How Many Pastors Did NT Churches Have?
A Biblical Study on the Question of Multiple Pastors in a Church (Part One of Four)
What is the right number of pastors for a church to have and how should a church approach the selection of a new pastor? To answer these important questions, we need to consider thoughtfully what the NT says (and doesn’t say) about this subject.
Three Words, One Office
First, we need to recognize that the NT uses three terms that relate to this discussion: elder, bishop, and pastor.
- The first term, elder (πρεσβύτερος, presbyteros), carries over from Hebrew culture and refers to men who provided leadership for Jewish synagogues.
- The second term, bishop or overseer (ἐπισκοπή, episkope), carries over from Gentile culture and refers to men who governed cities that Rome had conquered.
- The third term, pastor (ποιμήν, poimēn), carries over from a rich, longstanding precedent of how both God cares for his people and a shepherd cares for his sheep.
Together, these terms describe the same leadership role in the church. We know this because New Testament writers use them interchangeably. Luke does this (Acts 20:17, 28), Peter does this (1 Pet 5:1-2), and so does Paul (Tit 1:5-7). This means that every elder is also a bishop and a pastor. The NT gives no precedent for elders who are not pastors. Every pastor is an elder and vice versa.
Furthermore, the NT never equates deacons with the pastor/elder role. Pastors provide spiritual leadership for the congregation and may consult the deacons for helpful perspective. Deacons provide strategic, necessary service, meeting various administrative, financial, and physical needs that arise. The role of pastor and deacon are distinct and not interchangeable.
For clarity, this study will use the word pastor throughout. If you prefer, you can use elder or bishop (overseer) instead because these words refer to the same role.
Examples of Multiple Pastors
The NT frequently portrays a plurality of pastors as caring for individual local churches. Examples include:
- The church at Jerusalem (Acts 11:30; 15:2, 4; 21:18; Jam 5:14)
- The churches at Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch (Acts 14:23)
- The church at Ephesus (Acts 20:17, 28; 1 Tim. 5:17)
- The church at Philippi (Phil 1:1)
- The church at Thessalonica (1 Thess 5:12)
This observation demonstrates that churches can benefit from the care of multiple pastors. Such an arrangement is good, appropriate, and necessary in certain cases. Even so, this observation does not mandate that every church must install multiple pastors in every case. It is an observation about some churches, but not all of them. It is not a command.1
Some Non-Examples
Those who insist that every church must install multiple pastors may highlight other plural pastor references in the NT. However, either these references do not refer to multiple pastors in one church or they do not require this arrangement.
When Peter wrote, “The elders who are among you” (1 Pet 5:1), he wrote “to the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia” (1 Pet 1:1). As you can see, this audience consisted of persecuted believers scattered throughout a large geographic area spread across multiple cities and locales.
As such, this example does not require multiple pastors in every congregation. It only recognizes that there were multiple pastors throughout this region. It says nothing about how many pastors were in each church.
When Paul wrote, “Appoint elders in every city” (Tit 1:5), he gave these instructions to a helper named Titus regarding new churches on the island of Crete. To understand the scope of these instructions, you should not read too much into them.
First, these instructions do not necessarily encompass every city on the island; they only refer to every city that had a church. Second, they do not require multiple pastors for every church; they only require at least one pastor per city. The Greek phrase used here, kata polin (κατὰ πόλιν), means “according to city” or “city by city.” This distributive prepositional phrase requires nothing more than installing one pastor per city.
The Only Clear Instructions
The previous passages of Scripture provide us with helpful perspective on the question of how many pastors a church should have. They show us that some churches may have had multiple pastors, while other churches may have had only one. Even so, none of these passages gives clear, dogmatic instructions. They do not prove that every church must have multiple pastors, nor do they require this to be the case.
To find clear instructions, we need to consider the general, universal command that Paul gave elsewhere. He said, “This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. A bishop then must be …” (1 Tim 3:1-2). Following this command, he provides a set of personal qualities which a prospective pastor must exhibit (1 Tim 3:2-7).
This passage is especially helpful not only because it gives clear, universal instructions (not limited to a single congregation or isolated situation), but because of the way it refers to the pastoral role. From beginning to end, it describes this role in a singular way. The word bishop is singular not plural. The same is true for all the following referents, descriptions, verbs, and pronouns. These all refer to a single pastor, not multiple ones.
While this fact does not exclude the possibility of multiple pastors, it affirms that multiple pastors are not a mandated requirement for churches. In fact, this contrasts markedly with the way that Paul refers to deacons in a plural way in the following verses, saying “deacons” and referring to them with plural words afterwards.
If the NT required multiple pastors for every church, this passage would have said so – but it does not. In this way, Paul underscores an important consideration for answering the question of how many pastors (or elders) a church should have. Though God requires certain personal qualities of any man who will serve as a pastor, he does not require a certain number. If a certain number were required, surely, this passage would say so, but it does not. Therefore, we should recognize that the NT allows, but does not require, a church to appoint multiple pastors. The number of pastors that a church should appoint will differ from congregation to congregation.
Thomas Overmiller serves as pastor for Faith Baptist Church in Corona, NY and blogs at Shepherd Thoughts.
Photo by kailash kumar from Pexels
- Ed. We also note that many of these passages could refer to multiple individual pastors in a region, gathered in special meetings, or more than one local church in a city. The plurals do not always require the interpretation of multiple elders in every one of these churches. [↩]
Are there any churches in the New Testament that we know had only one elder?
Offhand, I can’t think of a specific clear reference, but I will say while some references seem to be pretty clear about multiple elders/pastors in some churches (especially some that seem larger), no reference demands it as the norm. I think that is what Thomas is saying as well. It also seems unlikely that very small churches had multiple elders/pastors in every case, though there is no explicit biblical statement one way or the other.
maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Yes, I also understood his argument to be that plural elders are not required. I was wondering whether he/you view plural elders to be a consistent pattern in the clear examples we have, or whether you were aware of clear examples in both categories.
Hi Ben,
Thanks for replying. My view is that there are *some* clear examples of multiple pastors in a single church, but no clear examples of just one pastor per church. I think Thomas shares that view, but he would have to say so for himself.
However, either way, I don’t see the examples as normative. Church polity is very loosely defined in the NT which I believe leaves room for varied practice within the parameters of the loose definitions we have.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
Another thing to bring up which is significant (at least I see it that way) is that the NT speaks of the church comprising a whole city (the church at Jerusalem, the church at Ephesus, etc.). I say this is significant because, too often we then try to equate this to our local assembly and that is not the same. I’ll pick on Greenville, SC. There is no, “church at Greenville, SC.” There are several local “churches” in Greenville, each having at least one pastor/elder/bishop, so in order to then compare with the NT teaching, there are indeed multiple pastors/elders/bishops that minister in “the church at Greenville, SC” which is comprised of several local assemblies.
Are you suggesting that the “church comprising a whole city” was actually many churches? What text makes that clear (since that’s the standard the original blogpost requires to prove the case that plural elders are required). What makes you sure that there was not just one church in each city?
And are you suggesting that early city churches had something like episcopalian church polity? Or were they multi-site churches?
I share Brian’s sentiments here. What convinces us that the churches at Ephesus, Philippi, etc. always consisted of one assembly that met together physically as one unit on the Lord’s Day? These churches may have consisted of multiple house congregations, each with a designated pastor.
In a theological sense, this arrangement requires neither an Episcopalian hierarchy nor a multi-site structure. Theologically speaking, the church at Ephesus for instance may refer to all the believers in the Ephesus metro area, but consisting of multiple congregations, each with its own pastor. I’d be very interested to learn more about what’s been studied on this subject, from the church fathers, etc.
Ben, your question hinges on what is a “clear” example. Some instances appear to be clear examples of multiple pastor teams in a congregation. Other instances are ambiguous at best. This observation alone is not enough info to settle the debate for sure.