrow), but yes. Isn’t anything short of being together a big loss? Absolutely. But I’m seeing an upside: surely we will grow to value being together all the more. May we be all the more convinced that the church is not the platform on Sundays, but a people; not something to consume, but something we’re connected to. We are not customers on Sunday morning; we are partners in the gospel (Phil. 1:5).

We’re a strong singing church, but maybe we’ll give God more glory for commanding us to sing to one another (Col. 3:16). We’ll keep reading the Bible at home, but maybe we’ll see even more clearly God’s wisdom in his words to pastors, “Devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, to teaching” (1Tim. 4:13). Hearing the Word is always a good thing. Hearing it in public is his plan for us. Our purpose in meeting digitally on Sunday isn’t an attempt to deliver on all that God intends for us in meeting. Some of that grace, yes. But it’s also to make sure we taste church in order to truly miss church.

Third, the coronavirus will be good for our relationships with one another.

But aren’t we supposed to practice “social distancing”? Absolutely. If the Lord is kind, this is one way we’ll save ourselves from the rates of infection and death that we’ve seen in Italy. It’s why we’ve discontinued our Sunday gathering for a time, and it’s why we canceled all of our other programming. All of that is a matter of love for neighbor. Here’s the upshot: now we’ll get to see just how much we love one another.

We have good plans and programs at Heritage. I think we’re deliberate about what we do and why and how. But if our well-laid plans can also make us spiritually lazy, then we’re about to get a workout. If our programs can lead us to equate busyness with fruitfulness, then we’re about to bear some fruit together. And that will be good for us. Be encouraged when our younger members go shopping for our older members, and when we labor to stay connected in ways that prove that really we do care. I don’t see why we can’t come out of this a closer family, even having been apart for a time.

Fourth, the coronavirus will be good for our pocketbooks.

A friend recently commented, “I’m concerned for our older population. A surprising threat to their health is the time they have on their hands to read the news and watch their portfolios.” I made my way to the local hibachi place for lunch a day or so ago. The owners—a sweet young couple, now familiar faces—were waving from inside. The sign on the door thanked us for our patronage, but said they were closed, at least for the time being. Even events like T4G and SXSW had to cancel their huge events. They had event insurance, but that insurance didn’t cover pandemics. Everyone is affected. It is already devastating.

Oh how Paul’s words are ringing in our ears right now: “As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy. They are to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, thus storing up treasure for themselves as a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is truly life” (1Tim. 6:17–19). Riches fly away. But that’s hard to believe until it happens. It will be a good thing if we can come out ahead with real treasure and true life.

Fifth, the coronavirus will be good for our neighbors.

I plan to write a bit more on this at a later time, but I can’t leave our witness off of this list. We have an opportunity here to show our community the glory of Jesus, and that can happen in two ways. The first way is less obvious and less appreciated, but it is central to Jesus’s strategy for the spread of his name. Remember what Jesus prayed, “The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me” (Jn. 17:22, 23). How will our neighbors in Greer and Taylors and Greenville see the glory of Jesus? In the love and unity of the church. But, of course, secondly, we show the glory of Jesus through our good works, which includes doing good toward our neighbor (Matt. 5:16). I’ve already heard of one young mom spending her afternoon calling all her older neighbors to ask if they needed help. That was so good to hear.

So, the coronavirus is bad. Everyone agrees. But we’re the people who know not only the first and the last thing about this bug, but everything in between. And there are some good things going on there.