church government
Post on 30-Aug-2014
103 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
CHURCH GOVERNMENT
A PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. BOB BAYLES
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE COURSE DSMN 505
LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
BY
ELKE SPELIOPOULOS
DOWNINGTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA
SUNDAY, APRIL 29, 2012
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
THE SINGLE-ELDER-LED CHURCH.........................................................................................2
THE PRESBYTERY-LED CHURCH............................................................................................3
THE CONGREGATION-LED CHURCH......................................................................................4
THE BISHOP-LED CHURCH........................................................................................................5
THE PLURAL-ELDER-LED CHURCH........................................................................................6
STRENGTH AND WEAKNESSES OF EACH MODEL..............................................................7
CHURCH MODEL AT CALVARY FELLOWSHIP CHURCH...................................................8
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................9
BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................................................................10
iii
1
INTRODUCTION
Churches hold to distinct and different forms of church polity. For Protestant believers,
this is a topic, which has led to the division of local bodies during the past centuries of Christian
history since the Reformation, when the Protestant faith groups first formed and distanced
themselves from the Roman Catholic Church. While the Roman Catholic Church had been run in
an Episcopal model, new polity models began forming apart from the Episcopal form of church
government, according to Brand and Norman, which is also seen in Anglican/Episcopalian or
Methodist bodies): the Presbyterian, the Congregational (as observed in Baptist or
Congregationalist bodies), the Erastian (national state church), and the minimalist or
nongovernmental models, such as practiced by Quakers or Plymouth Brethren.1 Welch alters
this description slightly when he writes that “with regard to religious organizations, polity may
be categorized as a monarchial system, and episcopate, a loose hierarchy, or congregational in
format.”0
Zahl rightfully writes that “’church’ is a fought-over landscape in the history of
Christianity.”0 While each of the models presented have proponents in their respective
denominations, for non-denominational churches, these church polities are at best guidance, and
in some of these local bodies, hybrid models have begun to arise. This is the case at the author’s
home church, a non-denominational, Bible-teaching church in Downingtown, PA. The mixing of
elements of elder-led and congregational church polities seeks to provide the best of two models
to the congregation.
1 Robert H. Welch, Church Administration: Creating Efficiency for Effective Ministry (Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing Group, 2005), 26.
0 Ibid., 66.
0 Daniel Akin et al., Perspectives on Church Government: 5 Views, ed. Chad Owen Brand, and Norman (Nashville, TN: B & H Academic, 2004), 213.
2
THE SINGLE-ELDER-LED CHURCH
Akin bases the biblical justification of a single-elder-led model of church government on
the predominant evidence in Scripture on a congregational model, but allows for an elder-led
approach due to the congregation’s “equal standing before God” in a Congregational model
might lead to abuse “where the practice of church discipline is absent.”0 Akin underlines his
understanding of church government models through a number of New Testament passages that
make it clear that, while a church needs to govern itself, there are times when pastoral (or elder)
leadership needs to balance congregational understanding and participation.0
Akin first and foremost provides ample evidence for a Congregational approach. He lists
the fact that the epistles were directed to church congregations, and not to individuals, such as
bishops, elders, groups of elders, or deacons. In addition, the responsibility for upholding the
truth of doctrine fell on the church body as a whole.0 The local body highlights the priesthood of
all believers, a central understanding of Scripture for Protestant believers.0 However, as he
highlights, the priesthood of all believers does not mean “I am my own priest.”0 In that sense, it
is important to remember what Akin writes about ensuring doctrinal accountability in
congregations: "God has graced the church with both men and women who possess the gift of
teaching. They are invaluable to the well-being of the church, and their importance should never
be minimized.... Doctrinal accountability is the responsibility of all believers in the body of
Christ as they submit themselves to the lordship of Christ under the authority of his Word." 0
0 Ibid., 28.
0 Ibid., 29.
0 Ibid., 33.
0 Ibid., 35.
0 Ibid., 37.
0 Ibid., 38.
3
To ensure that congregations remain under the arbitration of the final authority of God’s
Word, Atkins sees a need for a leadership within a congregation. He points to the Didache, a
writing possibly dating back to the end of the first or beginning of the second century A.D.,
which speaks of electing bishops and deacons and says that this model “strikes a beautiful
balance between congregational participation and pastoral leadership” as reflected also in the
New Testament. He continues, “The congregation has a voice in who leads them, but once these
leaders are chosen, the members of the congregation are obligated to honor and follow them
unless they (the leadership) are disqualified through immoral, unethical, or unscriptural
behavior.”0 Akin argues that the single-elder-led model is biblical based on such passages in
Scripture as Exodus 18:13-18, where Jethro counsels his son-in-law Moses to set himself as a
senior leader over leaders.0 The leader has to be “based upon spiritual qualification for service.”0
THE PRESBYTERY-LED CHURCH
Reymond argues for the Presbytery-led model of church government. Presbyterian
etymologically comes from the Greek words presbyteros, meaning “old(er) man” and
presbyterion, meaning “body (or council) of elders.”0 Presbyterian church government, in
Reymond’s definition, means “governance of the church by elders/overseers in graded courts,
with these officers executing the responsibilities of their office in unison and on a parity with
each other, and with the material care and service of the church being looked after by deacons
(known corporately as the “diaconate”) under the supervision of the elders/overseers.”0
0 Ibid., 39.
0 Ibid., 66.
0 Ibid., 67.
0 Ibid., 91.
0 Ibid., 93.
4
In Presbytery-led churches, there is an understanding that the men elected to be elders,
while elected by the congregation, are ultimately chosen by Christ’s will and are placed in office
by the Holy Spirit. As such, they are not there to do everything according to the congregation’s
bidding,0 but rather they are “to rule and oversee the congregation, not primarily in agreement
with the will of the congregation but primarily in agreement with the revealed Word of God.”0
One of the primary reasons for a Presbyter-led model is the “connectional government of
graded courts”0, which provide accountability and dependency on each other. Reymond’s argues
this model is biblically based on evidence such as the Antiochean church leaders forming
themselves into a sort of presbytery (Acts 13:1-3) or the Council of Jerusalem, which suggests
such an approach, in Acts 15.0 The church in Antioch seemed to not feel they had “sufficient
authority to settle for themselves the terms of church membership in their churches,” yet
“deliberating together,” they determined the path ahead regarding church membership.0
Reymond sees this model of church government as a direct reflection of the church depicted in
Acts 15.0
THE CONGREGATION-LED CHURCH
Garrett defines Congregational polity as “the form of church governance in which final
human authority rests with the local or particular congregation when it gathers for decision-
making.”0 Garrett provides a broad approach to this type of church governance, as he allows for
0 Ibid., 94.
0 Ibid., 95.
0 Ibid.
0 Ibid., 96.
0 Ibid., 108.
0 Ibid., 109.
0 Ibid., 157.
5
different patterns within the broader model, both externally and internally. Externally, this can
mean that a congregation may choose to associate with like-minded congregations on such
matters as missions or education. 0 Internally, different structures may be found, such as those
involving pastor and deacons, pastor-deacons-committees, or pastor-deacons-committees-church
council structures. In all of these forms, however, the congregation is the final authority.0
The New Testament provides ample evidence for a congregational approach to church
governance, and Garrett provides sufficient examples. He outlines how the Congregational
model shifted to more structured models of church polity as the centuries passed, until Martin
Luther during the Reformation brought the focus back on congregational authority in choosing
its pastor and leadership. Baptists have adopted this form since their beginnings. English Baptist
confessions testify to congregational selection and calling of ministers.0 Garrett does raise the
difficulty of a congregation-led large church, where instead a heavy centering on the pastor’s
authority has occurred. Yet, as he concludes, Congregational polity has several advantages, such
as the fairness it provides to the members, the flexibility in patterns or structures, the
development of loyalty in the church body, and the producing of more mature believers.0
THE BISHOP-LED CHURCH
In Episcopal polity, there are three “orders” (or levels) of ordination: deacon, elder (or
presbyter), and bishop.0 Only bishops can perform the rite of confirmation. The bishop also has
the authority to ordain presbyters and deacons. This trifold order is intended to safeguard the
0 Ibid., 158.
0 Ibid.
0 Ibid., 176.
0 Ibid., 192-94.
0 Ibid., 226-27.
6
catholicity of the church: preaching the pure Word of God and administering the two sacraments
of baptism and communion faithfully.0
Several elements can provide negative outcomes in this model, according to Zahl. First,
prelacy can become a problem, i.e. the authoritarian rule of one man. Second, the structure given
can lend an element of “churchiness” to church governance and life. Third, it may not be able to
provide the right tools to discipline bishops who err theologically.0
Finally, this model of church governance, according to Zahl, arises from a strong sense of
tradition. Reflection of tradition can be seen in the clinging to a strict liturgy according to its
prayer-book tradition. Episcopalians believe in the “three-legged stool” of Scripture, tradition,
and reason.0 Zahl underlines that the system of bishops “attains an ideal of Bible doctrine”, but
warns that “Episcopacy evacuates into power when prelacy takes over, and it turns to mush when
theological discipline proves impossible and when churchiness, hence distance from real life, is
attracted to it.” 0
THE PLURAL-ELDER-LED CHURCH
White argues for a plural-elder led form of church governance. He clarifies that if “the
local churches are seen to function independently, then it follows that the offices established by
God in those churches are sufficient, in and of themselves.”0 Much of White’s argument centers
on the self-sufficiency of the local body of believers. White cites examples such as the church at
0 Ibid., 228.
0 Ibid., 231-34.
0 Ibid., 238-39.
0 Ibid., 240.
0 Ibid., 259.
7
Ephesus, which does not appear to exercise jurisdictional control over another church in the
area.0
White offers much of the same biblical argumentation as Akin or even Garrett in support
of independent congregations, yet focuses the remainder of his discussion on the evidence of
plurality in the elder-led churches of the New Testament. He sees evidence that the elders were
considered equals amongst each other.0 There may be differences between ruling and teaching
elders, but these seem to be handled differently in congregations.
The single-pastor (or elder) model brings with it the danger of a loss of checks and
balances. White argues that this is avoided with the biblical plural-elder-led model of church
polity.0 Having multiple elders also facilitates exercising church discipline. To White, this is the
only biblically supported model.
STRENGTH AND WEAKNESSES OF EACH MODEL
Single-elder-led: This is a model that may work well for a smaller local body. As White
points out, it leads to a loss of checks and balances, and as such, it would be important to balance
this model with the appropriate councils.
Presbytery-led: There is a benefit in coming together for the reason of accountability, yet
the danger is inherent in this model that it might deteriorate to the level warned about in the
bishop-led model: changes in theology – or even complete missteps moving away from an
orthodox faith – may be harder to combat in a “run by presbytery” approach.
Congregation-led: Even in this definition, Garrett qualifies that a congregation may
delegate decisions to an individual member or group of members, taking the congregational
0 Ibid., 262.
0 Ibid., 280.
0 Ibid., 283.
8
approach almost back to a single-elder or plural-elder-led approach without outright saying this.
As such, this model seems to underlie in many ways the elder-led approaches.
Bishop-led: This, by far, seems to be the most dangerous way of leading a church. As
Zahl points out, power plays are very quickly possible, as are serious doctrinal errors that are
hard to correct. It also appears to have the least biblical backing, but rather seems to be an
overlay structure from later centuries that tradition has kept in place.
Plural-elder-led: This model seems to provide the most checks and balances of all the
systems offered. By having a group of elders make decisions for the body, based on a framework
for how long each elder may serve, the danger of power plays has been largely curtailed. In
addition, the congregation’s choosing of the elders will empower the congregation to a degree to
ensure their desires and concerns are represented.
CHURCH MODEL AT CALVARY FELLOWSHIP CHURCH
Calvary Fellowship Church, the author’s home church, is based on a plurality-elder led
governance model, yet has a strong built-in element of congregation affirmation. The church was
founded on the frameworks of two smaller fellowships over thirty years ago, and as such,
slightly divergent opinions of church polity were brought together.
This model is a very workable model for Calvary Fellowship Church with a weekly
attendance of about 2,000. The congregation is not surprised by elder board decisions, rather
major decisions (such as a senior pastor confirmation) is always managed via a congregational
affirmation vote. This also includes the incoming elders and the head of the elder board. While
the elders propose the names, the congregation is asked to affirm via a congregational vote.
Alternative models would not work with a group of educated, high-income families,
many of which have members that work in high-profile careers and are used to decision
processes not dissimilar to that offered within the congregation. As such, Calvary Fellowship
9
Church has found them most workable form of church government for the local body of
believers.
CONCLUSION
Zahl writes that “protestant version of the New Testament church aspire to be ‘catholic’
in the true sense of the word.”0 This holds true for the models of church polity presented in the
book reviewing five different models of governance. Each of these models is based on verses
that support how they were arrived at in Scripture. Ultimately, believers want to be faithful to the
Lord they follow. While various types of church polity may even be needed for different
situations in which local bodies of Christ find themselves, they should not be reason for division.
In the local body of the writer, two models, the congregational and the plural-elder-led
models have found a home. Neither of them is expressed to the exclusion of the other, making
congregational life by and large irenic as the congregation does not feel deprived of its role in
decision-making. It is, for this local body, the preferred and right model of government. This
may change as the church continues to grow or as church plants are spun off that need to re-
investigate what the best model of church governance is for them. In it all, may Christ be
glorified!
0 Ibid., 209.
10
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Akin, Daniel, James Leo Garrett Jr., Robert L. Reymond, James R. White, and Paul F. M. Zahl. Perspectives on Church Government: 5 Views. Edited by Chad Owen Brand, and R. Stanton Norman. Nashville, TN: B & H Academic, 2004.
Welch, Robert H. Church Administration: Creating Efficiency for Effective Ministry. Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing Group, 2005.
top related