Customer Reviews

Elders and Leaders

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I've noticed several previous reviewers compare 'Elders and Leaders' by Gene Getz to another book on church eldership called 'Biblical Eldership' by Alexander Strauch. After growing up in a small Plymouth Brethren church (Alexander Strauch's background as well) I've understood for years why Biblical Eldership was written and used as the key book for elders to study their biblical role. However, Strauch doesn't just present the biblical texts, but presents many personal conclusions as if they were the logical biblical conclusions. The problem is that Strauch doesn't identify or separate out his own cultural biases in reading the biblical texts on elders. His conclusions work perfectly in small PB churches, but create much confusion in larger churches and those with different elder structures. As a result, I've asked many elder boards over the years to read Strauch to study the biblical texts, but work hard to draw the line where he jumped in to his own cultural conclusions. It has been a hard task and often elder boards finish the book frustrated by the obvious bias placed on biblical texts. The key area of problem is that Strauch has made the Bible say things about leadership structures, the role of staff, and involvement of elders in various micro-tasks that are just not present in the biblical texts.

As with Strauch, Getz also presents the biblical texts very well. He also includes writings of the early church fathers up to the 3rd century. What Getz does differently than Strauss is that he keeps the 'pure text' work to the front of the book so elders of all size and type churches can read this as 'pure' biblical exegesis. In the later section of the book, Getz draws his own conclusions which come from pastoring large, elder-led churches for over 3 decades. They are very different conclusions than Strauch but they are very consistent with larger and non-PB elders experiences. This book can be read by an elder board both as a biblical study alone (skip the last chapters) or as a biblical study plus application if your church is similar to Getz's.

People with small Plymouth Brethren style church biases should continue to read Strauch. These churches often have strong opinions about elder leadership and this book is not meant for them. Larger and non PB elder-led churches will be very well served by Getz's work. Churches with presbytry, council or bishop systems will find this as a helpful 'first' book to read, but will need to read additional books that provide the background to their specific denominational system since Getz's book does not cover aspects of later church history where these systems were created.

Getz' teaching on Biblical Eldership includes all the scriptures and materials that other authors use and he does an excellent job just as others have done. What separates this book from others is an adequate explanation of leadership within the plurality of eldership. He explores and explains the teaching pastor as a servant leader within the plurality of elders (pastors) in a church. I have read almost everything available on church government and Getz's book most clearly lays out government like the New Testament Church. Others I have read fall short, in some respect, of covering the whole story. Also, after doing a little research on the qualifications of Mr. Getz, he has a vast history of helping the church toward good fruit. Do a google on Gene A. Getz, you'll be surprised at the life's work and fruit. I heartily recommend the book. It was just what I needed at just the right time.

I have great respect for Gene Getz. He has been a faithful pastor, church-planter, and educator, and has written other books of value to the body of Christ. But one cannot allow respect for an author to prevent a frank and honest evaluation of his work, and I'm sure Gene Getz would agree.

As with similar books that include practical observations, readers will agree with some applications and question others. The author provides some solid insights and principles of biblical church leadership. If not for serious flaws, this book would have been a beneficial addition to the existing books on pastoral leadership. Unfortunately, as other reviewers have noted, one begins to notice far too many biblical interpretations based on conjecture rather than clear exegesis. For example:

-- There were no elders of the church in Antioch in Acts 13. [This may be true; it may not. Scripture doesn't say. This is simply an assumption.]

-- Barnabas "voluntarily became second in command" to Paul. [Where are we told this? Where is the relationship between the two so expressed? If this is so, why did Barnabas later counter Paul regarding Mark? Was he defying Paul's primary leadership?]

-- In Luke 22:32, Jesus not only instructs Peter to strengthen his brothers, but to shepherd them and to lead them---and this in a manner unique from the shepherding and leading of the other apostles, serving as a primary leader. [Of course, Scripture doesn't actually tell us this.]

-- Peter wasn't just prominent in proclaiming the Gospel in Acts 2, he was exercising primary leadership of the other apostles, which they obediently followed.

-- At the conference reported in Acts 15, Peter represented the apostles, and James represented the elders.

-- John served as Peter's "assistant."

These examples may be plausible, and we may even be sympathetic to some. But they go beyond the clear teaching of Scripture. (And, alarmingly, they occur in the exegetical section of the book.) This is reading into the text one's own conclusions.

Of course, the elephant in the room for many readers of this book will be Getz's idea of the necessity of a primary leader being distinguished from the other elders. In Part Three of the book, his Observation 11 states: "The New Testament definitely teaches and illustrates that when there is a plurality of leadership, someone needs to function as the primary leader of the team." He insists that God didn't plan for the church to have coleaders. He then surprisingly (and somewhat self-contradictorily) admits that "the biblical story of local church leadership offers little data to make the specific observation that someone must function as the primary leader." In his opinion, the overall context of Scripture and the roles of Peter and James are enough to establish this primary leadership function.

But Getz doesn't adequately cover (or usually even discuss) examples from Scripture that would tend to differ from his interpretation. What of Barnabas and Saul together teaching the congregation in Antioch? Why does Paul refer to three pillars of the Jerusalem church in Galatians 2, rather than to one primary leader? If James was an apostle of Christ, as many scholars believe, wouldn't that provide a different rationale for distinguishing him from the elders?

Getz refers to the apostles sending Peter and John to Samaria as a demonstration that Peter "did not act unilaterally without seeking advice and counsel and affirmation." But there is not one hint in this passage of Peter providing primary leadership in this venture while seeking advice, counsel, or affirmation from the other apostles. Instead what we see are the apostles leading as a team and directing Peter and John. Getz reads into the passage his own assumptions, and arrives at an interpretation not born out by the actual text. Actually, this passage is very supportive of the viewpoint that Getz dismisses.

If the primary leader shepherds the shepherds and leads the leaders, who shepherds and leads the primary leader? The Bible gives us many accounts of plural elders/overseers, qualifications for elders, and instructions given to the church elders. But we don't have one clear reference to even the existence of a designated primary leader for a NT church (not even of Peter or James), not to mention the lack of any qualifications for such a primary leader, the appointment of any primary leader, or any instructions given to some primary leader. Where does the NT "definitely teach" this? We're not told. All we have are the examples of Peter and James, which are questionable in their support of Getz's conclusions, and which do not establish the normative role that he describes. Even if everything he claims about them is true, all this would show is that one of the elders may tend to exercise a prominent leadership. Of course, no one denies this. But anything beyond that is pure conjecture. And prominence in leadership doesn't equate a formally distinct role, no matter how much one may assume so. The only place where the Bible refers to one who provides ongoing primary leadership to the elders/shepherds is the "archipoimen" (Chief Shepherd or Senior Pastor) in 1 Peter 5:4. The body has only one Head; the kingdom has only one King. Each team of church elders do require a primary leader, but that primary leader should be Jesus Christ, their Chief Shepherd/Senior Pastor.

I am one elder/pastor who, regrettably, cannot recommend this book. I would suggest instead Alexander Strauch's book "Biblical Eldership." Strauch is sound in his exegesis, careful in his conclusions, and presents a balanced approach that has proven to be instrumental for a broad range of evangelical churches, from small house-churches to congregations with large staffs and attendances in the thousands. Gene Getz tells (p. 302) of a time earlier in his ministry when he became more pragmatic than biblical. With no disrespect or animosity intended, I would gently suggest that this is true of this work [Elders and Leaders] as well.

You would be hard pressed to find someone more experienced than Gene Getz in working with various forms of church leadership and learning from the past. He's a first rate teacher, leader and Pastor. I've read both Strauch's and Getz' book and find the differences primarily on their conclusions about whether a strong pastor should have a primary influence over an elder board. Dr. Getz favors a strong and primary leader role for the pastor. This is a debatable point and I think most church elders would benefit from reading the scriptures, as well as both books and reaching their own conclusions. Very helpful book.

While Getz makes a number of important and valid points, he intermingles these with conjecture and unsupported insights that distort the book's conclusions. For example, Getz suggests that sometimes "brothers" refers to church leaders rather than all members (p. 50), yet nowhere does he support this insight. (Perusing 200+ NT refs to "brothers" yields no that support that I can see.) And Getz says things like "Jesus stated that the apostles would have a primarly role in teaching [the spiritual truths the Spirit would remind of]" (p. 113), yet nowhere does he tell where Jesus says such a thing. In trying to make a case for the need for a primary leader in every church, Getz cites Luke 22:31-32 where Peter is to "strengthen and lead" his brothers (p. 220), yet Luke 22 mentions only strengthing and says nothing about Peter leading the other apostles. In talking about restoring someone in sin (Gal 6:1), though elders are not mentioned, Getz conjectures that "they certainly must have been uppermost in Paul's mind." (p. 196) Such conjecture, absent evidence, distortion, and misquotation--some subtle, some not--is sprinkled throughout the book. The result is some good reflection intermingled with ideas that are read into the Scriptures rather than drawn out: Getz shifts duties from everyone to leaders, he distortes the role of elders, and he fabricates support for the primacy of the "senior pastor." Such elements, based on my reading, miss the Biblical mark fairly significantly. While I value some of Getz's insights, these concerns leave me unable to recommend the book to anyone who has not already studied the text and early church history extensively enough to catch where the "insights" aren't based on the text. Strauch's Biblical Eldership is a better, more biblical approach to the subject.

Getz's book is an interesting one. He is a very able writer, often using stories to get his point across, and for the most time I agree with his conclusions. I do believe that one of his major arguments that a "chief leader" should be inplace is not biblical, as the previous reviewer noted the book by Strauch is a good book, which has excellent section discussing the arguments that Getz's employed.[ interesting the previous reviewer gave the book 5 stars without even reading it ! ].
The major premise that Getz's uses to support it, to use one of his examples, James is a prominent christian- that means I can be a chief pastor. Something which Strauch and other writers have shown to be a ridiculous argument to utilize and which Getz makes no effort to counter.

Which shouldn't detract from the rest of the book if you ignore the chapters dealing with it, however Getz's comments leave a nasty taste in the readers mouth;

Throughout the book his language polite and very easy reading, but goes on rampage refering to any system that does not include a chief leader as " Dysfunctional, seriously inefficent, flaw[ed]" which I found offensive and not in tone with the rest of the book and was quite a shocking switch, it made it worse that the insults he delivers goes to the apostles who show its implimention and God who instituted it, which will no doubt make some readers cringe and fill with anger at his comments.
However, ignoring that and concentrating on the good parts its an alright book. I feel however its in a market already served exceptionally well by Strauch's book but still should be useful companion.

Also see Benjamin. Merkles' "Elder and the Overseer" which is an incredibly well written book, but a more specfic study dealing with who elders/bishops are and offices in the early Church.

I found the language, from a Christian writer, that Gene uses to demean those who oppose [ and rightly do so] his views is shocking, his book does not give any other contribution to the studies of Strauch or Viola give, its obsolete in comparison. I would not recommend it to anyone.

I have not read Getz' book yet (I only filled in the star rating because I had to in order to post). No doubt it will be a nice addition to Strauch's work on biblical eldership--emphasis on biblical. In regard to the first review posted: A reviewer with a little backbone might include his name in the review.