Forms and Issues of Church Governments - Research Paper Example

? Church Governments Church Governments Introduction In theology, there exists several church governments in which the various denominations within the Christian religion. These are Congregational, Presbyterian, Single elder, plural elder, and lastly the bishop led models of church governance. In essence, the bishop led polity is a model of church governance that involves a hierarchy in which a bishop carries the responsibility of shepherding the believers of this polity. Secondly, there is the Presbyterian polity in which elders have the responsibility of governing this church. On the other hand, the congregational polity is one where there is autonomy of local churches in that these churches have no affiliation to any other church. The other form of church governance is the single elder polity in which there is the pastor is the main source of guidance and decision making organ. Lastly, the plural-led polity is the most applicable form of church governance as it involves both the clergy and the elders being on the same level of governance. Comparison between the five models Presbyterian Ideally, this form of church governance existed in the olden days of the bible to which many of the present day churches have adopted. Presently, the application of this church governance involves the congregation voting in the elders that they feel would lead them in a just manner. However, the aspect of these elected leaders having the entire decision on how to govern the congregation posses some challenges as the decision of the elders chosen is unquestionable. As compared to congregational churches, the decision making process partly involves the congregation making this form of church leadership be one way. On the contrary, this polity evokes some democracy aspects as the judgment on church matters does not lie in the shoulders of one elder as compared to the single elder polity. The basic principles that govern this polity are those embedded in the Holy Bible and not any other principles that present an avenue for social justice. In essence, the pastor of the church has equal authority to the elders in that his leadership is not unique. Some elders in a session are also congruent to the larger general assembly that exerts authority in a region or a state1. This makes the session have accountability towards higher authority hence making them exercise responsible leadership as compared to one elder polity. Single Elder polity In this form of church governance, the church congregation tends to have equal stature among all members meaning that an individual is superior to others in the church. Over time, this form of church governance has elicited critic as the most humble of the congregation takes up the leadership role. This makes them more special than the rest of the church because this serves as an impediment to access to God. Additionally, the scripture has no illustration of this aspect as the Bible 2 tends to have widespread application of the Presbyterian leadership as kings had sessions of elders that helped them in governance and decision-making. Others consider this as a form of secular polity as its rise was during the American expansion period due to the travels that the missionaries experienced. This meant that the Americans involved in the spreading of the gospel could not be under a specified region like in the Presbyterian polity hence influencing this form of church governance. Therefore, this encompassed service to a large fraction of society under the leadership of a single individual. Congregational polity Arguably, this is a sovereign form of church governance witnessed among contemporary churches in which the absolute decision power lies in the congregation itself 3. This has distinctive features as c compared to the above-mentioned polities in which the final decision making responsibilities tend to vary between congregations. This form of polity has also attracted critic as the congregation makes decisions for itself hence implying that they may negate God’s law in their judgment. In essence, this creates an aspect of moral compromise in that an individual may not speak out against the principles embedded within this church structure. The rise of this church governance was in the medieval era in which human beings started adopting modernist theories that also influenced their religious standing. In contrast to Presbyterian and single elder church governments, this form of governance relies on communal thinking in that it does not leave the decision-making responsibility to the leadership. The Bishop led polity (Episcopal) Ideally, this structure of church governance characterizes three categories, namely bishops, priests, and lastly deacons4. In this structure, the other parties that are part of the leadership serve as subjects answerable to the deacon. This means that they do not have an entire entitlement to the ministry as compared to the Presbyterian form of polity because they receive ordainment form the bishop in order for their work to commence. Therefore, the bishop in this form of church governance ensures progress in the discipleship just like in the early Bible days. The congregation and leadership are separate entities in this polity meaning that the two are independent of one another. Unlike in the congregational and Presbyterian leadership, the decision making aspect lies within the bishop where the decision made is final and unquestionable. Essentially, the archbishop has the mandate of ensuring that the bishops falling under his guidance operate5 within the principles of this polity. As compared to the single elder governance, the clergymen only answer to the bishop unlike the latter where the session answers to the regional governing council that oversees operations. Plural elder polity In this model of governance, the pastor and the elders fall in the same cluster as none is superior to the other as compared to the single elder polity and the bishop led forms of church governance. In this form of polity, the elders prevent the pastor from preaching against the Christian doctrines embedded in this religion. The overseers have the power to negate teachings that the pastor may apply as away of maintaining the church congregation. Additionally, the deacons ensure that service is for God’s followers on a full time basis while the elders serve in the church on a part time basis. However, the elders and the deacons subject the preaching and teaching responsibilities to the pastors and the deacons6. As compared to single elder church governance, plural elder polity serves as an avenue for the provision of social justice within the church as they keep the teachings in check. This contrary to the bishop led church governance and the congregational polities where is the likelihood of preaching to have a compromise. It also serves as the best form of leadership as it provides room for stability and growth for the church that adopts it as a form of church governance. Model of church governance used in my church In relation to the models stated above, my church has adopted the plural-led form of church governance that proven to be effective for church operations. In essence, this model has helped in the running of the church as the congregation has never resulted to unresolved conflicts. Arguably, there can never be smooth and non-challenged environments as where there are people that have unique traits conflict has to arise. However, the mode of conflict resolution within this church governance structure has made it possible for amicable settlement of disputes arising in the church. This form of polity is also the best application to governance as the pastor may receive correction from the congregation as compared to pastors from churches that use a different approach to governance. On the contrary, the pastor in this church congregation does not change the content and the message of the bible into one that would appeal to the audience as in congregational leadership. This preacher focuses on bringing more people to Christianity without compromising the message contained in the preaching. Therefore, the fact that the pastor does not preach against what the elders know of the bible then there are no conflicts within the leadership hence making plural-led polity effective. Proposed model polity Many at times, the paths that society may choose to adopt may somehow fail hence provoking the need to have an alternate plan. In this case, the best alternative model that this church may adopt should be the Presbyterian form of church governance. The beliefs engraved in this model are quite similar to those of the plural-led leadership as they both apply the principles dictated in the bible. Despite the fact that decision making here may take time, the decision made for the congregation complements the well-being of the church congregation. In addition, it may be a better alternative to plural-led leadership as it also serves as an avenue for social justice as it also does not allow for spiritual or moral contradiction. It may be dictatorial in some way, but the impediments made by this model make the Christian religion uphold substance within society as compared to the other forms of governance. Bibliography Akin, Daniel L., Chad Brand, and R. Stanton Norman. Perspectives on Church Government: Five Views of Church Polity. Nashville, Tenn: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004. Duesing, Jason G., Thomas White, and Malcolm B. Yarnell. Upon This Rock: A Baptist Understanding of the Church. Nashville, Tenn: B & H Academic, 2010. Erickson, Millard J., and L. Arnold Hustad. Introducing Christian Doctrine. Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Academic, 2001. Grenz, Stanley J. Theology for the Community of God. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 2000. Norman, R. Stanton. The Mission of Today's Church: Baptist Leaders Look at Modern Faith Issues. Nashville, Tenn: B & H Academic, 2007. Van Gelder, Craig. The Missional Church in Context: Helping Congregations Develop Contextual Ministry. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 2007. Read More