Thank you for your gracious reply. I do understand the limitations to an article of this type. I thought you were balanced within the space given. I also understand the emphasis on “potential.” I hope this sort of dialog can be repeated many times over inside the Covnetion. I am glad to have a brother of meek spirit co-laboring in the work of the kingdom. I hope out paths will cross soon. Blessings! ECR

Thanks for your well-reasoned response to my article in Deacon Magazine. I appreciate the fact that you took time to read it and interact with it. I don’t disagree with any of the points you made, but here is my response:

1) The article was not supposed to be an exhaustive Biblical study of the two offices. I did what I could do with
1200 words. The purpose of my article was to try and give a fair and balanced approach to these various approaches to congregationalism, especially noting potential weaknesses in both models. Your letter probably contained more than 1200 words, so I know (from your comments in the introduction) that you understand the contraints of a word count.

2) Note that the purpose involved POTENTIAL weaknesses. Both models have potential strengths and weaknesses, and merely pointing them out is not a condemnation of that model or an impilication that all elder-led models have those weaknesses. Though FBTC currently has a Pastor/Deacon model, I neither condemn nor mistrust those who have an Elder led congregation. There is room for both models in the interpretation of Scripture, and Baptists should certainly recognize that the presence of varying interpretations on this issue should not be a dividing line for fellowship. Too often, we make artificial dividing lines on issues that should be left to matters of interpretation by the local church.

3) Some of the points of disagreement you mentioned (congregation becoming detached, “the vote,” etc.) suffered from lack of adequate space to discuss the issue. Again, these were merely potential weaknesses that one hears when discussing the issue, but no real attempt was made to delve deeper into the discussion because of a lack of space. I certainly would not imply, for instance, that the “vote” is the only thing that makes a person connected. But the lack of a vote could certainly be the thing that makes people who have shifted to the elder-led model feel disconnected. That’s all I was saying.

I intended to write an article which gave a fair and balanced approach to both sides of the issue because too often people on either side get defensive about their positions and don’t really talk. I didn’t get that impression from your letter and truly appreciate you letting me “start the discussion” with the article.

God bless,
Greg