ORDER
(4th in a series)
By Elder Mark Green
Frequently the discussion of “church sovereignty” comes up among our people, and how this subject is viewed has a direct influence on good order in the church. A sovereign is a king, and so “sovereignty” means kingship. To exercise sovereignty means to rule within the bounds of a kingdom. The church is a kingdom, but nothing could be clearer than that members of the church are not sovereigns, nor is the church as a body a sovereign. Christ is our sovereign. “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church” (Eph. 1.22). “And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence” (Col. 1.18). We are His servants. He rules and reigns in the church. We have no license whatsoever to do what we wish, but “in all things” Christ is to have the preeminence; in all things He is to be obeyed. If we ask the question, “Are local churches sovereign?” we can easily see that such an idea is directly contrary to Scripture.
If we asked the right question, however, we would be more likely to get the right answer. “Can one church act for another church?” The answer clearly is “no.” Each church must act for itself. No sister church can presume to take over the affairs of another church. To do so would be highly irregular and a direct violation of good order. Even the apostle Paul, when he was rebuking the Corinthians for the lack of discipline in the case of incestuous fornication, directed them to carry out the discipline. “In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor. 5.4-5). He did not seek to carry out the disciplinary action himself, but instructed them to do it “when ye are gathered together.” As a church, they were to “purge out the old leaven.” Paul did not presume to act where only the church, as a body, could act.
While one church cannot act for another, we should not think that sister churches have no voice of any sort in our affairs. They cannot act for us, but they do have and ought to have influence upon us. If this were not true, why would we say in our church covenants that we are to “watch over one another for good” in our local congregations? We are to seek to influence one another in a positive manner in our churches, to “provoke” or call forth one another to good works. If this is true among individuals with a common bond in a local congregation, why not among churches of like faith and order? Do we not all wish to do what is right, and are we not all thankful for good counsel?
To illustrate this, let me parallel the relationship between my household and that of my natural brother. We both bear the same surname and therefore the actions of both our families reflect either credit or shame upon that name. While he has no authority to act within my household, if I or someone in my home were to misbehave in a scandalous manner, my brother certainly would have the right and the duty to speak to us about it, since he is bound to us by the ties of nature. Similarly, sister churches are bound together by a common name – the name of our Husband. Anything that one church does affects her sister churches, either directly or indirectly. So, to say that sister churches have no say in our affairs would be totally unreasonable. We have the right of influence, but not of action. Thus, we can occupy “seats of counsel” with our sister churches, but we are not able to vote in their conferences. Why would any honest church object if a brother of like faith and order, seeing something amiss in their affairs, were to call it to their attention? If we truly wish to do that which is right, we will appreciate the admonition.
As in most matters, there are extremes on both sides of this issue. Some, presuming too much, have sought to give mandates and decrees to sister churches, which is wrong. Others, allowing too little, have sought to exclude all influence from sister churches in their affairs. In this latter scenario, it is commonly the case that such churches wander into some sort of error from which good counsel might have saved them. From The Christian Pathway.