The Adams

Chapter 3: The Scriptures

Chapter 3: Church Government

Since we began on the topic of bishops, it is only logical to take this area next. I was tempted to put this section first, as the particular doctrinal claim made by Grace Church is what truly started me on the path of examining the Scriptures and finding that their position did not stand up.

Grace Church says:

We teach the autonomy of the local church, free from any external authority or control, with the right of self-government and freedom from the interference of any hierarchy of individuals or organizations. (Titus 1:5)

But an examination of Titus 1:5 demonstrates exactly the opposite doctrine:

For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you
Titus 1:5, NKJV

This verse clearly says that Titus is to appoint elders in every city and to set in order the things that are lacking. Paul immediately then commands Titus to teach, giving him instruction on how to teach. Titus is not an Apostle, but was appointed by one to ordain presbyters, and to set things in order. His job is to oversee things until a new representative from Paul arrives (cf. Titus 3:12). From this, it is logical to conclude that they will take over where Titus has left off. This is the role of the bishop.

We saw earlier, as well, that Paul told Timothy to teach faithful men the doctrines that he had taught Timothy, so that they might pass these on. This is exactly the role of the Bishop, as noted in the previous chapter, citing Iranaeus of Lyon. But there is more to the Bishop's role. Let's listen to a disciple of John, the author of the 4th Gospel. After making it clear that the Bishop is the representative of Christ, he writes:

As therefore the Lord did nothing without the Father, being united to Him, neither by Himself nor by the apostles, so neither do ye anything without the bishop and presbyters. Neither endeavour that anything appear reasonable and proper to yourselves apart; but being come together into the same place, let there be one prayer, one supplication, one mind, one hope, in love and in joy undefiled. There is one Jesus Christ, than whom nothing is more excellent. Do ye therefore all run together as into one temple of God, as to one altar, as to one Jesus Christ, who came forth from one Father, and is with and has gone to one.

As therefore the Lord does nothing without the Father, for says He, "I can of mine own self do nothing," so do ye, neither presbyter, nor deacon, nor layman, do anything without the bishop. Nor let anything appear commendable to you which is destitute of his approval

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid. See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles.

This teaching comes from one who was taught by the Apostle John, and from a Church that was shepherded by Peter and Paul (see Appendix B, as noted).

We have, then, biblical statements of Apostolic authority being given, oversight being practiced and succession being established in the Scriptures, and then described by Ignatius and Iranaeus.

When confronted with this information, one of the elders of Grace Church responded:

What do you want to do? Bring back bishops? Nobody here will go for that!

It was quite clear from the ensuing conversation that, in the end, the Biblical witness didn't matter, since everyone had already made their minds up that Bishops were not necessary. I had this conversation with several other teachers at Grace Church and was always turned away with "well, we don't think the Bible requires that."

It was these conversations that first raised red flags about the biblical accuracy of teachings at Grace Church. It was clear to me, upon examination of the Scriptures, that the office of Bishop was biblically grounded, and was reflected in the earliest writings of the Church Fathers. One must conclude, then, that either Ignatius and Clement completely misunderstood John, or that they were accurate in their views and modern, free-church Bible interpreters are wrong.

It's very important to note that Protestants are not of one mind on this issue. Lutherans still have bishops, as do Anglicans and Methodists. All three claim Sola Scriptura, and have Bishops, yet they have very different conceptions of what a Bishop is and whether "Apostolic Succession" is an issue or not. On the other hand, Baptists, Bible Churches and others all reject the notion of Bishops.

It is important to note that Luther opposed the very idea of "free Churches", and I can find no evidence that it had been taught in the prior to the 15th Century. While there were disputes about the authority of bishops (for example, the major one between Rome and the other four ancient patriarchates), there is no evidence of any suggestion that bishops were optional.

The consistent witness of the Scriptures and the Church is to an Episcopal form of government. The Church is placed under the care of the Bishop (cf. 1 Tim 3:5; Titus 1:9; 1 Cor 12:28). It is the case that the specific roles of elders and bishops is not clearly delineated in the Scriptures, but we have already in the 1st century examples of how the Apostles' teaching on this was understood.

Chapter 2

The Adams
Suggestions/questions about this website: