Let’s review.  Congregational churches believe that Jesus Christ governs his church through local congregations. Each congregation is subject to no other ecclesiastical authority. Each congregation selects her own leaders.

There are two types of congregational churches. Some congregational churches are led by a single elder. Some congregational churches are led by multiple elders. And there is excellent biblical support for both.

St. Paul’s Church adheres to both. We are both/and, not either/or. We are a single elder congregational church in that we have a Lead Pastor.  We don’t have Lead Pastors, we have a Lead Pastor who directs the affairs of the church.  But we are also a multiple elder church in that we have a Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is a group of equals who govern the church and hold the Lead Pastor accountable.

To my mind, the governance at St. Paul’s Church is a governance which most clearly adheres to the teachings of Scripture.

I do not agree with a pure form of single elder congregationalism.  I do not agree with one person directing the church, accountable to no group except the whole church.  I do not think this governance conforms to NT practice. There are always multiple elders.

I also do no agree with a pure form of multiple elder congregationalism.  I do not agree that multiple leaders each with the same authority can direct the church.  I do not think this governance conforms to how God works in the Scriptures.

The choice between single elder and multiple elder congregationalism is a false one.  It’s not either/or. It’s both/and. 

At St. Paul’s Church we are both/and. We are both a single elder congregational church (one Lead Pastor) and a multiple elder congregational church (a Board of Directors).  It’s biblical.  And that’s a good thing.

Congregational churches believe that Jesus Christ governs his church through the members of a local church.  These church members select their own church leaders.  And these churches are subject to no other ecclesiastical body.

But there is more than one kind of congregational church.  There are two kinds of congregational churches.  They are generally referred to as single elder congregational churches and multiple elder congregational churches.  Single elder congregational churches are led by one elder.  Multiple elder congregational churches are led by multiple elders.

But let’s remember. Congregational churches do not make hard distinctions between bishop/elder/pastor.  So we could say…There are single or multiple bishop congregational churches.  There are single or multiple pastor congregational churches.  Or more commonly, there are single or multiple elder congregational churches.

Proponents of single elder congregationalism assert that God leads his churches through individuals.  This is the testimony of Scripture.  Through Moses, through Joshua, through David, through Jesus, through Peter (apostle to the Jews), through Paul (apostle to the Gentiles), through these individuals, God leads his people.  This position doesn’t exclude multiple elders.  For example Moses led with Miriam and Aaron.  But this position says that multiple elders are not a necessity.  Moreover, even when multiple elders are present, one elder leads the group of elders.

Proponents of multiple elder congregationalism assert that God leads his churches through groups of elders. This is the testimony of Scripture. Whenever elders are mentioned in the NT they are mentioned as a group. In the NT there is not one example of a church with a single elder. 

So which version of congregationalism is right?  And more to the point, which version of congregationalism does St. Paul’s Church embrace?  That is the subject of the next post.

We have seen that in congregationalism, Jesus Christ governs his church through the members of a local congregation.  Congregational churches are locally governed through leaders selected by the congregation.  What’s the Biblical basis for this?

The Biblical basis for congregationalism is seen best in the Book of Acts.  The whole church in Jerusalem decided how to replace Judas (Acts 1).  The whole church in Jerusalem selected deacons to serve (Acts 6).  The whole church in Antioch sent Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem (Acts 15) to represent them in settling the question of Jewish and Gentile Christians in the church.  Again and again, we see local churches selecting their own leaders to lead and represent them.

This is important.  Proponents of non-governance argue against any leadership structure in the church.  That sounds good until you read the New Testament.  Whatever leadership structure the early church had--it’s abundantly clear there was a leadership structure.  This is why the non-governance model has so few adherents today.  It is the least biblical.

The Biblical basis for congregationalism is also seen in a careful reading of the New Testament.  The titles of bishop/overseer, elder/presbyter and pastor/shepherd all appear in the New Testament.  That’s obvious.  But what often goes unnoticed is that these terms are used interchangeably.   

The best example comes from Acts 20:28.  Paul, speaking to the elders of the church at Ephesus, says:   “Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you bishops.  Pastor the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.”

Most translations substitute overseer for bishop and shepherd for pastor.  Why?  To avoid confusion.  If you believe that elders are different than bishops or pastors, then what Paul says is confusing.  But we simply let Paul speak, and then we see that for Paul, elders and bishops and pastors are in fact the same group.  They are the leaders of the local church.

In Paul’s mind, elders are bishops are pastors.  They lead local congregations and the different terms refer not to different offices, but different functions of the same office.      

This is important.  Proponents of episcopal or presbyterian governance argue for a hierarchical understanding of authority.  They argue for an external authority over the local church.  Episcopalians argue that the bishop has authority over local churches.  Presbyterians argue that the presbytery has authority over local churches.  These arguments are based on perceived distinctions in the NT between bishop, elder and pastor.  But if these distinctions are doubtful, then so is the argument for having external authority over local churches.  

The Biblical basis for congregationalism is strong.  Congregationalism follows NT church practice—local churches select their leaders.  Congregationalism follows NT church terminology---bishops, elders, pastors are used interchangeably and are therefore three functions of one role:  a leader in the church selected by the congregation.

What is congregationalism?

Congregational churches believe that Jesus Christ governs his church through the members of a local congregation. More specifically, all congregational churches share two basic features that distinguish them from all other churches.

First, congregational churches are governed by the local congregation.  They are subject to no other ecclesiastical authority.  If they happen to be part of a denomination, it is because the local church has chosen to be part of that particular denomination.  If the church decides to leave that denomination, it can and does.  But the salient point here is that congregational churches are governed locally by the local congregation.

Second, congregational churches select their own leaders.  This means congregational churches have an identifiable church leadership structure.  They have pastors.  They often have elders or deacons or boards.  Moreover, the congregation selects these leaders themselves.  No outside ecclesiastical body selects these leaders for the church.  The congregation selects its own leaders themselves.

This is very different from other models of church governance. 

The non-governmental model is similar to congregationalism in that the church is governed locally.  But unlike the non-governmental model, congregationalism has a clearly identifiable leadership structure.  In congregationalism, church decisions are not always made by all of the church’s attendees.  Instead, leaders are selected and empowered to make decisions for the church.

The presbyterian model is similar to congregationalism in that the church has an identifiable leadership structure.  Each local church has a pastor and elders who may be selected locally.  But each local church also belongs to a larger governing body of churches called the Presbytery.  And those Presbyteries (groups of Presbyterian churches) make up a larger governing body of called the Synod.  And those Synods make a larger governing body called the General Assembly. 

Still following?

The important point here is that in the presbyterian model, local churches do not govern themselves.  They are part of a governance structure that goes from the General Assembly to the Synod to the Presbytery to the local church.  And the authority goes from the top down. 

Congregationalism is unique among the church governing models.  Only congregational churches have these two features:  local governance and identifiable leaders whom the congregation selects.

What are the Four Types of Church Governance?

As you probably already know, there are several different forms of church governance.  Not all Christians agree on how churches should be governed.  In this blog we’ll look at the four basic types of church governance. 

But don’t worry.  There is broad consensus across all churches on one aspect of church governance: Jesus Christ governs his church.  He’s in charge.  Not bishops, not elders, not congregations.  Jesus Christ is the head of the church.

So the question isn’t who governs the church (Jesus Christ does); the question is through whom does Jesus Christ govern his church?  And in two thousand years of church history, there have been four answers.

Some churches believe Jesus Christ governs his church through a person, namely the bishop.  This is the episcopalian model.  Best examples include the Roman Catholic Church, the world-wide Anglican communion, many Pentecostal churches, and many African American churches. 

Some churches believe Jesus Christ governs his church through a small group of people, namely the elders.  This is the presbyterian model.  The best examples include any Presbyterian denomination (of which there are many). 

Some churches believe Jesus Christ governs his church through the members of a local congregation. This is the congregational model.  Best examples include any Congregational denomination (of which there are many), and most Baptist denominations (of which there are many).

Some churches believe Jesus Christ governs his church through the Holy Spirit.  This is called the non-governance model.  There is no formal governance structure.  Here’s what it means in practice: there is no pastor, there are no elders, there are no members.  There are no role distinctions.  Everyone decides everything together by mutual consent through the leading of the Holy Spirit.  Best examples include Quakers (Friends), and the Plymouth Brethren.

In reality, there is significant overlap between these models.  No church in practice is exclusively any of these models.  Even the Pope has his college of cardinals he has to work with.  Even in Quaker meetings, some people clearly exhibit more influence than others over the assembly—even though they have no formal role.  But these models are helpful in illustrating the four basic types of church governance. 

So there you have it—a very brief overview of the four types of church governance.  In the next blog, we’ll examine basic congregationalism in a little more depth.

What’s the relationship between governance & denominations?

There are four basic types of church governance, and they are: episcopalian, presbyterian, congregational, and non-governance forms of church governance.  We’ll examine each of them in the next blog.  

However, there are more than four Christian denominations.  Therefore, lots of different denominations share the same basic governance.  Just because two churches come from different denominations does not mean that they have different governance structures.

So far so good.

Now here comes the confusing part: again the four basic types of church governance are episcopalian, presbyterian, congregational, and non-governance.  And here are a few specific denominations:  The Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church USA, the United Congregational Church. 

The problem:  the same terms are used for both 1) a basic form of church governance and 2) specific denominations. And when the same terms are used for different meanings, confusion abounds. 

Just for fun: all Congregational churches are congregational; however, not all congregational churches are Congregational.  The “big” C refers to a denomination.  The “small” C refers to the basic governance model.

St. Paul’s Church is a congregational (small C) church.  This means our church is congregational in how we are governed.  But we are not part of a “Congregational” denomination. 

St. Paul’s Church is not unusual.  Almost all Baptist churches are congregational (small C).  But no Baptist church is Congregational (big C).   

Got it?  Or still confused?  No problem.  Here’s the dummy, need to know version.

St. Paul’s Church is a congregational church.  That is we are governed by the congregation.  But we are not a Congregational church.  We are not part of a Congregational denomination.  This is not unusual.  This is very common, but a little confusing.  But I hope this blog clears things up a bit.

Why am I writing a blog series on congregationalism?

At St. Paul’s Church we are currently revising our bylaws.  But while we will be proposing some changes, we will remain a congregational church.  In fact the proposed changes will be strengthening our congregational roots. 

There’s just one problem: most people in our church do not know much about congregationalism. That’s understandable. People aren’t born with such knowledge. And we’ve never taught on the subject. Until now. 

In the fall, I was planning on doing one message on basic congregationalism, but we lost two Sundays to some wild weather. So I’ll be posting a series of blogs on the subject.

But if we are to understand the proposed changes that will strengthen our congregational roots, we first need to understand what congregationalism is.  That’s what my winter’s blog series is for.  Enjoy.