Who Runs the Church?

—Chris Krycho

For the last five hundred years, one of the most divisive questions in ecclesiology (church theology) has been how should the church be run—and by whom. One of the significant factors in Luther's break with the Catholic church was over the extent of the church's authority, and particularly the relationship of the clergy to the ordinary believer. Calvin and other Reformers ran with Luther's rejection of the Roman Catholic system of church government. The result is an incredibly diverse array of governmental systems in place across the church.

The topic also tends to seem a bit musty and dry to our modern sensibilities. Understandably, most of us simply feel comfortable in the system we're accustomed to, and unfortunately we tend to give little thought to whether those patterns line up with Scripture. Even church leaders can be guilty of this.

With that in mind, I can heartily recommend Who Runs the Church? as an introduction to church government. The book is part of the Counterpoints series, which takes controversial theological topics and presents a variety of views on the topic. While I had already developed some fairly solid and distinct views on church government, I was curious to read this volume and learn from men much more educated than me. I was not disappointed. While I've been nominally familiar with the arguments for each of these positions before, I think I understand each position much better than I did.

Each author was given an opportunity to make his best argument for his own preferred system, after which each of the others was invited to offer a critique. At the close of the book, each was granted some space to respond to the others' criticisms. While the topic at hand is serious and all the authors draw extensively from Scripture and church history, this isn't an advanced theology textbook. Even the most obscure references are explained by excellent footnotes.

A brief summary of each position:

• Episcopalianism:
  The church is governed in a hierarchical structure, with deacons serving at the lowest level, rectors (called priests in some episcopalian denominations) pastoring individual churches, bishops overseeing all the churches in a region, and an archbishop administrating all the bishops in a yet larger region. This was the form of church government for most of the church from the third to the sixteenth centuries, and as such it has quite a pedigree. Unsurprisingly, Peter Toon advocates strongly for episcopalianism largely on the basis of this great Tradition and its basis in the church fathers' teaching and practice.
• Presbyterianism:
  Each local church is governed by elders, who are separated into ruling and teaching elders. Deacons help coordinate service ministries and serve the elders, but do not rule. The elders take part in the presbytery, a governing body that directs the denomination as a whole and has authority over the affairs of a local church. L. Roy Taylor argues for a multiplicity of elders and the existence of a presbytery on the basis of both New Testament church practice and Old Testament government of Israel.
• Single Elder Congregationalism:
  The church is led by a single individual, though if it is of sufficient size he may have other elders helping him. He is ultimately not answerable to any external authority, but is constrained by his own congregation. The individual church is self-governing and no governing body exists to dictate the affairs of the individual church. Paige Patterson argues for this position on the basis of New Testament instructions, rejecting the Old Testament government of Israel as normative for the church and arguing instead that the church is part of a new age and has a new government.
• Plural Elder Congregationalism:
The local church, as in single elder congregationalism, is independent of any governing authority. Though it may meet with other churches for wisdom and to hammer out doctrinal points, any such meetings are not ultimately binding on the church. The church is governed by a team of elders, served by as many deacons as they believe the church needs. Samuel E. Waldron argues for this position on the basis of New Testament texts pointing to a plurality of elders and the "regulative principle"—that is, that our mode of wosrhip is governed by the Biblical pattern and instructions. If our practice does not correspond with the examples and instructions of the Bible, he argues, we are out of line.

PJ and I make no secret of the fact that we're both strongly in favor of multiple elder churches, and it's not hard to figure out that we both have Baptist, and thus, congregationalist, leanings. Thus, it's no surprise that I mostly agreed with Waldron, the plural elder congregationalist. I also frequently agreed with Taylor, the presbyterian. In the end, I found both Waldron's arguments for strict independence of congregations and Taylor's arguments for the presbytery unconvincing. I suspect the New Testament churches functioned somewhere in the middle.

I found Toon and Patterson's arguments disappointing, albeit for different reasons. Toon opened by stating that Scripture has no clear view on church government, and accordingly argued from church history. While I deeply appreciate tradition, I disagreed with his initial assertion and thus found it difficult to give the rest of his argument credence. Patterson seemed to misunderstand his opponents' arguments, and he seemed to be reading his own views (i.e. the traditional Baptist model) into the text.

Church government is an important topic. I hope you'll take the time to think about it in more detail, and Who Runs the Church would be an excellent place to start.

Periodically, we'll be reviewing books relevant to church life. Since this is our first go at it, we'd love to hear your thoughts and feedback on the format of the review!