BY STEPHEN J. CURROW

HE NEW TESTAMENT portrays a vibrant church. Starting in the upper room, the church developed into a diverse collection of believers throughout the Roman Empire. Great things took place almost daily. Yet underneath the excitement was a developing organizational structure that continues to facilitate ministry.

Church is described in both cosmic and earthly perspectives. The cosmic perspective incorporates all Christ's believers in a heavenly community.¹ The earthly perspective of the New Testament included at least nine clusters of churches,² 18 different locations,³ three of which met in somebody's house.⁴

The ideal church is prescribed in Ephesians. Paul integrated the ideas of "temple" and "body" into a theological statement that climaxes in the marriage between Christ and His bride, the church. The roles of several church officers are also prescribed. These officers were to develop ministry by building individuals in the corporate body of Christ. However, specific duties of these officers are not outlined.

The New Testament Church
Looking at perspectives of organization, we find that the following five characteristics summarize the biblical data:

1. Organism, Not Object. Objects are identifiable because of their unique components, structures, and reactions. Simple observation would enable an easy categorization of an object. However, the New Testament church is more than an object or organization. It is a living organism transforming the components, structures, and processes into a spirit-breathing life-transforming entity. The source of this life is not the components, structure, or process. It is the connection with the Godhead that breathes life into the object. Images such as the people of God and the body of Christ reinforce this life. Yet even the static object of a temple (Eph. 2 and 1 Peter 2), as used by Scripture, is described with the language of life.

2. Dynamic, Not Static. Churches are dynamic, destined to grow and develop. This is the purpose mandated by Jesus in the Great Commission. The evangelistic spread of Christianity beyond Jerusalem to the many cities throughout the empire, the emerging doctrine of the church, the appointment of officers, and the establishment of processes to deal with issues as they arose (such as the Jerusalem Council, Acts 15) all highlight this development.

For Reflection . . . Why do churches need to be interdependent, corporate, and not just congregational? The Seventh-day Adventist Church's two early attempts to decide on its structure led to a debate as to whether the church should be more corporate or congregational. What would the issues be if we attempted to push this debate now?

Dynamic organisms have life cycles. Church life cycles are best demonstrated in the congregational context by the Ephesian church, whose birth and infancy are described in Acts 18-20, its growth to maximum potential nurtured by Paul's letter to the Ephesians, and the challenges of maturation and aging addressed in Revelation 2.

3. Diverse, Not Identical. Churches have their own individual characteristics and challenges. Each congregation was the product of the Christian message's transforming its unique environment of cultural, geographical, political, and socioeconomic variables. The creative power of these churches as they interacted with and adapted to their environment enabled them to fashion, often with counsel from the apostles, their own structures, offices, and processes for congregational life and divine worship.

Some congregations adapted the first-century household structure for use as a church structure. Greek congregations adapted a word from their background for the office of elder that was different from the word Jewish congregations adapted from their background. John's letters to the seven churches (Rev. 2 and 3) highlighted the diversity of congregations in a similar geographic region and the way in which they interacted with their environment.

4. Interdependent, Not Independent. Just as churches are diverse, so are the individual members who comprise each church. These independent Christians choose to connect together interdependently to achieve more than what any member could do on their own. The body image suggests that the Spirit gives life to individuals so that they can work together in a dynamic and diverse way. Ligaments hold the body together; no one can claim that they do not belong, and no one can be told that they are not needed. Everyone has their interdependent part to play in the life and mission of the church.

5. Corporate, Not Congregational. Like the interdependence of individual church members in the congregation, congregations are also mutually interdependent, creating the corporate church. The New Testament affirms both the corporate and the congregational perspectives, portraying churches ministering in both specific locations and regionally in a corporate way. Both types have the responsibility to initiate, collaborate, and cooperate. The offering for the saints in Jerusalem, who were undergoing hardship; the church in Antioch's support for Paul and Barnabas's missionary visits; and the corporate recognition and support of various apostles' ministry demonstrate corporate structure.⁵

A synthesis of the New Testament's data presents an emerging doctrine of the church, but does not specify or define the blueprint for church structure. It provides a number of case studies, not a definitive model for identical reproduction. Organization is implied in Scripture, but the form is clarified only in historical accounts beyond Scripture.

Implications for Today
Seventh-day Adventist practice needs to be firmly grounded in Seventh-day Adventist belief. Church structures need to emanate from the doctrine of the church rather than being imposed and then justified by proof texts.

Historically, Seventh-day Adventists have addressed corporate church structure on two occasions. Both discussions, one at the commencement of our organization in 1860, the other at the time of reorganization in 1901, have centered on practical and pragmatic concerns, not theological foundations. In the 1901 discussion between Elders Daniells and Jones, Daniells was presenting the mission-based corporate position, which deemphasized the local congregation, while Jones presented the Christ-centered congregational position, which deemphasized the sociological aspects of church, trying to keep it just as a theological entity in an ideal world. Both positions used a proof-text approach to Scripture, ignoring each other's passages.⁶

As Seventh-day Adventist church-structure, both corporate and congregational, continues to be discussed, decisions need to be informed by biblical prescriptions. To implement these prescriptions, Seventh-day Adventists need to encourage the church itself to be a living, dynamic, diverse, and interdependent organism in both the congregational and corporate settings. The extremes of congregationalism and hierarchicalism need to be avoided. In whatever context or stage of the life cycle, the church in both its congregational and corporate aspects needs to perceive its God-given identity and life, focus on its divinely mandated mission, encourage its contextual diversity, and choose to work interdependently. Such a church would be filled with vitality, enabling the organism to adapt its methods and structures to maximize its mission and ministry in local contexts while collaborating corporately to fulfil the great global commission.

_________________________
¹ See, for instance, Matt. 16:18, 19; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 4:26, 27; and Heb. 12:27.
² Such as the churches in 2 Cor. 11:28, the churches of Antioch and Jerusalem in Acts 15, and the churches in the province of Asia in 1 Cor. 16:19 and Rev. 1:4.
³ Examples are Antioch in Acts 11:26; 13:1; 15:22; the house church of Apphia and Archippus in Philemon 1:2; and Caesarea in Acts 18:22.
⁴ The house churches of Apphia and Archippus (Philemon 1:2), Nymphas (Col. 4:15), and Priscilla and Aquila (Rom. 16:3-5).
⁵ For instance, the offering for the saints in Jerusalem (1 Cor. 16:1-4) and the church in Antioch's support for Paul's ministry (Acts 13).
⁶ For this theological evaluation and the history of the reorganization in 1901, see Barry D. Oliver, SDA Organizational Structure: Past, Present, and Future (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 1989), especially pp. 5 and 244.

_________________________
Stephen J. Currow, D.Min., is a senior lecturer in ministry and mission at Avondale College.