June 5, 2008

The Restoration of the City or Locality Church and Apostolic Leadership

This is the seventh post in a chain blog on the restoration of the New Testament model of the city church. Alan Knox kicked off the chain blog with The Assembling of the Church: City Church - A Chain Blog.

I've had a vision for the restoration of city or locality churches and apostolic leadership since 1985. I caught the vision a few months after I was gloriously saved and attending an independent Pentecostal church which taught about the restoration of city churches and apostolic leadership. I heard various pastors and itinerant ministers describe New Testament church government in terms of five-fold ministry. Some of those teachings stuck with for over twenty years through both encouraging and disillusioning church experiences.

I must admit that at one point I developed an arrogant attitude while I thought that churches which rejected five-fold ministry would quickly fall apart while fellowships that governed themselves according to five-fold ministry would take over the world-wide church. For example, I graduated an Assemblies of God (AG) Bible college in 1989 while I rejected a part-time AG ministry position and thought that God would never again start a revival in an AG church. Then, I spent a few years with a church governed by five-fold ministry while I had some encouragement and also experienced disillusionment. The kickers came in 1995 when the Brownsville Revival started in an AG church and in 1996 when my home town State College Assembly of God in Pennsylvania began to show signs of renewal. God strongly spoke to me about these events. I needed to repent of my view that God wouldn't pour out revival in churches with a less than perfect New Testament model of church government. And I went as far as getting ministry credentials with the AG for a few years.

Now I'll back up and explain what five-fold ministry means to readers who never or barely heard of five-fold ministry. It's based on various passages including Ephesians 4:11-13, "The gifts he gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of Christ."

Many proponents of five-fold ministry say that the above passage teaches about five types of ministry: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. On the other hand, many interpretors say Ephesians 4:11-13 teaches about four types of ministry because "some pastors and teachers" refers to one type of ministry, a pastor-teacher. And three of the four types of ministries are listed in 1 Corinthians 12:28. I lean toward seeing four types of ministry in Ephesians 4:11-13 and call it four-fold ministry.

Ephesians 4:11-13 teaches that apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastor-teachers prepare and bring unity to the body of Christ. There's little controversy about the roles of evangelists and pastor-teachers in most evangelical churches, but great controversy surrounds claims of modern day apostles and prophets.

Some evangelicals such as evangelical Methodists attend churches with an episcopal government while episcopal governments assume an unbroken apostolic succession going back to the New Testament church. In this model, episcopal bishops are supposed apostolic leaders.

On the other hand, most evangelicals reject the legitimacy of unbroken apostolic succession. I see this rejection broken down into two categories: one, apostolic government ceased with the New Testament apostles; two, apostolic succession miserably backslid while God is restoring genuine apostolic leadership in the church.

I never saw an argument which opposed the idea that the Early Church unanimously accepted apostolic succession. And the NT apostles included more than Paul and those who witnessed the ministry of Christ. For example, Acts 14:14 and 1 Corinthians 9:1-6 teach that Barnabas was an apostle. And 1 Thessalonians 1:1, 2:6 teaches that Silas and Timothy along with Paul had apostolic authority in Thessalonica. And Titus 1:5 describes Titus carrying out apostolic ministry in Crete. And Romans 16:7 implies that Andronicus and Junias were outstanding apostles or outstanding companions of apostles.

The Early Church eventually developed a three-tier government with bishops, presbyters/elders, and deacons. And the bishops were the supposed successors of the original apostles while the presbyters were the second level of church government. However, the New Testament teaches that elders/presbyters are also bishops/elders per Acts 20:25-28 and Titus 1:5-7. So the distinction between elders/presbyters and bishops/elders is a church tradition apart from the Bible.

Here I'll briefly describe my interpretation of NT church governmental tiers. The NT church described a four-tier government: 1) apostles, 2) elders/bishops, 3) deacons, 4) the congregation. For example, Acts 6:1-6 says that the apostles appointed deacons who were selected by the congregation. And Acts 15:22 says that the apostles and elders with the consent of the whole congregation made a church government decision. Likewise, Acts 6:1-6 teaches that apostles and deacons and the congregation are different levels of government while Acts 15:22 teaches that apostles and elders and the congregation are different levels of government. And this adds up to the four-tier church government listed above.

The four-tier government integrates with the four-fold ministry. For example, a prophet could be an elder or an apostle. In the case of Silas, Acts 15:32 says that Silas was a prophet while 1 Thessalonians 1:1, 2:6 implies that Silas also became an apostle. And I suppose that the four-fold ministries of evangelist and pastor-teacher could be at the level of elder or apostle.

I briefly outlined the NT teachings about four-fold ministry and four-tier government to set a foundation to see basic structures in the city church. And many Christians look forward to the restoration of the city or locality church before the Lord returns.

I see controversy in any attempt apply NT city church government to the contemporary church. For example, I reject unbroken apostolic succession while I understand that many of my brothers and sisters in the Lord believe in unbroken apostolic succession. On the other hand, while I reject that church tradition, I also acknowledge that a bishop selected according to the tradition of unbroken apostolic succession could also be a genuine apostle.

I heard many people say that the apostleship of Barnabas, Silas, Timothy, and Titus are merely examples of people called to missions. I don't see that interpretation flowing from the Bible. These apostles were Ephesians 4 apostles while Ephesians 4 apostles didn't cease after the death of Paul and those who witnessed the ministry of Jesus Christ.

Now, we'll answer the following question. Who is a contemporary apostle? First, apostles are called by God to be apostles (1 Corinthians 12:28 and many other verses). Second, apostles meet the Pauline requirements for elders/overseers (1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9, 1 Peter 5:1, 2 John 1, 3 John 1). Third, apostles are leaders of elders (Titus 1:5, 1 Peter 5:1, and many other verses).

Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 also wrote that apostles are marked by miracles. And James 5:14-15 says that elders minister healing to the sick. And a modern day restoration of biblical miracles and healings should be part of the restoration of apostolic ministry and the city church.

Some ministerial fellowships recognize apostles (apart from the claim of unbroken apostolic succession) who oversees various pastors and ministry leaders. And this represents a small fraction of the church. But there are many other leaders of pastors and ministry leaders in various denominations using various structures of church government which do not use the title "apostle". Many of these leaders of pastors are apostles regardless of official title.

All of these modern day apostles need to reach across doctrinal and cultural lines while learning to work together in unity. For example, Ephesians 4:11-13 says that apostles and other four-fold ministers equip the saints and bring unity to the body of Christ. Likewise, unity in the body of Christ should be a primary goal of all modern day apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors.

Both Paul and John the Revelator wrote to seven city churches. And modern day congregations in the same city or locality need to work together in unity. The apostles and elders in each locality need to look at the bigger goal of building up the church and reaching the lost in their locality instead only building their congregation with little concern for the growth of the locality church.

Does this mean that one day there will be only one senior apostle or senior elder per locality? God help us if locality churches focus on a senior apostle or elder (Mark 9:45-48, 10:35-45). Apostles in Acts typically ministered in teams. For example, an apostle such as Barnabas may switch back and forth from the roles of senior ministry leader and associate ministry leader. And little if any fanfare went to the ranking of the apostles. And Paul details qualifications for elders/overseers while he never describes the selection of a senior elder/overseer.

The restoration of locality churches will coincide with the rise of apostolic leaders working in unity. And this restoration of unity will prepare the body of Christ and help lead many more people to Christ (John 17:20-21, Ephesians 4:11-13).

I thank the late John Carr for his clear and passionate preaching and writing about the restoration of the city church and apostolic ministry.

Copyright © 2008 James Edward Goetz

New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Links and Chain Blog Guidelines

Chain blog rules:

1. If you would like to write the next blog post (link) in this chain, leave a comment stating that you would like to do so. If someone else has already requested to write the next link, then please wait for that blog post and leave a comment there requesting to write the following link.
2. Feel free to leave comments here and discuss items in this blog post without taking part in the actual “chain”. Your comments and discussion are very important in this chain blog.
3) When you write a link in this chain, please reply in the comments of all previous links to let everyone know that your link is ready. Also, please try to keep an updated list of links in the chain at the bottom of your post, and please include these rules at the bottom of your post.

1. Alan Knox, The Assembling of the Church: City Church - A Chain Blog
2. Charlie Wallace, City Church: Meeting
3. David Rogers, Roadblocks on the Path to City Church
4. Steve Sensenig, The Major Roadblock to a City Church
5. Paul Grabill, The Resurrection of the City Church: Who Will Move the Stone?
6. Jon Amos, A City Church Thought Experiment
7. James Goetz, The Restoration of the City or Locality Church and Apostolic Leadership
8. Alan Knox, The Assembling of the Church: Unity and the Church in a City


jon said...

Thanks for this post, James. I was starting to worry that I'd killed the chain!

Btw, are you familiar with Joseph Mattera's book, Ruling in the Gates? I haven't gotten it yet, but it's on my to-read list and I've heard good things.

Alan Knox said...


Thanks for the post! I'm also glad that this chain blog is continuing.

I appreciate your perspective on city church leadership. I agree that the work of apostles and elders/bishops is very important. There's one question that I can't seem to answer though: If the work of apostles and/or elders/bishops is so important to the unity of the church, why does neither Paul, nor Peter, nor James refer their readers to either apostolic or elder leadership? Instead, it seems that the authors of Scripture tell all of the readers to seek unity. Am I missing something?


James Goetz said...


This is the first time that I heard about Mattera's book, and the first chapter looks good to me.


Paul refers readers (or illiterate hearers) per Ephesians 4:11-13 to be built up by leaders including apostles and pastors while that preparation should bring unity to the saints. And 1 Peter 5:5 refers hearers to the submission of elders. And on a tangent, James 5:14 refers sick hearers to call for the ministry of elders. And Jeremiah 3:15 says that the Lord will give His people shepherds after the Lord's heart.

I agree that everybody in the body of Christ needs to do their part for unity regardless of leadership. Yet God's primary model is for godly leaders to lead God's people. And James 3:1 says that teachers have a stricter judgment compared to others. And I believe that one of the reasons that teachers (such as pastors per Ephesians 4:11-13 and overseers per 1 Timothy 3:1-3) get a stricter judgment is that such leaders tend to influence more people in the body of Christ compared to non-leaders.

Each believers obedience to God is important, but I felt the need to put together a New Testament view of church leadership while examining the restoration of the city church.

Alan, I hope I addressed your question.:)

And since your an adjunct professor of Greek who likes to focus on ecclesiology, I'm interested in your view. Do you think that I kept the context of all of the Bible references in my post? I'm not claiming that I put together an exegetical paper, but I want to make sure that I kept to the context of the passages that I referenced.

Alan Knox said...


Thanks for the further explanation. Instead of answering your question about context, I'd like to step through my explanation of the same passages. Perhaps my explanation will help explain my question.

Eph. 4:11 lists four types of gifted individuals as examples. In fact, all gifted individuals are necessary for equipping the church and for the work of service. As in 1 Cor 12, these four giftings are important, but no more important than others. In fact, when we see them as more important, we're missing the fact that what seems less important to us is actually given more honor and made more important by God (1 Cor 12:22-25) especially in developing unity. So, Paul didn't write Eph 4:11 in order to specify the types of gifted leaders necessary, but as examples. If these four types of gifted individuals are more important for equipping the church, it would be interesting to ask Paul (and God, I suppose) why he only explained that to one church, and why he didn't explain that to the Corinthians, who were having a hard time keeping things straight. I would have been easier for Paul to simply tell the Corinthians to follow their leaders.

James 5:14 instructs those who are sick to call the elders to pray for them. Instead of a ministry of leadership, this seems (at least to me) to reflect more on the maturity of the elders. Similarly, James 3:1 does say that teachers will have a stricter judgment. But, notice there is no connection in the text between the teachers of 3:1 and the elders of 5:14. (As a side note, Hebrew 6 also says that everyone should be teachers. Perhaps this "strict judgment" is not meant to warn people against teaching, but to be careful what they teach.)

Jeremiah 3:15 does say that God will provide shepherds for his people, and I think that pastoring is very important. The identification and work of these shepherds become a little less clear when the teaching about the new covenant and the indwelling Spirit of God is included from Jeremiah 31. Jeremiah 31:34 even says that we will no longer teach one another.

I believe that leaders are very important - primarily as examples to the people. We should follow those who closely follow the work of God in their own lives, and this will certainly include unity.

My concern, however, is not with leaders. My concern is that even in the passages that you mention, these leaders are not connected specifically with guiding and directing the "city church". As I mentioned previously, when writing to the church that needed help the most - the church in Corinth - Paul did not point to leaders, but he pointed to the responsibility of each believer to follow the Spirit of God and build up the church (which would include unity).

In fact, when writing to the church in Corinth, Paul actually downplays the role of himself and others who the believers in Corinth were following. I believe there was a church of Corinth, and it probably had several sub-groups that were also churches, but I don't see Paul instructing these people to look for guidance and direction from either their apostolic or their elder leadership.

I hope this better explains where I'm coming from.


Alan Knox said...

I'd like to write the next post in the city church chain, unless someone else is already writing it.


James Goetz said...

Thanks, Alan. I see more about your point of view while I struggle with some of your premises.

I see the church in Corinth as an example of a city church helped by the ministry of apostles. Here are some examples.
1) Paul began his letters by mentioning his office of apostle
2) Paul rebuked the Corinthian church perhaps more than any other city church
3) I Corinthians 4:1-13 appeals to the importance of apostleship
4) I Corinthians 9:1-18 focuses of the rights of an apostles
5) I Corinthians 12 is complex in that it teaches that everybody in the body of Christ is important while 1 Corinthians 12:28 lists a first, second, and third hierarchy
6) II Corinthians mentions the leader Titus nine times
7) II Corinthians 11-12 spends a lot of time justifying genuine apostolic ministry

And concerning Ephesians, Paul wrote Ephesians with a purpose of intracity circulation. (Of course, God intended worldwide circulation for all New Testament letters.) And Ephesians 2:20 describes apostles and prophets as foundations with Jesus as the chief cornerstone.

I see Paul referring the Corinthian church to apostolic leadership.

jon said...

James, here's an old post of mine on apostolic succession and mission:


I'd love to hear any thoughts you might have in response.

James Goetz said...

Jon, here are some comments about your post from November 11, 2002.

First of all, the term "Apostolic Succession" implies an unbroken succession of apostolic bishops going back to the New Testament (NT) apostles. And this excludes contemporary apostles apart from apostolic succession. So I'll focus on the idea of apostolic ministry in relationship to city churches.

And I'll repeat from my original post that the NT term "bishop" (related to episcopal) describes elders/presbyters. Likewise, distinguishing bishops from presbyters is a post-biblical church tradition.

Nonetheless, I hope that my original post and follow up comments explain that the NT teaches about apostolic government continuing past Paul and the apostles who witnessed the ministry of Jesus Christ. For example, NT apostles mentored new apostles.

I also commented on Paul Grabill's post, the fifth link in this chain blog, that the NT doesn't teach that city churches raised up resident apostles. The NT apostles typically ministered to multiple cities while the permanent resident leaders of NT city churches were elders/bishops.

So where does that leave us with the restoration of city churches and apostolic government? I suppose that the city church movement will eventually reach a point where city churches are more important than denominations. And when this point is reached, denominations as we know them will cease to exist.

When denominations as we know them will cease to exist, then I believe that many city churches will clearly recognize the government of apostles. On one hand, I would never push this view to evangelicals who believe that this is wrong while I believe that I should put it out on the table.

One key criteria for an apostle is that the apostle ministers to church/ministry leaders in multiple cities. This type of ministry can include ministerial fellowship/denominational officials. And some of these officials could primarily be a pastor of a church while they also minister to church/ministry leaders in other cities.

If my above criteria is accurate, then any given city or locality could have one or more resident pastor who is also an apostle while some cities could have no resident apostles. And I believe that the Early Church made a mistake when it eventually appointed one primary apostolic bishop per city church or regional church. The Bible didn't mandate that model while that model didn't work.

Elders should be the resident governors of city churches while some of those elders may be apostles. And the ministry of apostolic councils should include the training of ministers, the management of missions, help with the succession of church/ministry leaders, and the correction or discipline of wayward leaders.

Alan Knox said...

I've posted link #8 in this chain blog in a post called "Unity and the Church in a City".


Carla said...

Great work.