In talking with someone a few weeks ago, a blog we had linked to back in July came up. It was this post, which led you to two other posts. I decided to go back and see if this guy had gotten any other comments on it or had written more about it. I came across this article that I thought seemed to go along those lines. We wrote about this somewhat here.

We do agree on the issue that not EVERYONE should be involved in EVERY aspect of church business. This guy gives a good definition of how most EFCA churches are “congregationally” run and what that means.

We have seen many issues though that get brought up and then die in either committee one, two or three on their way to approval. Many elder boards are now viewed as a yes-or-no totalitarian/authoritative board, instead of as a shepherding board whose role it is to be “responsible for the spiritual temperature of the church, ensuring that the congregation is taught, protected, developed - empowered and released in ministry and led well...All of this was designed in an atmosphere of trust where leaders were actually loved and appreciated by the congregation.” It seems many boards have become administrative instead of shepherding, thus many of them are no longer trusted or appreciated. Well, I would suppose many are appreciated on the "trustee" role they are playing-taking care of the building matters, finances, etc. But when the model of shepherding is lost, much respect is lost as well. It's almost a sneaky thing sometimes. You may not come right out and say or feel that you have lost respect for the board, but something just doesn't feel or sit right.

This congregationalism goes amuk stuff does not though, allow the leaders to run amuk either. We are all under Christ’s authority. Elders, pastors, musicians, members, regular attenders. And we are fellow heirs, all working for the same goal. So while not EVERYONE needs to know and be involved in EVERY decision, the heavier responsibility then falls to the leaders to listen, understand, and yes-appreciate all the differing views, opinions, hurts, needs and desires that the congregation brings and not favor any of one (group, idea) over another.