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.
