How does church governance impact the choice of a pastor?

One of the commonly overlooked aspects for hiring a pastor is the impact a church governance style can have on the hiring process.  Just take a look around at the churches within our communities and country.  Some churches have lifelong pastors while others seem to have a different pastor every few years.  In churches with a hierarchical system, the same situation often occurs as some overseers are appointed and/or hired into lifelong positions while others serve only for a set period of time.  So how does church governance impact the choice of a pastor as well as the potential candidates who may apply for the position?  What are the likely scenarios when you apply the pastor selection process to the three major church governances, be it the papal, presbyterian or congregational style?  Basically, whose vested interest is at stake – the church, the pastor, or both?  Additionally, how does this impact the overall direction of the church?

In regard to the papal system, the pastors and/or church leaders often fall into two different categories, depending on whether the church is completely independent or part of a hierarchical body.  In regard to the independent church model, many of the pastors and/or senior pastors of these churches are the actual founders of the church, or the predecessors who have been appointed by the original church founders.  Many of these individuals attain the pastoral positions as a result of the merits of their efforts applied in initially founding and establishing the churches.  Likewise, pastors selected and/or appointed into a hierarchical system often follow the same pattern of progression for attaining their respective leadership positions.  Overall, one of the major drawbacks to the papal system is the reality that some church pastors and leaders may be susceptible to the temptation of choosing future leaders based off their own personal agendas, rather than God’s will.  Conversely, pastoral leaders in a papal system often have a long-term vested interest in their respective local churches, which provides leadership stability for the congregants.  Furthermore, the church leaders have the freedom to cast long-term Biblical visions for their respective churches, without the impending fear of being dismissed or removed from their pastoral position by a disgruntled board member or group of board members. 

Concerning the presbyterian system, pastors and church leaders are often appointed and/or hired by a presbytery or group of church elders.  The great thing about the presbyterian system is that the group of elders usually consists of well-rounded believers who have a concerted interest in safeguarding the direction of their respective churches, especially from local perspectives.  In similar manner, many pastoral candidates may appreciate the opportunity to discuss a church’s long-term vision with a core group of elders, rather than the whole congregation, in order to prevent disruption within the church.  On the contrary, many churches may be limiting themselves by trying to choose “perfect candidates” from outside the congregation through the prism of their church elders’ religious views, instead of waiting for the Holy Spirit to work in the lives of possible future leaders from within their churches.  Likewise, many pastoral leaders may find themselves compromised when they try to cast long-term visions for their congregations, since the long-term fate of their pastoral positions lies with the very group of elders who appointed and/or hired them.

As for the congregational system, pastor candidates are often selected by a pastor hiring board and the congregation later comes together to cast their individual votes for approving/ disapproving the selected candidate.  On the surface, the congregational system seems to allow for everyone to get their vote on who they prefer to lead their church.  However, the reality of the matter is that most church members only get to vote during the final selection process of the pastor, not the entire selection process.  On the positive note, church members have the opportunity to participate in decisions concerning the welfare and direction of the church. Ideally, as a result of every member being allowed to vote on church matters, the vested interests of the congregation should remain preserved.  Realistically, many congregational-style churches have encountered the opposite results – church splits.  What happens to hired pastors in these scenarios?  Unfortunately, some church members may potentially fall into the trap of choosing a pastor who teaches what the congregation wants to hear, rather than a pastor who teaches what the congregation should hear.       

In conclusion, church governances can have broad impacts on the type of individuals churches choose for its pastors, be it lifelong pastors for their congregations or different pastors every few years.  What message are our churches sending to our communities?  Do pastors represent the short-term, disposable needs of our churches or do pastors play an integral part in the long-term vision of our churches?  We need to take heed to the Apostle Paul’s words to Timothy – “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.  Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.” (II Timothy 4:3 NIV)