Saturday, March 4, 2017

Church Government by Rev. Katherine Liu Bruce



Introduction
The “Lord” is the only King reigns over all. Thought out the historical stories in the Bible, it teaches us the Church government must develop the “Kingship” awareness which is the “Messiah –Christ” is the only King rules over all. Band and Norman mention about five models of Church government which includes 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-Lead Church. This paper intends to compare and contrast and evaluate each model. And discover the Biblical history in New Testament Apostleship, and in Old Testament, the Israelites assembly; it illustrates the early church government. It lays the Biblical foundation of Church government. It can be the Single-Elder-Led Church, the Presbytery-Led Church, Plural-Elder Lead Church, and Congregation-Led Church. Finally, the paper concludes in the heart of Christ that He is Bridegroom and eagerly waits for Body of Christ to become His Mature Bride. Church needs to grow in maturity and unity; congregational voices cannot be denied. For each believer’s voice is precious and valuable.  
                                     Church Governing in Old Age and New Age
Israelites assembly illustrates the Church governing in Old Testament. When Samuel grew old, all the elders of Israel gathered together and asked Samuel, “You are old, and   your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have.”(1Samuel8:5). This was elders’ decision that they needed a human king to rule over them. Samuel was displeased, for they failed to see the Lord is greatest King to reign over them. However, the people (congregation) refused to listen to Samuel, and said, “We went a king over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.”(1Samuel8:19). The Lord was forced by Israelites to give them a king. This resulted the authority of church government was controlled by Elders and Congregation.
Saul as first anointed King as the Single-Elder-Led, he made all the decision by himself, without patience, and consultation with Samuel, he sacrificed the animals himself, he didn’t wait Samuel arrive at Gilgal. Saul disobeyed the priesthood authority of Samuel, it resulted his final rejection. Moreover, Saul ignored the Lord’s commands to put to death of all the Amalekites, their livestock, and their goods. In his bitterness and anger, he even killed priest Ahimelech and priest’s eighty families, in Samuel’s eyesight, Saul was rebellion. It resulted another King must be raised up. It is pretty opposite, the King David who acted fully obedient, “he was sensitive to their religious leadership, and willingness to consult the Lord is evidence of his concern for the priestly ministry. And David got priests’ support.”[1]                                                                                      In New Testament Acts 2:42 and Acts 22: 12-15, those passages are appropriate to imply the sense of a Single-Elder-Led. Jesus sent Ananias as single Elder to Paul and said, “Brother Saul, receive your sight!...the God of our fathers has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. You will be his witness to all men of what you have seen and heard. (Acts22:12-15). Without Ananias’ obedience to God’s calling to have fellowship with Paul, Paul would not receive the salvation. Paul, without acceptance and belief that Ananias is Elder; he would not receive the sight and returned to Jerusalem. Both had experienced the glorious God, and completed the mission. Because one can be sent out to have fellowship with others, one acknowledges the orders. A Single-Elder-Led Church also called Solo- Pastor- Led Church model can result both positive and negative influence. King David’s meekness, Ananias’s obedience can lead church prosperous and Gospel can reach out the nations, grows multiple blessing. However, a Single-Elder-Led can also lead church crash or sudden failure, like King Saul, become self- governing in arrogant attitude, rebellious, and disobedient
leader model. In this age, we often call “one man show problem”[2] or “one man against the world syndrome”[3]. Therefore, this results another church government structure–Plural-Elder-Led Church we can take into consideration. According to New Testament implicitly state the discipleship between “Apostle” and “Elder” in Acts 15 Jerusalem council. And Apostle Paul instructed Timothy and Titus both in the same sense of “appointing elders in every city” (Titus1:5), “they appointed elders in those churches.” (2 Tim.3:2). Luke’s narrative of discipleship growth and development process also utilized “elders” (Acts.14:21-23). The context πρεσβύτερος based on Lexicon of the Greek New Testament interprets as 1) denoting greater age older; 2) as designating honorable officials in local councils, synagogues; 3) as lay members of the Sanhedrin from important families as distinct from priests and scribes elder; 4) as denoting leaders who preside over Christian assemblies elder.” [4] Hence, Plural-Elder-Led Church government has biblical foundation to support the theory.
However, the Elders’ morale characteristics and selection must under the rulership of Christ. Elders must be aware of God’s calling, without God’s anointing and the Holy Spirit guidance and permission, so often, it results risk of church governing. As “Aaron’s sons Nadab, and Abihu took their censers, put fire in them and added incense; and they offered unauthorized fire before the Lord, contrary to his command. So fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them and they died before the Lord.” (Leviticus10:1-2). For scripture urges, “A prudent man sees danger and takes refuge, but the simple keep going and suffer for it.” (Prov.22: 3).To govern the house of God is not easy, for God is watching daily. To create a sense of security or safety church government, it requires the leadership walk with Lord, and under the lordship of Christ.
There are two arguments and disagreement of Plural-Elder-Led Church government structure, first, the independence of local or particular churches value the sense of being “self-governing entities gifted by God as “autonomous” or “independent” local church. They are congregations functioning directly under the headship of Christ, his rule expressing itself through the preaching of the Word, the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, and the divinely instituted guidance of the elders.”[5]Second, Plural-Elder-Led Church government structure neglects the “congregational decision-making.”[6] According to the Acts 6:1-4 “when the number of disciples was increasing, the Grecian Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food…” so the twelve gathered all the disciples together and choose seven men Stephen, Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas to take care of this responsibility. “This proposal pleased the whole group” (Acts6:5). This event lights up the congregational voices should not be neglected.
Congregationalism reflects the democracy as citizen evolve election, each voting is valuable. Throughout the Old Testament, Israelites’ voices, no matter, it’s complaining, crumbling, thanksgiving, and praising, these voices affected Moses and elders’ decision making. In New Testament, each believer “as living stones are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual  sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.”(1Pet.2:5). Apostle Peter indicated the importance of being “a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, and a people belonging to God.” (1Pet.2:9). Jesus also commanded “to make disciples of all nations” (Matt.28:19). Every believer should “be His witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth” (Acts.1:8). The congregational form “is consistent with the priesthood of all Christians, the exercise of spiritual gifts, Christian growth, and the witness of all Christians, the ministries of pastors and of deacons, church discipline and the kingdom of God.”[7]        The advantage of congregational polity is that church “vision” and “ministry” sharing and adopting. “It’s more capable than other polities of developing loyalty to and support of the congregation which means it can produce loyal and responsible churchmanship.”[8]        However, “the disadvantage can be time-consuming, cumbersome, and detracting from the church’s central mission.”[9] Meanwhile, there is an argument and disagreement of congregational polity, “it does not follow by logical necessity that Jesus intended let every member of the local church to be informed of an error brother’s offense and that every member must be involved in the adjudication of the case.”[10] And “Congregationalist cannot deny that the Jerusalem council in Acts15 that was comprised of elders from Antioch and Jerusalem and perhaps from other regions as well such as Syria and Cilicia. And they cannot deny in the early church that elders governed the New Testament churches.”[11] 
The Presbytery-Led Church government anchors on the 1 Timothy3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 that Paul pointed out Timothy as “overseer (3:2episkopon) and Titus as elder (1:5: presbyterous).”[12] This model practice of governance by elders continued within Israel into the New Testament era. “The council of the elders” (Luke22:66) and “all the council of the elders authorized him to seize Christians for trial and death (Acts22:5). Presbyterians urge that the New Testament provides the schematic for their governmental “connectionalism”; which means the
churches of the apostolic age were bound together by a connectional government of graded courts, reflecting mutual accountability, dependency, and submission among them.”[13] Because “those churches were all part of the one body of Christ, they were to be mutually submissive to, mutually dependent upon. The apostles and elders didn’t regard these congregations as independent and autonomous.”[14]
The argument and disagreement of The Presbytery-Led Church government is that “the Scriptures didn’t present a connectional government of graded courts (local “session,” regional “presbytery”, general “Assembly”). This ecclesiastical connectionism comprises a functional denial of the autonomy of the local church and of the local eldership. The Presbyterian form of government is over against plurality of elders in local churches without an overarching ecclesiastical structure about them.”[15] For the sense of “independence does not mean the local church and her elders and deacons are isolated from the body of Christ. It simply means the highest level of mandatory. Biblical organization is that of the God-ordained elders.” [16]
The Bishop-Led Church government is the Episcopal or Anglican Polity affirmed. It is catholic sense, “only the Bishop has the authority or in high church practice, the magic hands of pipeline to ordain presbyters and deacons. In the bishop’s unique ordaining power lies the validity of the church: its apostolic succession going back in one unbroken line to the apostles themselves and to Peter and through Peter to Jesus”[17], “Episcopacy is the form of church government by which bishops represent the true catholicity; this catholicity of the church is expressed in its ministry. The Episcopal position within the Christian family of churches attains an ideal of bible doctrine and enterprising mission when the system of bishops runs according to its Reformation and prayer book source-line.”[18]
The argument and disagreement of the Bishop-Led Church government is that first, we cannot firmly find this form in the New Testament and “any case for hierarchical Episcopacy (or for the value of Anglicanism in general) can only be made on pragmatic or utilitarian grounds. There is no order of Diocesan Bishops appears in the New Testament.”[19] Second, “the priesthood of all believers in New Testament is only Jesus himself who is the high Priest. No human being is or can be a priest before God.”[20]
                                                             Compare and Contrast
             These historical stories inspire us to look at church government must develop “Kingship” awareness that the “Lord” is the only King reigns and rules over all.  “Jesus” is only one the high Priest among the priesthood of all believers. “Christ” is head of church. When church under His lordship, each ministry will results oneness, unity and brings glory and honor to God. Single-Elder-Led Church, Bishop-Led Church government, the Presbytery-Led Church and Plural-Elder-Led Church four models all are neglect the congregational voices and the vision of Bride and Bridegroom that God delights to gain a holy nation as His Bride who is mature and suitable for  Bridegroom. In Book Revelation provides us a spiritual vision that Christ eagerly wait for a mature Bride which is the church (body of Christ). A single priest, elder, or bishop cannot replay a mutual Bride (Church) to meet Bridegroom in that day, each believer has responsibility to pursue the goal as useful ten talents vessel in the Church, grow in unity, and maturity. Each voice of Israelites and Gentile are valuable in God’s eyesight. Therefore, in my opinion, the best Church Government model is Congregational form, which is my favor form in present time church functioning; let each member’s voices can be heard. As a nation’s election for president, each voting is precious. Through it all, the Bride must under the lordship of Christ who rules over all.
                                                             Conclusion
            To fulfill God’s mission, God himself needs manpower. He call Moses as leader to lead his people, anointed King David to reign over the nation and commanded King Jehoshaphat to fight the battle, all the battle were gained by Lord’s hand with an obedience heart, the leader who willingly consulted and listened to his people’s complaining and cared about his people’s suffering. Israelites’ wept and suffered Pharos’s physical, emotional and mental abuse, God did listen and delivered them. Congregational voices and prayers cannot be denied. God pay attentive listening ear to His people’s petition and appeal. When His chosen race, the Holy nation work together in unity, and walk with the Lord in an obedience heart, loves one another, and under lordship of Christ, the nation grow in strength and in peace. Thought out the historical stories inspire us to look at church government must develop the sense of “Kingship” that the “Lord” is the only King rules over all. “Jesus” is only one the high Priest among the priesthood of all believers. “Christ” is head of church, as Bridegroom, He eagerly waits for His Bride (the body of Christ). Each believer has responsibility to pursue the goal to be a useful vessel as ten talents gifted person in the church. As Body of Christ, we shall grow in unity, maturity and under the authority of Christ’s lordship. When congregation acts in oneness, and unity, it brings glory and honor to the Lord.
Bibliography

1.      Brand, Chad Owen and R. Stanton Norman. Perspectives on Church Government: 5 Views. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004.
2.       Friberg, Timothy, Friberg, Barbara and Neva F. Miller.  Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament. (Victoria Canada: Timothy Friberg and Barbara Friberg,2005
3.      LaSor, William S., Hubbard, David A., and Frederic W. Bush.  Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament.  2d ed.  Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1996.    
  



[1]  William S. LaSor, David A. Hubbard, and Frederic W. Bush.  Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament.  2d ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1996),178.     

[2] Chad Owen Brand, and R. Stanton Norman. Perspectives on Church Government: 5 Views.( Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004), 288.
[3] Ibid.,283.
[4] Timothy Friberg, Barbara Friberg  and Neva F. Miller.  Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament. (Victoria Canada: Timothy Friberg and Barbara Friberg,2005),325.

[5] Chad Owen Brand, and R. Stanton Norman. Perspectives on Church Government: 5 Views.( Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004), 260.
[6] Ibid.,157.
[7] Chad Owen Brand, and R. Stanton Norman. Perspectives on Church Government: 5 Views.( Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004), 189.
[8] Ibid.,193.
[9] Ibid.,192.
[10] Ibid.,199.
[11] Ibid.,202.
[12] Ibid.,92.
[13] Chad Owen Brand, and R. Stanton Norman. Perspectives on Church Government: 5 Views.( Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004), 95.
[14] Ibid.,108.
[15] Ibid.,139.
[16] Ibid.,140.
[17] Ibid.,228.
[18] Chad Owen Brand,  and R. Stanton Norman. Perspectives on Church Government: 5 Views.( Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004), 240.
[19] Ibid.,244.
[20] Ibid.,247.

No comments:

Post a Comment