Putting in a Good Word for Congregationalism

Article
08.22.2014

Thanks to Kevin and Hunter for the good discussion on the keys, congregationalism, and Presbyterianism! I’d like to add my own two cents in defense of congregationalism:

1. The keys: Like Kevin, I think the power of the keys pertains to authority in matters of doctrine and discipline (assuming one is using “discipline” more broadly to refer to order and not just to excommunication). Concisely put, Kevin!

2.  Several kinds of authority: However, I don’t think there is only one kind of authority that shows up in churches. In a company, the CEO has one kind of authority, the board another kind, and the shareholders still another kind. In the U.S., the president has one kind of authority, a Supreme Court justice another, and the voters still another. (I use two examples here because I don’t want to tie myself to any one. Both are different than what you find in a church.) And each of these parties have authorities that overlap and sometimes check one another. You can’t just say, “The CEO has authority” or “Congress has authority” and be done with the conversation.

The point here is, it’s not enough to say, “The elders have authority. Look at Hebrews 13:17.” Yes, they have authority, but what kind? How far does the jurisdiction extend, and are there any checks on that authority? Could it be that the elder authority/oversight described in the Epistles (e.g. 1 Tim. 5:17, 1 Peter 5:2-3; Hebrews 13:17) is just one kind of authority which plays a role in the foundation and function of a church?

Why assume that oversight given to the overseers is the be-all, end-all of authority in the church?

3. Kingdom authority vs. authority of oversight: What’s distinct about the authority of the keys discussed in Matthew 16 and 18 is the explicit connection that is made to the kingdom. They are called “the keys of the kingdom.” Their binding and loosing ability binds and looses in the kingdom.

Nowhere is the discussion of elder authority in Acts or the Epistles tied to the kingdom (that I’m aware of) or to the keys. And nowhere in Matthew 16 or 18 are elders mentioned. Exegetically, in other words, there’s no reason to think that the authority of the keys is the authority of oversight.

The congregationalist’s basic contention is that the authority which belongs to the congregation is of one kind, and the authority which belongs to the elders is of another kind. The congregation’s authority pertains to the foundation or very existence of the church as an eschatological embassy of Christ’s kingdom. The elders’ authority pertains to the function of the church—they lead life together within the community, including in the church’s use of the keys.

The keys are the church’s to use, but they should generally follow the elders in using them.

4. Earthly sanction vs. heavenly sanction:  Institutionally speaking, the main difference between congregational authority and elder authority is that the congregation has an earthly sanction while the elders have a heavenly sanction. For instance, Presbyterians (e.g. James Bannerman) sometimes critique congregationalists by saying that the authority we give to elders is “no real authority” because it has no teeth.  Not true. We give it heavenly or eschatological teeth. When Jesus tells you to submit to your elders, he means it. If you don’t, he will bring an eschatological smackdown. You will account for your disobedience—in some way—on the last day.

The congregation, like the state, has an earthly sanction (“Whatever you bind on earth…”). Where the state has the power of the sword, the church has the power of the keys. It its severest form, this means the state can take a life, while the church can excommunicate a person. The elder cannot excommunicate a person; instead, he must appeal to the church to make use of its authority to excommunicate a person. And the church, if it’s properly submissive, will obey.

5. The gathered assembly:  Congregationalists also tie authority and the assembled people together. There is a geographic “boundary” of sorts to Christ’s kingdom. It’s the gathered people of Christ. The gathering is where the citizens of his kingdom “go public” in their corporate life together. This is the two or three gathered together in Christ’s name (Matt. 18:19-20; cf. 28:19). It is also where the keys are responsibly employed. For examples of this playing out, see 1 Cor. 5:4-5 and 11:18, 20, and 33. The idea of an extra-local assembly (like a regional presbytery) exercising binding authority over Christ’s eschatological assembly would present the picture of a dismembered body.

Church power is a ordinance of Christ, and to give that power to an extra-local body is to deny his ordinance. Also, as Hunter has put it, placing authority in an extra-local body bifurcates ruling and shepherding.

6. Secret congregationalists: Everybody, including Kevin, is secretly a congregationalist! They just call it “voting with their feet.” We who are open congregationalists simply think that Jesus gave the congregation the ability (and responsibility!) to get rid of a heretically preaching pastor without actually leaving the church to him.

7. Authority and responsibility: Congregationalism, in the final analysis, is not about voting on carpet colors and ornery members lording it over the pastors. That’s a caricature and an abuse of congregationalism, in the same way there are abuses of any system. Congregationalism instead is (i) an intermittent veto power for those occasions when the elders go off the rails, and (ii) the authority which is commensurate with the responsibility we in a congregation have over one another’s profession of faith. Take away authority and you take away, to some measure, the responsibility.

I don’t mean these remarks as a full-on explanation or defense of congregationalism, but simply an attempt to give a more careful treatment to the matter of authority.

By:
Jonathan Leeman

Jonathan (@JonathanLeeman) edits the 9Marks series of books as well as the 9Marks Journal. He is also the author of several books on the church. Since his call to ministry, Jonathan has earned a master of divinity from Southern Seminary and a Ph.D. in Ecclesiology from the University of Wales. He lives with his wife and four daughters in Cheverly, Maryland, where he is an elder at Cheverly Baptist Church.

9Marks articles are made possible by readers like you. Donate Today.