Autonomy of the Local Church

Introduction

Going back to our discussion of biblical authority. As Baptists we believe that the bible should tell us how we structure and run our churches. When we talk about the structure and governance of the church we are talking about church polity. Traditionally, there have been three modes of church polity practiced by churches of different denominations.

Three modes of organization

Episcopal polity- early in Christianity, a distinction began to be made between elders and bishops. In the second century, a bishop came to be the lead elder within a local church, but eventually grew out of that to be regional leaders. The word bishop is from the greek word in our bible episcopas from which the term episcopal comes from. The word means to oversee. This form of church government has regional overseers over a group of churches in an area. So a local church would be led by elders while the region would be overseen by a bishop. Eventually, this evolved into the Catholic system of government. By the 300’s at the council of Nicea there were four archebishops created: in Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople and Rome who governed the church. In the 5th and 6th centuries the archebishop of Rome became more prominent, but it wasn’t actually until the 11th century that power was fully centralized under the Roman Catholic Pope.

Presbyterian polity- Some churches have a presbyterian polity which includes elders that lead the local church which they call a session, but they also have a group of elders who are over the local churches called a presbytery. Regional presbyteries join into a synod and all the synods form the general assembly. The difference between this structure and the episcopla structure is the diversification of authority by a group of leaders instead of a single leader.

Congregational polity- Congregational polity can be led by a single pastor or a group of pastors from within the congregation, but ultimately matters of governance are in the hands of the people. This is a more democractic form of government. Congregationalists, Puritans, some methodists and Baptists have this form of church government. Each local congregation is independent of any outside authority structure. We call this autonomy which mean self-law or self-governed.

So why should church government matter to us?

Outside authorities control what is done at the local level

Often times this outside authority controls:

selecting of pastors

curriculum taught in the church

who holds the title to the property

choosing missionaries

2. We believe the bible has a right to tell us how we are to govern our churches.

3. Ultimately, Christ is the head of the church and not an outside denomination.

Colossians 1:18 “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.”

Tonight we are going to look at three biblical reasons we support a congregational polity and then ask one controversial argument against congregational polity.

Christ is the only head of the church

Our text verse declares that Christ is the head of the body. This body includes all believers everywhere, but its physical manifestation is in the local church. While the use of the word head is a picture of a physical body. It’s meaning is more than that. The head functions as the top of the body and what tells the body what to do. The word is used of leadership and authority. Ephesians 1:22 “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,” Jesus is the authority over the church and any other authority must receive its authority from him.

To see that Christ is not only an authority, but the only true authority over the local church, I think it would be helpful to take a look at.

Galatians 1:8–9 “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”

The book of Galatians was written to challenge the church because false teachers has come into the church and corrupted the gospel and distorted God’s plan for our sanctification. Paul points out that even an apostle or an angel does not stand between the church and Christ’s authority. No matter how high an authority might be, if they come in changing the gospel, they are to be rejected. Paul says let them be accursed. The gospel message must be protected because it comes from Christ Himself. vs 12. So even the most authoritative voices in the church are still subject to christ’s authority and must be rejected by the church if they depart from the truth.

A key point in this text is that the church is to reject these false apostles and false angels in submission to Christ’s authority. The church has the authority and right to make this decision even in judgement over an apostle or an angel. The very fact that they have this authority elevates the church to a position accountable to Jesus Christ alone.

In the bible, each local church governs its own affairs.

The autonomy of the local church is also deduced from the scriptures that tell us how the church operates. Nowhere do we see an external force dictating the day to day life of the church; rather, we see throughout scripture local churches settling matters on their own.

The local church disciplines its own members Matt 18:15-17, 1 Cor 5:13- In both of these passages, the local church is the final arbiter of church discipline issues. It doesn’t get passed on to an outside board or bishop, but is settled by the church. Consider this, the implication of these passages is that even the pastor cannot discipline someone out of the church without first having persuaded the church to follow his input. Scripture does not leave room for abusive pastors to push through their desires in this matter. Throughout the scriptures we see congregations and elders working together to make decisions. What we see is a congregation rule that is led by the elders of the church.

The local church selects its own deacons Acts 6:1-3 In this passage when there was a problem arising between the widows of the Jerusalem Jews and those from outside Israel, the apostles spoke to the disciples and commissioned them to look ye out. They were to search for and choose men who were qualified to be deacons. Again we see the leaders and the people working together here because the people would select and the elders would appoint.

The local church sends its own missionaries Acts 13:1-3 The church of Antioch was one of the first missionary churches mentioned in the bible outside of Jerusalem. As godly men in the church were seeking the Lord, God told them to separate Barnabas and Saul for the ministry.hTHe church of Jerusalem and the apostles did not make this decision, but the church did. They then ordained them and sent them out.

The local church ordains its own ministers 1 Timothy 4:14 “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.” I had to put this one in here because it would seem to support a presbyterian system because the bible uses the word presbytery. A presbytery is a group of elders. The difference between the biblical model and the presbyterian model is that the presbytery is in the local church not an external group outside the local church. Paul as a church planter would establish elders in the churches he planted, but after that initial plant, the elders of the church would ordain their own men. We know this atleast partially because the qualifications are given to the church for the selection of elders.

The local church administers the Lord’s Supper 1 Corinthians 11:33–34 “Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.” The Lord’s supper was consistently practiced when the church gathered together. The implications of all of chapter 11 is that this was a ceremony of the local church.

Each of the letters were written to local congregations and not some ecclesiastical body above them.

Rev 2,3 Mark Dever comments about the letter to Galatia:

Paul doesn’t write merely to the pastors, to the presbytery, to the bishop or the conference, to the convention or to the seminary. He writes to the Christians who compose the churches, and he makes it quite clear that not only are they competent to sit in judgment on what claims to be the gospel, but they must.

1 Corinthians 1:1–2 “Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:”

Ephesians 1:1 “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:”

Philippians 1:1 “Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:”

Colossians 1:1–2 “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timotheus our brother, To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”

The exceptions to this pattern are Paul’s personal letters to Timothy, Titus and Philemon. Timothy and Titus were left in churches after Paul planted them to organize and get them established. But their function was as a leader within that local church and not an outside body dictating what they should do. The letter to Philemon was purely a personal letter from Paul to a member of a church. Paul’s tone is not demanding, but pleading in this letter.

What about the Jerusalem Council?

Now if you have read through your bible you might think of one passage that seems to contradict the idea of congregational rule in the church. In Acts 15, we read were Paul and Barnabas went as representatives to the Jerusalem church with questions of theology dealing with whether Gentiles needed to keep the law. Some have tried to down play the role of the Jerusalem church in the lives of the other churches by saying that this was merely advice. This was just one church asking for advice from another. Unfortunately the text does not support this conclusion.

I want us to look at a couple key verses in this passage that will help us understand the what is going on here:

Acts 15:6 “And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.” The leaders of the church at Jerusalem gathered together to hear the arguments back and forth. Notice that this group included the apostles.

Acts 15:19 “Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:” James gets up as the primary leader in the church of Jerusalem and concludes what they should do. But notice that word sentence. The word means a judgement or legal decision.

Acts 15:22 “Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren:” Even here we see fingerprints of congregational rule as the church was not left out of the decision.

Acts 15:28 “For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;” They viewed their decision as laying a burden on people.

Acts 16:4 “And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.” Paul and Silas delivered the decrees which refers to commands or an authoritative proclamation.

So the decision of the Jerusalem council was not merely suggestive, it had authority behind it. So does this disprove congregational rule? Let me ask you what is one difference between then and today? Key to this passage was the presence of the apostles. Jesus has specifically ordained these apostles to be his representative to the entire body of Christ. Back in July of 2022, I preached a message showing that the apostles were a one time thing. In Ephesians 2:20 “And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;” They were a foundation that is only laid once. Throughout the NT, we do not see any evidence that the apostles were replaced other than Judas. When James was killed, they did not seek a successor. So that position of authority died off when the apostles themselves died off.

Conclusion

So here is what this means for us today. As a church we may join with others in cooperation for edification and evangelism; but we do not put ourselves into a position where the church is governed and controlled by some outside force. Baptists of all types hold to this. Even the SBC technically concludes that the churches are independent though that has been compromised by some of their policies. This principle is essential to being a baptist, but it is also why we are independent baptists. There is a blessing and a responsibility in this.

The blessing is that I don’t have to be lumped together with churches who I have fundamental disagreements with. We have freedom to believe and practice as we see the bible teaches us.

The responsibility is that we are accountable to God for what we do. We cannot make our decisions just because others are doing it. As well, without outside accountability, we must police ourselves even more stringently.

Hopefully, this message helps you to understand why we are not part of the SBC or the PCA or the PCUSA or any other such denominational structure. When you are seeking out a church, these principles should come to mind.