|
Obviously, this is an interesting topic to research in the Scriptures, in that you can’t simply look up the word in the concordance and check out all of the Biblical references. I have read through the book of Acts in rather careful fashion and additionally skimmed through the balance of the New Testament, skipping over the more didactic sections, looking for any insights into how the local churches governed themselves and related to one another in the first century. I will list what may be relevant passages and suggest possible conclusions and inferences.
“So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, ‘It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom…..This proposal pleased the whole group. They chose Stephen…They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.” Acts 6:1-7 NIV
- Even with apostles clearly involved, this major decision was made by the congregation. All the disciples were involved in choosing these men.
- Obviously, Jerusalem is the only church at this time, but it still sets a precedent for disciples collectively being engaged in a decision-making process about a matter very important to them.
“During this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. One of them, named Agabus, stood up and through the Spirit predicted that a severe famine would spread over the entire Roman world. (This happened during the reign of Claudius.) The disciples, each according to his ability, decided to provide help for the brothers living in Judea. This they did, sending their gift to the elders by Barnabas and Saul.” Acts 11:27-30 NIV
- One church (Antioch) sends a gift to another church (Jerusalem and surrounding area);
- This “love offering” appears to be spontaneous and initiated solely by the contributing church, ie., the gift is not requested let alone proscribed. The Antioch church somehow decided to make this generous, benevolent gesture.
“They preached the good news in that city (Derbe) and won a large number of disciples. Then they returned to Lystra, Iconium and Antioch, strengthening the disciples and encouraging them to remain true to the faith. ‘We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God,’ they said. Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, commited them to the Lord, in whom they had put their trust.” Acts 14:21-23 NIV
- Notice that as the gospel is preached and churches planted in new cities, these churches take on their own identity. They become the “church in Lystra,” the “church in Iconium,” etc. simply referring to the “called-out ones” in each location. This is why, apparently, the apostles had elders appointed in each church, not elders over a group of churches, which would have certainly been a possibility had it been God’s intention. Each church had its own life and identity and hence, needed its own leaders.
- “appoint” = “cheirotoneo” According to Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon…”to vote by stretching out the hand,” “to create or appoint by vote,” “to elect, appoint, create.” According to Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, “this was primarily used of voting in the Athenian legislative assembly” although Vine holds that this wasn’t to be taken in the literal sense. It is uncertain as to the church’s involvement in the choosing of elders. I don’t believe we have enough information to conclusively say precisely how this process occurred, but it is possible that individual disciples were involved.
- Once appointed, the apostles felt confident that these elders could lead and adequately shepherd the flock. They did not set up any controlling mechanism or organizational structure, but simply entrusted them to God.
“Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: ‘Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.’ This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question.” Acts 15:1-35
- Interesting that the trouble-makers are called “some men,” not “disciples.”
- These men were not official representatives of the Jerusalem church; cf. 15:24, “without our authorization”
- At stake here is doctrine directly associated with salvation…these were crucial matters, not minor matters of opinion.
- Again, it appears that the church was involved, that Paul, Barnabas and “some other believers” were “appointed”, somehow selected, perhaps by the entire church, to go and consult with the apostles and elders in Jerusalem.
- There is no indication that they were going to Jerusalem to get some “official” answer because they were being “discipled” or “governed” by some other church. Of course, they were consulting with “apostles” who were inspired in a special, supernatural way.
“The apostles and elders met to consider this question. After much discussion…” (v. 6)
“The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them.” (v. 12)
“Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers.” (v. 22)
- It seems that while the primary decision seems to have been made by the apostles and elders, that the entire body of believers was a part of this special time in the church’s early history. There seems to have been a confidence and trust in the ability of individual disciples to engage in discussions and decisions.
“As they (Paul, Timothy and Silas) traveled from town to town, they delivered the decisions reached by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the people to obey.” -Acts 16:4,5 NIV
- These decisions, arrived at in Acts 15, clearly had “weight” and “authority.”
- If they were simply “of the elders”, we would have a clear example of elders in one place “over” other churches---however, the apostles were involved and they definitely had a “foundational” role in the church and I believe it was this reality that gave this decision binding authority.
“When Apollos wanted to go to Achaia, the brothers encouraged him and wrote to the disciples there to welcome him.” -Acts 18:27
- Here is an example of communication between churches. The brothers in Ephesus wrote to the church in Corinth encouraging them to accept Apollos. There is no one-church-over-another, but simply a written confirmation of the legitimacy and authenticity of one’s character and ministry. So, we in Cincinnati could certainly speak to another church about a ministry leader or vice versa.
“He sent two of his helpers, Timothy and Erastus, to Macedonia, while he stayed in the province of Asia a little longer.” -Acts 19:21-22
- Paul sent leaders to other churches. What precedent, if any, this is for us is dubious due to his apostolic ministry.
- It is alright for leaders to travel to other churches, but most likely to help with the continued spreading of the word, not a governing or decision-making role.
“The people seized Gaius and Aristarchus, Paul’s traveling companions from Macedonia,…”
“He was accompanied by Sopater son of Pyrrhus from Berea, Aristarchus and Secundus from Thessalonica, Gaius from Derbe, Timothy also, and Tychicus and Trophimus from the province of Asia.” -Acts 19:29; 20:4 NIV
- Gifted men from various churches clearly worked together in a missionary effort, planting new churches and strengthening young churches. So there was cooperation in missionary efforts.
- One could also infer that their financial support probably came from their own “sending” churches, although this isn’t specifically stated here.
“All the churches of Christ send greetings.” Romans 16:16 NIV
- The churches were related and united in spirit because of their common commitment to Jesus Christ. However, there is no evidence of organizational structure.
“Now about the collection for God’s people; Do what I told the Galatian churches to do…Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem.” I Corinthians 16:1-4 NIV
- A collection was taken up to help meet benevolent needs in Jerusalem. Churches in various cities cooperated in this collection. They worked together.
- It appears that each church received their own free-will offering and selected their own representatives to deliver and safe-guard their gift. This is later supported in II Corinthians 8.
“If Timothy comes, see to it that he has nothing to fear while he is with you, for he is carrying on the work of the Lord, just as I am. No one, then, should refuse to accept him. Send him on his way in peace, so that he may return to me. I am expecting him along with the brothers.” -I Corinthians 16:10-12 NIV
- Timothy had some ministry to carry on among the Corinthian disciples. He was sent by an apostle, probably carried on evangelistic work, and ministered with an authority that came from the word of God. However, there is no indication that Timothy had any oversight in the Corinthian church.
“I was glad when Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus arrived, because they supplied what was lacking from you. For they refreshed my spirit and yours also. Such men deserve recognition.” -I Corinthians 16:15-18 NIV
- The Corinthian church delivered financial support to Paul. There is no indication that this was requested or expected. It was simply a free-will offering to assist Paul in his missionary labors. Brothers, apparently leaders in the church, personally delivered the gift.
“I thank God, who put into the heart of Titus the same concern I have for you. For Titus not only welcomed our appeal, but he is coming to you with much enthusiasm and on his own initiative. And we are sending along with him the brother who is praised by all the churches for his service to the gospel. What is more, he was chosen by the churches to accompany us as we carry the offering, which we administer in order to honor the Lord himself and to show our eagerness to help. We want to avoid any criticism of the way we administer this liberal gift. For we are taking pains to do what is right, not only in the eyes of the Lord but also in the eyes of men.
In addition, we are sending with them our brother who has often proved to us in many ways that he is zealous, and now even more so because of his great confidence in you. As for Titus, he is my partner and fellow worker among you; as for our brothers, they are representatives of the churches and an honor to Christ.” -II Corinthians 8:16-23
- As this large (“liberal”) gift was collected and delivered to the saints in Jerusalem, it seems that each church selected their own representatives to accompany the gift.
- One unknown brother appears to have been approved by multiple churches. You could infer by this that churches made decisions together. However, I think that it is more likely that this brother had ministered in these multiple locations and thus had won their collective respect and admiration. So in this way they “chose” him to accompany the offering.
“The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.” I Timothy 5:17 NIV
- I and II Timothy are filled with specific instruction about Christian living that Timothy was to teach and even “command.” (see I Timothy 4:11)
- However, it seems that the only authority Timothy had came from the ministry of the word and perhaps in his close relationship to Paul, an apostle.
- The elders, not Timothy, were “directing the affairs of the church” and even assisting with the “preaching and teaching.”
- So, not even an evangelist sent by an apostle, had oversight over the church. The elders were given this responsibility.
“Dear friend, you are faithful in what you are doing for the brothers, even though they are strangers to you. They have told the church about your love. You will do well to send them on their way in a manner worthy of God. It was for the sake of the Name that they went out, receiving no help from the pagans. We ought therefore to show hospitality to such men so that we may work together for the truth.” -III John 5-8 NIV
- Again, we see workers who apparently move from church to church. It seems that their work was primarily evangelistic. John praises Gaius for his caring for the needs of these brothers.
- John admonished the Christians to “work together for the truth.” So, we certainly are permitted, in fact, expected by God to support financially Christian workers. However, this was never imposed by some outside congregation but was the decision of each local church.
Revelation 2,3
- Jesus spoke directly to seven churches…Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.
- He did not address them “collectively,” but rather as individual congregations. Each church had their own peculiar issues to deal with and their reward or punishment was dependent upon their response.
CONCLUSION:
It seems that the Christians in each city had their own distinct identity. They were the “ekklesia,” the “called out ones,” the church. They were identified by their city or location. Their existence seemed to be more an “assembly” or collection of disciples than some organization. Each congregation made their own decisions. There are no examples of one church directing the affairs of another church. The churches cooperated in encouraging and even financially supporting workers, but this still of their own accord and decision. The churches cooperated in meeting a benevolent need, but even in this venture determined the amount of their own offering and selected their own representatives to deliver the gift. So, it seems that the individual churches were, in fact, “autonomous,” self-governing. But this did not keep them from working together in a spirit of love and unity to help advance the gospel in their generation. Surely we can learn from our early brothers and sisters and put this into practice in our day.
|
