Customer Reviews

Perspectives on Church Government: Five Views of Church Polity

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Church polity is a fascinating topic and it is no light study to try to understand the differences in ecclesiastic praxis that we encounter even in our own broad theological traditions. This counterpoint introduction to Church polity includes five authors which represent three specific polities: Congregationalism, Presbyterianism, and Episcopalianism. The Congregational authors (Daniel Akin, James Leo Garrett, Jr., and James R. White) each represent subtle differences in Congregationalism (single elder, plurality of elders, and one representative of general Congregationalism who argues mostly for a plurality of elders). Why the editors chose three representatives of Congregationalism is not clear - they could have equally chosen three representatives of either of the other two ecclesiastic traditions. To add to the confusion, Daniel Akin was tasked with making a case for the Single-Elder-Led-Church but concedes that he personally prefers a plurality of elders. Huh?

I suspect most non-Congregationalist readers will find Akin's and White's arguments for Congregationalism tenuous at best; however, many will likely find James Leo Garrett's contribution to this work fairly helpful and perhaps some may even find it convincing.

For those interested in looking for a strong presentation of Episcopalian polity, they will need to look elsewhere. One wonders if the Editors were even familiar with their author's views on the subject prior to soliciting their participation. Case in point: Paul Zahl, the chosen representative of Episcopalianism. Zahl doesn't seem much interested in actually making a case for Episcopal polity, so no argument is presented, no exegesis is offered. What we get instead is his history of the Anglican Church. An interesting read nonetheless, but hardly appropriate for this venue.

That leaves Robert Reymond and his defense of Presbyterianism. Reymond is a gifted author and his confidence and handling of the subject at hand is attractive. Reymond will certainly be appreciated by Presbyterians and, like Garrett, will likely given opponents of Presbyterianism a better understanding of Reymond's tradition and the reasoning purported to support it.

The disadvantage to a format such as this book adopts is that it is not sufficiently interactive. Each author is given the opportunity to comment on each other author's presentation, but that's where it ends. This leads you to want to know how each author would respond to his peer's reviews, which would probably generate a lot more clarification of each author's intention and position.

When I am seeking to purchase books on Amazon, I read the reviews ultimately to determine if I should make the purchase or not. Is this one worth your money? I suppose that depends on how familiar you are with the topic. If you feel you have a good grasp of the traditions represented in this book, you should probably save your money as you are unlikely to gain much from this book. However, if you are not so familiar, then it is certainly is worth the money and in that case it has my recommendation.

The issue of church polity is perhaps one of the most divisive issues in local churches in America. Churches have split over the issue of "elder rule" versus some form of congregationalism (since the late 1970's this has been a major flashpoint issue in the ministry of TMS president Dr. John MacArthur and different Baptist associations because of his advocacy of an elder system). Churches in Episcopal systems have seen their congregations locked out of their church facilities by a "headquarters" who did not like the way a particularly local congregation was going. And in Presbyterian systems local congregations have seen church discipline decisions with clear Biblical warrant reversed by Synod and General Assembly courts.

Congregations and their leaders wonder what is the "biblical" form of church government, how should they be organized and how should decisions be made. Certainly, it seems, that this is a foundational issue for the local church that seeks to conduct it's affairs in a manner that pleases God.

Historically, several forms of church polity have developed, and many variations and nuances exist within those established positions. A local church struggling with its own organization or a new assembly wondering how to "get off on the right foot" is often left with a "blithering array of competing models, all of which lay claim to biblical authenticity" (p. 22) which are often by presented by respected evangelical leaders, pastors, and theologians. One work that escapes from the "blithering" category is this "five view" work. Here five options of polity are presented clearly, forthrightly and in a generally irenic manner. Brought together by the editors, five respected evangelical leaders present their case for local church polity. They and the positions they affirm are as follows:

* Daniel Akin, President of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, defends "The Single Elder-Led Church: The Bible's Witness to a Congregational/Single-Elder-Led Polity," (25-86).

* Robert L Reymond, Professor of Theology at Knox Theological Seminary, defends the "Presbytery-Led Church: Presbyterian Church Government," 87-156).

* James Leo Garrett, Jr., Professor of Theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, defends the "Congregation-Led Church: Congregational Polity," 157-208).

* Paul F. M. Zahl, Dean and President of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry, defends the "The Bishop-Led Church: The Episcopal or Anglican Polity Affirmed, Weighed, and Defended" (209-54).

* James R. White, Director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, defends the "Plural Elder-Led Church: Sufficient as Established -The Plurality of Elders as Christ's Ordained Means of Church Governance," (255-96).

As normal in this genre there are responses by the other contributors at the end of each major presentation. There are useful indexes (name, subject, and Scripture) and a clear introductory chapter by the editors dealing with the key issues and a brief history of the history of church polity.

The contributors uniformly present clear definitions, Biblical defenses, and generally offer detailed research in their efforts. The publisher opted to use endnotes instead of footnotes which often breaks up important points that the contributors were making in their articles. Each author supports his position from Scripture and with a wide array of material. For instance in his chapter, Garrett utilizes 318 notations which encompasses 19 pages of material.

In evaluating the presentations certainly that by Akin should be judged as superior. He is both current in his scholarship and, while making an affirmative case for his position, still acknowledging room for flexibility (p.73). Reymond makes a detailed presentation of the Presbyterianism and defends it, in large part, as a means to maintain church and ministry "balance." He states, that, "it provides the most trustworthy, just, and peaceful way for the church to determine its principles, its practices, and its priorities and to resolve its differences" (p. 135). Reymond's point that within a congregational model there are, "too many ministers and too many churches that are accountable to no one" (ibid) is well stated; however, he weakens his position considerably by attributing the tragedy of Jonestown and the scandals of Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart and Jesse Jackson directly to a congregational model (p. 136). In doing this he likewise fails to note that Presbyterianism, as a system was not able to deal with the liberalism that eventually led to the reorganization of Princeton Seminary in 1929 and the wholesale departure from orthodoxy of several Presbyterian denominations.

While thoroughly noted and detailed, the article by Garrett is more of a laundry list of quotations and people who have supported some form of congregationalism. His criticism of "mega-churches," the ministry of John MacArthur, and Dallas Theological Seminary, as part of the "crisis" or "major erosion or overt rejection of congregational polity" (p. 190) is a tired old canard. However, his point that individual members need to be more active in the affairs and ministries of their churches is a worthwhile contribution (p. 192).

In presenting the Episcopal model, Zahl centers on the Anglican Church, which is not a particularly major force in American evangelicalism. His presentation is clear and perhaps one of the best affirmative presentations of that system this reviewer has encountered. However, it would have been helpful had he expanded his horizons to include the Methodist, Lutheran and perhaps even the Roman Catholic schemas.

The final presentation by James White on the plurality of elders is perhaps the most disappointing in terms of presentation. His argument is often pedantic and has an air of "my way or the highway" to it. He utilizes Sola Scriptura in such a manner that he makes it clear that a rejection of his position on polity is a de facto moving away from or rejection of the Sola as well. His notations are weak (he uses only 11 footnotes) and he offers little in the way of affirmative support. In fact his is the only article that fails to cite or quote any supporting source outside of Scripture.

There are certainly other points of disagreement and issues that could be mentioned, but, for the most part, the individual authors dispatch these in their responses to one another. There are a couple of issues that we would mention however. In assessing Congregational model position, Akin appears to correct Garrett's assertion that John MacArthur is Presbyterian (p. 196) but points to a reference that he identifies as "Note 99" which has no bearing on that point, and in fact in the section discussing MacArthur (whose ministry Garrett views as a major reason Baptist churches have moved towards "elder rule", p. 191), does not make a claim that MacArthur is a Presbyterian.

This book, while covering a large swath of evangelical church polity, it is not complete. There is no discussion of a minimalist polity such in Plymouth Brethren assemblies, and as already mentioned there is no discussion of the non-Anglican systems that practice the Episcopal model. An additional issue is that there is no discussion of the inherent weaknesses in each system and how, on a practical level, those are overcome. There is also no discussion of how one might practically implement one system or the other if you were starting from scratch, how one might move a congregation from one model to another, or under what circumstances such a change might be a good or bad idea.

This is an important work and a valuable contribution to the literature of polity and we recommend it highly. That being said, this reviewer agrees with the great Anglican expositor and theologian, Bishop J. C. Ryle, who stated, "There is not a text in the Bible which expressly commands churches to have one special form of government, and expressly forbids any other" (Ryle, Knots Untied [reprint, Moscow, ID: Charles Nolan, 2000], 234). The diversity of polity within local churches that God has chosen to bless in history make it clear that outside of the Biblical commands that everything should be done "properly and in an orderly fashion" (I Cor 14:40); that godly men be given the task of local church leadership (1 Tim 3:1-13; Titus 1:6-9); and that those leaders must dispatch their duties with humility before God (1 Pet 5:2-3); the exact structures of church polity enjoys freedom of expression to meet the needs of a local assembly.

Who cares about ecclesiology? Why should a church member concern himself with who runs the church? In Perspectives on Church Government, editors Chad Owen Brand and R. Stanton Norman seek to facilitate a discussion that will engage these questions by providing the reader with a defense of the "classic positions on the matter of governing the church" (23), which include the Congregational model, the Presbyterian model, and the Episcopal model.

Brand and Norman include three broad variations of congregationalism with Daniel Akin defending the single elder position, James Leo Garrett, Jr. defending the congregation led position, and James White advocating a plurality of elders. Robert Reymond and Paul Zahl defend Presbyterian and Episcopal models, respectively. Each contributor presents an essay-length defense of his position, followed by a brief response from each of the other four scholars.

Defining church polity as "the manner in which a church or denomination practices organization and governance," Brand and Norman provide an introductory chapter that seeks to demonstrate that "polity has profound implications for understanding the nature of the church and its various functions and ministries" (5). To that end, they give a chronological survey of the development of polity in church history and highlight its importance in each major period.

Acknowledging the difficulty of proving which form of church government is the "prescribed pattern" for the New Testament church, the editors assert that there is an obvious criterion which must be considered in every model, namely, "the scriptural witness seen in the light of the historic and contemporary interpretations of the church" (23). The task of each of the contributors is to weigh their model according to this standard.

One positive feature about this volume is the depth of the essays presented. The contributors attempt to ground their views in biblical texts while highlighting the way their positions interact with the theological themes and emphases present throughout church history. Brand and Norman's introductory chapter sets the stage for this development in the essays themselves by highlighting the importance of the discussion and by orienting the reader to the major categories necessary for thinking through the issue of church government.

The panel discussion format of the book also provides the reader with the opportunity to consider each view defended by someone who actually holds that position. For the most part, the responses to each essay highlight the main areas of agreement and disagreement between the various positions. Though this format is helpful, the similarity of some of the positions lends itself to redundancy. For instance, a few of the minor issues in the debate such as the qualifications for elders and deacons are shared by all five contributors. In fact, even on the issue of the interchangeability of the terms elder and bishop, where one would expect the Episcopal position to differ, there is repeated agreement among the participants.

Further, though White does not specifically mention congregationalism in his essay, his interpretation of many key texts (e.g., Acts 15) is in line with Akin and Garrett. Thus, some points regarding congregational government are defended three times, and some rebuttals to Reymond and Zahl are similarly reiterated. In this sense, the congregational position serves as the first among equals in this plurality of contributors.

There is also some disparity in the tone of the presentations. Reymond's essay on Presbyterian is the most dogmatic, and his responses have the most edge to them. In the defense of his position, Reymond allows minimal flexibility for varying interpretive possibilities and describes Presbyterianism as the "divine right form" of church government (138). In stark contrast, Zahl's essay on Episcopal polity is perhaps not dogmatic enough. In his theological triage, Zahl lays much less emphasis on ecclesiology than do the other contributors in this volume. He would rather no one posit any form of church polity to the exclusion of another. The assertion that ecclesiology relates to the "well-being" of the church rather than its "being" drives his presentation and responses to the other positions. Zahl also fails to relate his position on polity to the biblical text. He gives an intriguing and thorough survey of the historical situation that gave rise to the Episcopal system in Elizabethan England, but does not seek to provide a biblical foundation for his position. Thus, while his writing style is notably engaging, it is sometimes unclear in this volume how the Episcopal system interacts with the other positions.

There are a few other minor issues related to content and style. Regarding the former, Akin argues for a senior pastor but continually upholds a plurality of elders as the ideal, and White does not interact with the congregational position. Concerning the latter, Garrett has twice as many footnotes as the other contributors combined, and Reymond uses an overabundance of lengthy block-quotations. Despite these concerns, this volume represents a helpful contribution to the contemporary discussion of church polity. Those who affirm that a pattern for ordering the churches can be discerned from the New Testament documents will appreciate the dialogue this work affords.

This book is very helpful for anyone wanting to have a deeper understanding of the different views on church leadership. Because each chapter is written by an author who holds a distinctive view, and then is critiqued by the other four contributors, we get to listen in on the conversation and hear some of the strengths and weakness of the various views. As another reviewer mentioned, it would have been even better if each author had been able to briefly respond to the critiques of his chapter, but the book still includes some insightful interaction as it is. I thought the lack of biographical material for each contributor was a curious oversight. (I do have the older cover, so maybe this was subsequently rectified.) The editors also provide a solid introduction to the issues with an excellent historical survey.

One reviewer questioned why there are three chapters presenting varieties of congregationalism. I think this reflects recent debate over the nature of congregationalism. What exactly is it? Does it simply refer to autonomous churches who have no formal authority beyond that of the local congregation? Or does it necessarily include the idea of democratic involvement by the whole congregation? And how much involvement is required to be truly congregational? meeting monthly to vote on everything? an annual affirmation of the church leaders? People strongly disagree on these issues, and some would not view all of the three "congregational" chapters as authentically congregational. The editors seem to have taken a broad view of "congregational" in their descriptions of the viewpoints.

Daniel Akin is first up, supposedly presenting the view that the church is led by a single elder. Akin doesn't seem at all committed to this view, and doesn't spend much time defending it. He prefers a plural-elder-plus-senior-pastor model. He devotes most of his chapter to defending his view of congregationalism. IMO, he has to stretch quite a bit to get his conclusions from the passages he uses. I remain unconvinced that the New Testament clearly teaches the traditional Baptist form of congregationalism. Akin writes in an affable style, and seems very likable. He doesn't view the NT as being definitive regarding a specific model of pastoral leadership. He does approvingly quote Adrian Rogers: "Anything without a head is dead. Anything with several heads is a freak." But just who is supposed to be the head of the body of Christ? Shouldn't that be, um, Christ? Interestingly, his fellow congregationalist, James Garrett, criticizes his reliance on the possible existence of house churches in the early church and his finding of senior pastors in Ephesian 4:11. Akin bases much of his view on the priesthood of all believers and seems disappointed that others do not base their polities on this concept as he has.

Next, Robert Reymond presents the Presbyterian model of church government. This chapter is direct and well-presented. But, when it comes to the distinctive aspects of the Presbyterian system, Reymond has to stretch even farther than Akin in trying to find his view unambiguously taught in Scripture. In his response, James White rightly criticizes Reymond for basing his exegetical arguments on inference and supposition. Akin notes, "one searches the New Testament in vain for the 'graded courts' of local 'session,' regional 'presbytery,' and 'general assembly' Dr. Reymond so confidently asserts is there."

James Leo Garrett Jr presents the Democratic Congregational model, or the congregation-led church. Garrett is even more focused on congregationalism than Akin, and displays the same exegetical over-reaching. His chapter is exhaustively foot-noted, and probably the least enjoyable to read. In Akin's response (a fellow Southern Baptist), he shows many of the serious weaknesses inherent in a democratic approach. White questions the view that the elders derive their authority from the congregation. He sees this authority as being delegated by Christ, not the congregation.

Paul Zahl explores the bishop-led church. Zahl is a delightful writer, and this chapter is a pleasure to read. But there is no scriptural defense of his chosen leadership model. Zahn feels that Scripture does not give us a definitive, normative model of church government, and seems to be happy with any and all views. This is also reflected in his responses, where he approves of Akin's acceptance of multiple approaches as valid, but strongly opposes Reymond and White who argue that the Bible has given us a clear, unambiguous church leadership model that we must follow. In his response, White effectively demonstrates that the synonymous nature of 'episcopos' and 'presbyteros' makes the Episcopal model untenable.

Lastly, James White presents the plural-elder model. He begins with some grand, over-arching themes that may be off-putting to some. But his intent is to build a solid case, from the foundation up, that Christ has provided everything for His church, including ordering how it is to be led. He gives a clear explanation of the autonomous nature of the church, and what this does---and doesn't---mean. His chapter includes a good biblical defense of the independence of congregations and a sound presentation of the biblical teaching regarding church elders. White explores issues related to applying these biblical principles, and gives us some helpful insights. Unfortunately, he seems to accept using a title of 'pastor' for one primary teaching elder in distinction to the other elders (although he makes clear that this is not a separate role or office). Akin takes advantage of White's apparent fudging on this, and notes that this doesn't sound too different from his senior pastor model (although he also wrongly accuses White of holding the teaching elder/ruling elder differentiation). In his response, Garrett finds it too difficult to believe that four centuries of Baptists could be wrong in their views of church leadership.

I thought Paul Zahl's and Daniel Akin's chapters were the most enjoyable to read, yet also the most disappointing because neither really tried to biblically defend their viewpoints. I was surprised by the amount of inference and conjecture relied upon to somehow find a clear Presbyterian or Congregational model in Scripture passages that just do not clearly teach such. IMO, White's chapter and responses contained the most sound exegesis and were thus the most convincing and compelling. Overall, the book was incredibly helpful. It left me wanting to hear much more of this discussion, which I would think is an indication of a well-executed book.

We have been searching for a new church and several of the churches that we have been looking at are elder led - one of those having a single elder. We are used to a pastor and a board of deacons. I ordered "Perspectives on Church Government: Five Views of Church Polity" to read biblical perspectives from the points of views of others who had different background from mine as I dealt with the possible change I faced.

The book was remarkably refreshing in that the men presented each of their cases for the type of church government that they preferred and, in most cases, were open-minded enough to understand that there is latitude for difference without one side necessarily being right or wrong. The most interesting part of the book in my opinion was that after each man presented his views, the others werer given the opportunity to respectfully challenge those views. It made for a very interesting exchange of ideas - again, with a high level of respect among the different men - and helped me tremendously. I really appreciated the book.

A great tool for anyone looking for a well rounded look at the issues of church governance and their respective proponents.

This is a great book in counterpoint. I think that every author had some good points about their position and some good counter points for their rebuttal. Before I read this book I held the purality of Elders position. After reading and finding out James R White held the same position. I still hold that position. One thing that we must remember is just because you might see the abuses of each of the positions in real life. Doesn't make them invaild. If you wanted a great overview this is a good place to start.

The book is a views book that deals with five different ways that churches operate. Several of the methods of government have little to no Biblical basis. It seems that one or two can fit the Biblical pattern. It will help you to understand other people's views but probably not worth the read.

I have found the book interesting just to get other peoples viewpoints. I have attended all these types of churches mentioned and have seen some pro's and con's to each.

I think one of the main structures to all these methods should be - to incorporate freedom of the Spirit. Which one will give the Spirit freedom to exercise in Liberty.

The New Testament is founded through the Holy Spirit by the very words of Jesus. He that was sent from the Father, The Holy Spirit, we should allow freedom to worship in the Spirit. So, how can one incorporate His good pleasure through the selected polity? If by instruction of the letter? No, it is to be by the Spirit saith the Lord of Hosts as the Prophets foretold and the way Jesus foretold. Rev. 19:10.

There can be too much structure in polity, which comes from man not God.