Church Government

Yesternight, I posted some thoughts on church government live on Facebook.
Here is the written equivalent of those thoughts.
I have seen a whole lot of models of ecclesiology (church government) that each have been held up as the paragon of G-d’s will for how the church should be governed, led, etc.
My mother currently (as an Arminian and a Wesleyan) serves on the pastoral nominating committee of a local Presbyterian congregation in Florida.
I have served as a Deacon in an Assemblies of G-d congregation in Missouri.
I have seen Deacon Boards, Elder Boards, Fivefold Ministry Boards (and mind you, we change the name because we think it is more biblical and yet elect the same people to lead the church).
I have seen Episcopalian forms (deacons, priests, bishops) of governance.
Congregational rule.
Et cetera.
And I have seen people push a hard line for one form or another, vocalizing effusively that their church’s form, or this form, or that form is the most legitimate form of government, and others need not apply.
I am also aware that there are people that have “prophesied” of the need to move past denominations.
And honestly, I think G-d is more concerned that we are in Him rather than we model a correct style of government and delegitimize all others.
And oftentimes, if the Episcopalian style of government transforms to the Fivefold style of government, and the Bishop graduates to Prophet, and then to Apostle, then all you have done is changed the lipstick and still have the same pig.
Gang, there is a better way. There has to be a better way.
So, some of my thoughts.

1. “Apostolic oversight” is the greatest malfeseance to ever be foisted on churh government. An apostle establishes the church, or churches. They plant and give life to. The do not oversee politically. If you want to see new life come, you turn loose an apostle.
2. Bishops, also called overseers, are the ones who oversee.
3. The form of church government (many of these forms have marshalled scriptural support) to me does not matter a whole lot for practical purposes. So long as things are done decently and in order, we are good.
4. If you have a man or woman at the top (yes I am a fan of women leading churches and overseeing, provided they are G-d’s woman), but they are incapable of learning and listening together with those flocks they serve, and the community is incapable of hearing the voice of G-d together, then you have a bigger problem than whether or not you have the right form of governance.
5. One word: HUMILITY.
6. See number 5.
7. See number 5.
8. After you have read number 5, go and do a word study on number 5 and gather all the chain references on number 5, and do not stop marinating in number 5 until you have significant revelation on number 5 and until you are incarnating the wisdom of number 5. Even after you are incarnating the wisdom of number 5, keep at number 5.
9. The Greek word for “deacon” in 1 Timothy 3 is Διακόνους. This word is also used in Romans 12:6-8. In Romans 12, it is translated as “servant”.
10. Servants are those who walk best in the Principle of Authority, because when they are reasonably healthy, there is no guile and G-d easily backs them in unusual ways in this realm.
11. I would contend that whatever form of government you go with, having a goodly number of those with the Redemptive Gift of Servant in leadership is a wise move. If you minister to those people with this Gift, and they walk in a healthy manifestation of their design, and you give them liberty and lattitude to speak, they will tell you the way things are and should be, and they will not try to finesse you. The trick is in helping them to recognize that you value the counsel of a straight-shooter. They will advocate for purity in many things, and they really do an excellent job of synching with leadership. One key, however, in establishing them is in making sure they are not victimized. They need to be kept from abuse.
12. I think there is a practical reason why Paul used the same word in both places. I think having the mentality of an RG Servant helps a group, institution, network, or family to flourish. That mentality of no guile, shooting straight, and working hard for your tribe really does reap a positive harvest. Leadership is not about how much you can dominate, but rather how closely to Yeshua can you emulate. He did not come to be served, but to serve. Leaders that do not know how to serve, and walk in grace and humility have an issue.
13. Personally, I would put healthy Servants in charge of most of the major departments of whatever organization I was leading.
14. One other reason it is good for Servants to lead is that they are most effective of all the Redemptive Gifts at building platforms underneath others for their success. They look for and see the best in people and can really highlight those qualities for others to see.
15. Top-down forms of government go haywire if there is not a mechanism for accountability.
16. Congregational forms of government go haywire if there is not strong discernment in the majority of the congregants.
17. Gang, take care of those who lead you, hold them accountable, and take care of each other and hold each other accountable.
18. Leaders, be humble enough to let some people hold you accountable.
19. Lastly, all y’all go be dangerous.

Well, those are some thoughts here. What do y’all think? Something that should be added? Taken away? Modified?