Just before his ascension, Jesus gave the Church her marching orders: ‘Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen’ (Matt. 28.19-20).

            The task is plain enough: Jesus owns everything, therefore convert and instruct the nations.  While every church isn’t called to fund an overseas missionary, every church is called to be missional, an ambassador for Christ in the place they find themselves.  And like the apostles who were first entrusted with this message, the Church today continues that mission to reconcile people to God.

Christ sent apostles, and apostles ordained elders in every city to establish and continue spreading the gospel (Titus 1:5).  As shepherds of local churches, elders are called to preach, teach, rule, exhort, rebuke and serve.  Because being or, better, believing, proceeds doing, if a session is to effectively carry out the mission, it must begin with right and like-minded belief.  It’s relatively easy in the evangelical church to reach a consensus on the centrality of the great commission, but it is something entirely different to see that mission enfleshed in practical terms in a local church.  We have different styles, theologies, ideas, methods, governments, and goals; the first century church faced the same issues struggling to be like-minded, avoid the party spirit, address sin, etc (Phil. 2:2-3; 1 Cor. 1:12, 5:1). 

Like-mindedness in a church begins with the session which must be in agreement on core beliefs and mission.  Obviously, unanimity of primary doctrine pertains to things like the Trinity, salvation by faith alone, importance of evangelism, and the necessity of Christian education.  But there are many things of lesser but still significant importance: doctrine of baptism, liturgy, music, church growth et al. 

No church or session will ever arrive at perfect agreement on everything under the sun.  We shouldn’t expect to have stainless unanimity or go in for Scottish church plants when our petty preferences for sprinkling over pouring and worship at 9am instead of 11am don’t prevail. 

But obviously some differences make it difficult for sessions to work together.  Amos asks “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” (3:3).  The answer is yes, but only for a short time.  Faithful Christians, and especially elders, should never agree to disagree, but they certainly can agree to work together while striving for like-mindedness.  This is one of the great privileges and opportunities for tangible love and submission in the church.  It can be seen in things like paedo-credo baptismal cooperations where elders with different convictions on baptism agree to study, let iron sharpen iron, and be led to unity by the Spirit.  Where a disagreement isn’t over a paramount issue, elders can submit to and bear with one another, demonstrating love and the centrality of the greater mission they are committed to.

In the long run, as Amos rhetorically indicated, two cannot walk together unless they are agreed.  In Presbyterian polity, ruling elders have equal voting and authority as pastors and teachers.  Samuel Miller, who pastored before teaching at Princeton in 1813, said the “Ruling Elder, no less than the Teaching Elder (or Pastor), is to be considered as acting under the authority of Christ in all that he rightfully does.”[1]  And yet the pastor is called to lead the session as a primus inter pares, a first among equals.  “But the particular department assigned to the Ruling Elder is to cooperate with the pastor in spiritual inspection and government.”[2] 

The vision of the church is not determined by a board consisting of men with identical gifts and roles.  The pastor is called to lead and direct, exemplifying submission and self-sacrifice.  Elders who can work together pursuing the vision of the church despite their differences should do so; but those who would hinder and obstruct the church should step down.  As a leader among peers, the pastor bears the responsibility to lead the session into unity first by teaching, and in the case of obstinate dissidence, by rebuke and confrontation.  Paul exhorts Timothy to rebuke and exhort with all patience, and to anticipate the time when people would gather teachers to please themselves (2 Tim. 4:2-3).    

Disagreements on the session are not necessarily the direct result of sin, but if left unaddressed they will give a sure opportunity for bitterness, competition, frustration, one-upmanship, division on the session and among the greater church body. Like-mindedness is a necessity for leadership, a goal for membership. 

In certain respects, it is much easier to deal with a great sin than a circumstance of incompatible vision.  For example, if an elder’s kids fell away from the faith, he would obviously be disqualified from leadership: “for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God ?” (1 Tim. 3:5).  It might take a great deal of courage to confront a disqualified elder, but the task is plain.  A dissenting elder, on the other hand, can be a much more difficult matter.  It may not even be his fault that he is out of agreement with the views of the session.  Sessions can fail to identify and understand their core values and mission or can fall into auto pilot mode while growing and electing new elders. Sometimes a dissenter isn’t in sin or it isn’t visible, in which case everyone must realize that his insistent convictions aren’t compatible with the rest of the session. 

Difficulties emerge when a dissenting elder won’t admit opposition or would rather remain antagonistic than step down.  When the session tries to move forward and is constantly blocked by his vote, or when people in the church are taught conflicting things, he may claim he is only exercising his right and duty of office.  But the duty of elders is to work together, to support the mission of the church, and to surround the pastor with counsel, accountability, and help in accomplishing the mission.  Because we are a society that loves victimization, it’s easy for the elder who purposefully acts like a stick in the spokes of a wheel to claim he is the one being mistreated, and that the pastor or session is being tyrannical for calling him on it.  Of course churches do fall into a bad business model of operation where the pastor power-trips like a runaway CEO and the session steamrolls opposition.  Authoritarian leaders are common enough and easily spotted.  But no one in the congregation can see a dissenting elder obstructing at session meetings, and undermining the church’s core values can be done subtly.   

The sooner a situation of incompatible visions is identified and addressed the greater the likelihood that sin and factionalism will be avoided or minimized.  But like a cigarette at a gas pump, tolerating a dissenting and obstinate elder sets a fine stage for explosions.  Paul instructed the Romans to mark those who caused division and avoid them (Rom. 16:17).  It isn’t divisive to put away the divisive man.  The Church needs to repent of the sentimental idea that all conflict and confrontation are bad, and that the initiator is somehow necessarily quarrelsome.  Kenneth Haugk notes that “Forgiveness and strong, confrontive actions are by no means mutually exclusive.”[3]  Jesus rebuked Pharisees and his disciples, and Paul rebuked Peter in front of Jews and Gentiles in Antioch .  Barnabas and Paul had such a difference over bringing John Mark on their mission that they parted ways.  Only the blindest reading of the New Testament would expect a faithful Christian ministry to be exempt from conflict.  

In order to deal with the antagonists who will inevitably crop up among the congregation and attacks from the outside, elders must be unified in their understanding of what the mission is before they can communicate that mission to the congregation, and labor diligently to accomplish it.  A session that tolerates division in its midst can expect a congregation rife with the same.