Jan
24
2013
Who Governs the Church?
Though together in the gospel, Council members for The Gospel Coalition do not all belong to the same churches—nor could they in good conscience. Meaningful, deep unity in the gospel of Jesus Christ and a detailed confession may put certain disputed doctrines in perspective. But such joyful cooperation does not mean we can ignore crucial issues where God's Word guides God's people. Rather, confident that we have genuine fellowship in the Holy Spirit, we freely debate our disagreements over anything from the millennium to cremation.
In that spirit, Ligon Duncan (Presbyterian) and Thabiti Anyabwile (Baptist) explore their differences over polity (how the church is organized and governed). It's a relatively tame discussion, and Duncan begins by establishing their shared commitment to search the Scriptures—not pragmatic sources or tradition—for guidance.
Still, you'll see how their churches differ on handling church discipline. Who stands on the front line of pastoral care in such cases? Who makes the final decision to dismiss an unrepentant sinner from membership?
They conclude with an open question about the dance in every congregation between the membership and leadership. Whether or not you're formally accountable as a leader to your fellow members, you must still heed them. In every church, members vote—if only with their feet.
14 Comments
[...] It’s a great testimony of God’s faithfulness that both Presbyterians and Baptists can have differing views on different topics and still work together to advance the gospel to the nations. Ligon Duncan (a Presbyterian) and Thabiti Anyabwile (a Baptist), both leaders within The Gospel Coalition, discuss the issue of church polity in this video. [...]
Yes, King Jesus must rule, or it's not a true church. But the question is how does the Lord exercise His rule? Through what means does He rule?
Modern individualists who really don't understand the church, don't understand the issue.
this comment was intended as a reply to Arthur's below.
Weird, I thought Jesus governed the church.
Odd that you should feel the need to point that out, Arthur, because that's exactly what Duncan and Anyabwile said in the video. Did you watch it?
Appreciate the winsome and charitable tone of both of these men. As a Presbyterian it's a little more clear to me now, having watched this, that the ecclesiological gap between Reformed Baptists and Presbyterians isn't as wide as one may think. Though still distinct from one another they aren't completely alien to one another.
This post seems to attempt to bring attention to the diversity within the Gospel Coalition. I agree that there is some diversity within TGC (as evidence here by the discussion of church government). However, I also see a lack of diversity in other key areas. The TGC is, in reality, a very homogenous group when compared to the broader spectrum of evangelical Christianity. As I understand, this is intentional.
You correctly observe, Jeffrey, that there is some diversity within TGC. Yet at the same time, someone like John Piper (a Council member) has a lot more in common with the fellow pastors who have also signed our confessional statement and theological vision of ministry than he does with, say, Joel Osteen. No one claims otherwise. Indeed, that's the point—we're one parachurch ministry with clearly defined goals, not the whole spectrum of evangelicalism.
These men seem to agree that church elders(who may or may not rule the church since these guys state both)have some role in church discipline. So my question is why has nothing been said about the gross miscarriage of justice against victims of rape and pedophilia in concerns to church "discipline"? By the way I mean action against those responsible not action against the victims in case anyone confused the two.
Excellent discussion! More agreement than disagreement here! An aspect worth looking at is how the role/authority of the elders and the congregation shift when looked from a time perspective. What this means is that potentially during a church planting with mostly new converts or very theologically "shallow" members, the elders may take a "presbyterian" approach, sort of imposing rule due to the inexperience and immaturity of the congregation. After years or solid biblical teaching and the solidification of the membership, we end up sharing more rule/authority to the congregation which now is able to carry it with responsibility. Being a local independent planter after 8 years of work, I'm still debating the proper mix point. Any thoughts?
Gadiel, I think that Thabiti, in mentioning the Corinthian church in 1Cor. 5 and 2 Cor. 2 and the churches role and function in putting out and in receiving back in, is quite telling. Just look at how immature that church was and seemingly young/shallow, and yet they are the church nonetheless and Paul puts that responsibility of functioning in that degree- with his apostolic teaching of course.
I know this practically must be more difficult, than on paper; however trusting the Lord in this regard can be a scary proposition yet yields great fruit in the end.
Jeremiah, Thanks for the note and advice. Certainly its scary for us pastors, but we need to do what is biblical and right as you said. God bless!
I love Ligon, he is a Spiritual Father in the faith to me but I believe he makes an extremely poor argument regarding Titus and appointing elders. Timothy and Titus were both men trained by an Apostle of Jesus Christ, There position and authority within the early church is unique. We no longer have men that have that Apostolic authority behind them and so that argument does not hold water concerning modern church polity. I'd love to hear back from some of my Presbyterian brothers on this. Is there more to this argument than Ligon was able to present in this short dialogue?
Kyle,
I am not a Presbyterian, but there seems to me a critical piece of evidence missing to your point. Timothy and Titus were not apostles. True, they were trained and appointed by an apostle but why is that the test? What about those that were trained and appointed by Timothy and Titus - do they carry this same apostolic-like authority? Do you see where I'm going with it? It seems to me that either the apostolic type authority (in this context) either ends at the apostles, or it carries forward indefinitely. What evidence do we have that it stops at the second generation, and not the third, fourth, or 100th?