Perspectives on Church Government: Five Views of Church Polity

Contents

Preface - ix

Introduction: Is Polity That Important? - 1

Chapter 1 - The Single-Elder-Led Church:
The Bible's Witness to a Congregational/Single-
Elder-Led Polity by Daniel L. Akin 25

Chapter 2 - The Presbytery-Led Church:
Presbyterian Church Government
by Robert L. Reymond 87

Chapter 3 - The Congregation-Led Church:
Congregational Polity
by James Leo Garrett, Jr. 157

Chapter 4 - The Bishop-Led Church:
The Episcopal or Anglican Polity
Affirmed, Weighed, and Defended
by the Very Rev. Dr. Theol. Paul F. M. Zahl 209

Chapter 5 - The Plural-Elder-Led Church:
Sufficient as Established-The Plurality of Elders as
Christ's Ordained Means of Church Governance
by James R. White 255

Notes - 297

Name Index - 337

Subject Index - 344

Scripture Index - 347

Excerpt from Perspectives On Church Government: Five Views Of Church Polity by Stan Norman and Chad Brand, Nashville: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 2004, ISBN 080542590X.

Introduction: Is Polity That Important?

One of the issues that I (Stan) address in my introductory systematic theology courses is theological method. Part of my approach is to teach my students to analyze the manner in which we as Christians assign doctrines their level of importance. That is, what makes this particular belief more or less important than another?

Following the insights of other theologians, I have adopted a threefold scheme for the categorization of valid doctrines.* These categories are: "dogma," "doctrine," and "belief." The category "dogma" encompasses those tenets that make us "Christian." "Dogma" consists of concepts that are absolutely nonnegotiable for the Christian faith. To deny a tenet within the "dogma" category would be to deny a tenet of orthodox Christianity. Students typically and rightfully place such concepts as the Trinity and the person and work of Jesus Christ in this grouping. The second category, "doctrine," includes those concepts that shape our understanding of the nature and ministry of the church. Differences of understanding for concepts within this classification would not necessarily constitute a denial of the Christian faith, but differing perspectives on concepts within "doctrine" would determine differences in denominational identity, nature of ministry, and such. My students (primarily Southern Baptists) typically place beliefs such as a regenerate church membership, believer’s baptism, or a memorial view of the Lord’s Supper in this category. The final category, "belief," encompasses those ideas that are important but can be matters of difference of opinion. Concepts within the "belief" category are matters on which Christians can "agree to disagree" without disruption or breach of fellowship. Differences of theological understanding for tenets within the "belief" grouping neither constitute a denial of the Christian faith nor separation into differing denominations or churches. Students often place within this third category eschatological concepts such as the sequence of events and the timing of the second coming of Christ.

The previous examples of categorization are relatively easy for most introductory-level theology students. Some theological concepts, however, pose more of a challenge for categorization. Among the more debated beliefs among my students is church polity. Some students say that the manner in which a church functions and organizes itself is a matter of opinion; thus, polity should be relegated to the category of "belief." Other students are more adamant that church polity should be classified within the second category of "doctrine" (no student ever argues that polity should be categorized as "dogma").

In a real sense, the exercise of doctrinal categorization reveals the questions at the heart of this book. What is church polity, and how important is it? Are discussions of polity really that necessary? In great measure, the manner in which one defines church polity will typically shape the level of importance and necessity attached to this doctrine.

If church polity is important (and all the contributors to this volume believe such, although they disagree about the level of importance), then what exactly is this concept? Each contributor will define his particular understanding of polity in his essay. For introductory purposes, however, polity can generally be defined as "the organization or governmental structure of a local church or fellowship of churches,"* or as "a form of church government adopted by an ecclesiastical body."* As these two definitions illustrate, most general understandings of polity involve governance and organization. In other words, church polity is typically conceived as the way in which a local church or a group of churches organize and administrate themselves.

Polity as the Organization of the Church

The early church in the Book of Acts provides ample evidence for understanding polity as organization. Early disciples kept a record of the number of their members (2:41; 4:4); they gathered together at set times and places for public worship and prayer meetings (2:42, 47), and they practiced the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper (2:41–42, 46). The "breaking of bread" seemed to follow some organized pattern (2:42). They shared property (2:45; 4:32–37) and received and accounted offerings (4:32, 36–37; 5:1–11). They even enlisted and organized deacons for the care of the poor and neglected widows among them (6:1–7).*

The meetings of the early church also reflect organization. Believers were commanded to meet together regularly (Heb. 10:25). The disciples set aside the first day of the week for this purpose, a practice that began almost immediately after the resurrection of Christ (John 20:19, 26). Paul instructed the Corinthian believers to receive an offering on the first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:2), and he ministered to the believers at Troas "on the first day of the week," when the believers had gathered together "to break bread" (Acts 20:7).

Organization within the early church is also evident in the concern for orderliness in all aspects of church life. Paul instructed the Corinthians that all things in the church were to be done "properly and in an orderly manner" (1 Cor. 14:40 NASB), suggesting that all activities of the church were to be conducted with symmetry and arrangement. The orderliness prescribed is that which results from discipline and structure. Thus, Paul commands orderliness from Christ’s followers (Col. 2:5) and rebukes lack of discipline and structure (1 Thess. 5:14; 2 Thess. 3:6–7).*

Ecclesiastic organization can be found in other practices of the New Testament church. Letters of recommendation were often sent from one church to another in which the letter bearer was commended to the church of destination (Acts 18:24–28; 2 Cor. 3:1; Philem. 9–12). Ordered processes for the giving and receiving of such letters surely were followed. Collections were often solicited and sent from one church to another in the name of the giving church (Rom. 15:24; 1 Cor. 16:1–2; 2 Cor. 8:6–9:5). Official lists were kept of those who needed care or assistance from the church (1 Tim. 5:9). Certain customs or observances seem to evidence uniform patterns of practice and organization (1 Cor. 11:16).

Polity today, as well as in New Testament churches, is in part the organization of a group of believers in definitive, prescribed patterns. Ecclesiastic organization ideally brings symmetry, harmony, and discipline within the membership of the church. Further, this organization also defines the corporate relationship of Christians to those persons outside the membership of the church.

Polity as the Governance of Christ

The organizational conformity of a group of believers to certain structural patterns reflects the belief that Christians should submit themselves in distinct, prescribed ways to the will of Christ. As will be seen in the essays that follow, convictions differ not only on the nature of the structure of the organization but also on the specificity of the explicit will of Christ on this subject. Nevertheless, all major forms of church polity posit in some form the notion that the rule of Christ should be manifested through the organizational structure of a church.

The issue of governance is most visibly seen in the lordship of Christ. The church exists by and under his lordship. He builds the church and calls it "my church" (Matt. 16:18). Christ claims all authority for himself, both in "heaven and on earth" (Matt. 28:18), and he commissions the church to make disciples in all the world in light of his authority (Matt. 28:19–20). Further, Christ instructs the church that its task is to observe all that he has instructed. His lordship is further evidenced in that he appoints those who are to minister within the church and gives gifts for ministry to the church (Eph. 4:7, 11; 1 Cor. 12:5–6).

The governance of the church is also manifested in the quest of believers to conform their ministries and relationships to the teachings of the Bible. The will of Christ as Lord is expressed in the inspired Scriptures. Before leaving his disciples, Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit, who would act in his behalf to convey his will to them (John 16:12–14). The written Word of God is thus the very word of the resurrected Christ. As such, Jesus provides instruction and direction directly to his church through the inspired, apostolic witness. Christ thus directly and clearly through the Spirit’s illuminating work manifests his lordship as he speaks to his church through Scripture. Polity, it is argued, becomes one means of implementing the governance of Christ’s lordship within a body of believers.

Polity thus becomes a means of manifesting the lordship of Christ within his people. As the church functions and ministers in Christ’s name, it attempts to do so in submission to his presence (vis-ŕ-vis the Holy Spirit) and his written Word. The structure of its ministries, the nature and function of its officers, and the relationships of its membership both within and without the fellowship are considered expressions of Christ’s governance over and among his people. As the church corporately submits herself to the lordship of Christ, the process, expression, and structure of her submission can be designated church polity.

The Shaping Influence of Polity upon the Church

Church polity is thus the manner in which a church or denomination practices organization and governance. Because these two principles permeate all areas of church life, polity has profound implications for understanding the nature of the church and its various functions and ministries. I (Stan) will attempt to demonstrate generally how this vital doctrine impacts the many facets of church life.

Polity and the Offices of the Church

One area in which we see the influence of polity is in the offices of a New Testament church. The contributors to this volume have differing perspectives on the number and purpose of the offices of the church. Nevertheless, all would agree, and do in fact discuss, that a particular view of polity shapes one’s understanding of the offices (the converse of this is equally true; that is, a particular view of the offices of the church leads to a particular view of church polity). In any case, an interconnectivity exists between the offices and church polity.*

The manner of selection and function of those who occupy and serve in the offices of the church is intimately tied to this doctrine.* For example, those traditions that believe in the governance of the church through bishops also believe that the right to consecrate other bishops and ordain other ministers is a prerogative belonging only to the office of the bishop. As such, bishops select their own successors and exert rulership over the other offices and the laity. Other denominations exert governance through representative entities known as presbyteries, which consist of elders. These elders represent the church in matters of governance and organization and exert rulership over the churches or other religious entities under their authority.

Whereas in the previous tradition the bishops select those who occupy the offices, those in Presbyterian denominations generally select their elders in one of two ways; "teaching elders" are generally ordained by other ministers and "ruling elders" are normally ordained by the local congregation. This tradition exhibits an organization and authority shared between representative entities and local churches. Other groups believe that religious authority resides within a local congregation, not in bishops or presbyteries. The authority to select those who serve within the offices of those churches rests with each local church. Ministers in this tradition do not have any authority over other congregations or other ministers; all matters of governance and authority inhere within the local congregation. Ordination of ministers in this tradition is thus the prerogative and responsibility of each local congregation.

The issue of the nature and meaning of ordination is also shaped by church polity. For those groups that have more of a hierarchical structure in their polity, those selected for ordination are determined by those within the ministerial hierarchy (i.e., bishops). These candidates, upon their ordination, are invested with an ecclesiastical authority that they can exercise over the churches under their oversight. Those groups with more representative structures, as already noted, may have ordination determined by a local church or by those who comprise an ecclesiastical body. Within a congregational model, churches call for the ordination of their candidates. Those ordained within this tradition do not receive and are not given authority over a congregation or congregations; rather, ordination is perceived more as an affirmation of calling and consecration unto service. In each of these models, the polity of each tradition plays a significant part in the determination of the meaning and significance of ordination for those serving in a church office.

Polity also influences the relationship of the clergy to the laity. Hierarchical-polity structures are such that the clergy exert religious organization and governance over the laity. In elder-led structures, elders and/or representative bodies comprised of elders exercise governance and organization in behalf of and over their churches. In congregational models, both clergy and laity ideally share in all governance and organization matters. Thus, in some polity models, governance and authority reside with the clergy and are exercised over the laity. In other models, religious authority resides with the congregation and is equally shared among clergy and laity. In the majority of cases, polity structures both reflect and determine how clergy and laity relate together within church life.

Polity and Church Membership

Another issue intimately intertwined with the doctrine of polity is church membership. In particular, the process of attaining membership in a church is directly affected by the particular polity beliefs of that church. For example, most churches require the candidate for membership to fulfill certain criteria or to complete certain rituals for membership. In some cases, these events are performed and supervised by the clergy of the church, reflecting the belief that the oversight and validation of the membership process resides with the bishop, elder body, or pastor. In other traditions, membership not only requires the completion of certain membership rituals, but candidates for membership must also receive approval by the congregation in some official public action. This is most certainly the case if a person initially becomes a Christian and desires to join a local fellowship of believers. In addition, whenever believers change their denominational affiliation, they may be required to submit themselves to certain membership requirements, depending upon the membership requirements and beliefs of their new denominational identity.

Polity not only affects becoming a member of a congregation, but it also affects the manner in which a church member transfers his or her participation from one congregation to another. This process is determined in great measure by the denominational and polity practices of differing Christian groups. Recently, in the area where I (Stan) live, a local Roman Catholic congregation within the parish experienced significant numerical growth. In fact, the increase was so substantial that the physical plant could not accommodate the demands of the parishioners. Church officials (bishops) determined that another church was needed; so, they raised the funds, built a new building, and assigned membership at the new place of worship based upon geography (I recognize that this type of assigning members may not be universally practiced; yet this practice is the pattern in which the Roman Catholic church determines membership in their local parishes in this particular area of the country). In other traditions, the congregation may determine membership transferals.

For example, in the Southern Baptist tradition, whenever church members decide to change their church membership, they ask their new church to petition their former church for a letter of recommendation. The former church may or may not, for whatever reason, grant the request. Further, the new congregation may or may not accept the request for church membership. In both cases, the congregation generally and ultimately decides membership issues. In most scenarios, the process and completion of church membership, the validation and acceptance into membership, and the transferal or change in membership status generally reflect the polity beliefs of the denomination and/or the local church.

Polity and Church Discipline

Church polity also affects the disciplinary practice of a church or denomination. The New Testament provides several teachings and examples of the practice. Those persons typically subjected to disciplinary procedures were those individuals or groups who in some way hurt the people of God or who subjected the church to public embarrassment or ridicule. In either case, the overall concern of the New Testament appears to be with those who engage in behaviors or attitudes that have a harmful, injurious effect upon the entire congregation in one way or another.

Categories of offenses mentioned in Scripture vary in nature and kind, but they generally include those that in some way are publicly detrimental to the ministry and witness of the church in the world. Certain types of relationship issues are subject to disciplinary actions. These include difficulties between members (Matt. 18:15–17; 1 Cor. 5:5–6), disorderly conduct (2 Thess. 3:6–15), _divisiveness (Rom. 16:17–18; Titus 3:9–10), and scandalous sins (1 Cor. 5:1–13). Deviant sexual behavior is also subject to disciplinary actions. Along with sexual immorality, Paul also includes covetousness, idolatry, abusive speech, drunkenness, and swindling as sins meriting corrective action (1 Cor. 5:11). False teaching is also cause for church discipline (1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 2:17–18).

All orthodox Christian denominations formally recognize that church discipline is given by Christ to his church. The ultimate goal of the practice is the health and welfare of the body. The distinctions that exist in the practice and procedures of discipline stem from the differences of perspective regarding polity. Although aspects of the practice vary from church to church, overall polity determines how church discipline is practiced.

The polity beliefs of a church or denomination therefore determine the procedure for discipline. Those churches where governance resides with bishops will implement processes in which the bishops exercise disciplinary actions. Should expulsion from membership need to occur, the bishops will make the final determination. For those churches where governance resides with representative bodies, those entities will oversee and exercise the corrective measures. In traditions that practice congregational polity, the procedure for discipline resides ultimately with the congregation. If excommunication is required, each congregation makes the final decision for the removal of the offender. In like manner, restoration of the wayward person or group follows the same process; depending upon the polity structure, inclusion in the fellowship will be determined either by the bishops, representative bodies, or the entire congregation.

Polity and the Ministry of the Church

The importance of polity is further seen in the ministries of a church. In particular, issues of the organization and governance of church ministries are issues of polity. In denominations where organization and governance coalesce within the office of bishop, the responsibility and accountability for the ministries of the church or churches also rests with the bishop. Again, in those groups in which oversight resides with representative entities, the supervision of those ministries likewise resides with those same entities. In congregational polities, each local congregation assumes supervision of the ministries as an expression of the belief that the entire fellowship is responsible and accountable for its own ministries.

The relationship of polity with ministry can be taken a step further with regard to the participation and practice of ministry. I am well aware that most Christian denominations and churches have some belief that all Christians can and should participate in ministry. All contributors to this work would no doubt affirm the importance and role of all members of a church sharing in ministry opportunities. Polity does, however, affect the level of expectation and participation. For example, churches that shape their polity _in bishopric structures largely expect that the ministries of the church will to some degree not only be supervised by bishops but will also be executed primarily by those bishops. In churches with congregational polity, all the members are expected to participate and practice in ministries.

Polity Is Important

I (Stan) hope that I have demonstrated the importance of this issue. Although not a tenet of orthodoxy within the Christian faith, polity does have profound implications for our understanding of the nature and purpose of the church, clergy-laity functions and relationships, and the ministry within and without the church. Because of the importance and necessity of this issue, church polity requires ongoing theological and practical dialogue not only among churches of like faith and order, but also among churches of differing denominational identities. Our own convictions on this matter are strengthened and enriched as we engage and reflect upon the traditions and practices of other believers.

to be continued ...

* For Endnotes see book.