An Author Interview from Books At a Glance
Greetings, I’m Fred Zaspel, and welcome to another Author Interview here at Books At a Glance.
I have mentioned before my appreciation for the new Short Studies in Systematic Theology series from Crossway, and today we talk to Dr. Gregg Allison about his contribution to that series – The Church: An Introduction.
Gregg, welcome, and congratulations on a good little book!
Allison:
Thanks, Fred. It’s always a pleasure to be on your program! I always look forward to being here.
Zaspel:
Tell us what you hope to accomplish with your book. And what do you mean by “mere ecclesiology” and “more ecclesiology”? Are you trying to be all things to all men?
Allison:
The basic idea for the books in the series would be introductory, short works. They treat the major doctrinal areas like the trinity, christology and in my case, the church. These would not be profound, deep, or doctrinally, super developed. It is primarily for pastors who have not had any seminary education. And certainly, for lay people who want to become more informed about these different doctrines. The goals of my book are to introduce people to the basic concepts of the church. I use this framework, mere ecclesiology, and more ecclesiology.
Mere ecclesiology, I refer to the matters of the church. These are the six topics I address: identity, leadership, government, ordinances, ministries, and future hope. It would be these areas of the church that the vast majority of churches have agreed upon over the course of the last 2,000 years. This would be what we hold in common.
More ecclesiology would be looking at the differences between different churches and denominations. One example, we all agree that baptism is one of the ordinances or sacraments of the church. Some churches baptize only those who provide a credible profession of faith in Jesus. Other churches baptize infants. Even though we agree on the ordinance of baptism, we practice it differently.
Zaspel:
It is helpful to show what we all agree on.
Allison:
Yes, we are in a divided country. Even local churches are often divided. I wanted to emphasize mere ecclesiology. There are a lot of matters we agree on and can unite under, rather than divide. Then we look at the honest differences. We do not want to cover those up. I hold strongly to credobaptism, but I am not looking at our pedobaptist brothers and looking down on them. I strongly disagree but accept that there is also diversity.
Zaspel:
So, then what is a “church”? Talk to us about the various ways that question has been answered, and then maybe you could narrow it to the essentials that make a church a church.
Allison:
The church has been defined and described in different ways over the course of the centuries. The early church self identified as one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. These words mean unified, pure, universal in making disciples, and grounded on the word and scripture. Then the Roman Catholic church began to stretch the definitions of those four adjectives. The reformers came along and established these four identity markers but in a protestant way. There is a way to tell the difference between the false and true church. In the 16th century with the new protestant churches, they articulated two or three marks of the true church. Preaching the word of God, and ministering baptism and the Lord’s supper. Some added a third mark, exercising church discipline. The protestant churches defined themselves as not only one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church but also according to these three other marks. Different denominations flow out of those reformation-oriented churches.
Zaspel:
This may narrow our perspective a bit, but what marks the church’s official beginning? How does the new covenant church relate to Old Testament Israel? Can Old Testament Israel be properly called “the church”?
Allison:
I identify the beginning of the church as the day of Pentecost. I believe there is one people of God. All those before Christ and we who are now post Christ. We in the New Covenant church, begin from the day of Pentecost. We are the body of Christ and the temple of the Holy Spirit. Those beautiful scriptural descriptions of the new church can only apply to the new covenant church. We do relate to the people of the Old Covenant because we are apart of the same people of God. We are saved by faith in the promises of God, his provision of salvation. There is a commonality in terms of salvation and certain experiences of salvation. The church in my estimation began on the day of Pentecost. The Holy Spirit was poured out by the Father and the Son. The Old Covenant was gone and instituted a new covenant relationship with God. What emerged from that was the church.
Zaspel:
You argued in terms of some historical redemptive events that had to take place first. I recall you dealt with Pentecost, the ascension, the headship of Christ, the pouring out the Spirit, the death of Christ, and the pouring of the salvation of the church.
Allison:
We could not be the body of Christ until the incarnate Son accomplished His work of salvation. He did this by dying on the cross, raising from the dead, and ascending to the Father who exalted him as cosmic head over all things. He gave Him to the church which is his body. We cannot be the body of Christ until those events take place. We cannot be the temple of the Holy Spirit until the day of Pentecost. The Spirit poured out his new covenant reality to all believers. We have spiritual gifts which give each person a unique experience in the church. Certain historical events had to take place before the church could come into existence.
Zaspel:
Sketch out for us the varieties of church government in differing church bodies today, and then explain what we find in the New Testament itself.
Allison:
Historically, the church has been governed in three primary ways. There is the episcopal polity, the ultimate authority would reside in the bishop. The Presbyterian polity, Presbyterianism would be elders or pastors, both teaching and leading. They are representatives of the members of the church. They represent the church both in the local church sessions as well as authoritative government above the church level. Congregationalism places the authority of the church in the hands of the members of the church. Pastors or elders in congregationalism still have their proper authority and responsibility. If you have deacons, they will carry out their serving. The congregational members have the responsibility for voting on budget, acceptance of elders, members, and church discipline.
All three governing structures claim biblical warrant. All three specifically look at Acts 15, which is the Jerusalem council. They will emphasize various aspects in the narrative to underscore their polity. As a Baptist, I am convinced of Congregationalism. Even in Acts 15, though the Apostles convened at the Jerusalem council, they were present with the elders and members of the Church. There were decisions made, and practices enacted with the approval of the apostles, elders, and members. We see the church in Antioch in Acts 13 sending out missionaries. We see all the letters of the New Testament, not just to the leaders of the church, but to all the members of the church. There is an assumption we have in these letters that each local church has all the divinely provided resources among the leaders and members to carry out the mission and grow and multiply as a church. I also recognize that the Episcopal and Presbyterian systems appeal to Scripture. I believe a stronger case can be made for congregationalism.
Zaspel:
Talk to us about the two offices of the church mentioned in the New Testament, the various titles given to designate them, and their core responsibilities.
Allison:
One would be the office of pastor or elder. We could also call this qualified man in this office a bishop or overseer. There are various words in the New Testament used to name this office. They are interchangeable terms. This office is reserved for qualified men reaching the requirements of 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9. The primary responsibilities are teaching and communicating biblical sound theology. They lead at the highest level of human authority, always under the Lordship of Jesus Christ. They are to be praying especially for the sick according to James 5:13-16. They are to shepherd the church, providing a Christ-like model. Nourish, protect, guide, and lead the church. The second office would be the deacon and deaconesses. I take this office to be qualified men and women. They are leading servants in the church. All members are expected to serve, but then leading servants we would call deacons and deaconesses. They would be responsible for leading all non-elder ministries in the church. My wife is the deaconess of the women’s ministry. She does not have pastoral responsibility, but she is the one who gives oversite to this non-elder level ministry.
Zaspel:
What is a church “ordinance” or “sacrament,”? and what is the significance of these terms? Which do you prefer and why?
Allison:
Protestants hold to two ordinances. Baptism and the Lord’s supper. We Baptists usually use the term ordinance because we take these rites or celebrations as having been ordained by Christ Himself. There were only two rites that were ordained by Jesus. Baptism in Matthew 28:19 and Matthew 26:26-29, Jesus ordained the Lord’s supper. Other protestant brothers and sisters as well as Catholic and Eastern Orthodox will use the term sacrament. This term has a long history. Augustine defined a sacrament as, “a tangible and visible sign of an invisible yet real grace.” Think of water in association with baptism. Think of bread and wine in association with the Lord’s supper. These means of grace communicate the presence and nourishment of Christ. They communicate God’s mercy and benefits. I prefer ordinances. Sacraments have a lot of good and bad baggage. The word ordinance is cleaner and emphasizes the fact that it was Jesus who gave these ordinances to the church.
Zaspel:
What is the church’s assigned task, its mission, or reason for being?
Allison:
There are three common areas. Worship, in the church’s ministry, oriented toward God. Discipleship or growth, edification which would be the church’s ministry to its members. Evangelism or missions, which would be the church’s ministry towards outsiders not yet part of the church. This would be a common way of describing the task or purpose of the church. Most churches over the course of the last 2,000 years agree that these are the purposes of the church.
Zaspel:
How is the question of complementarianism important for the church?
Allison:
It is very important because it gives biblical instruction about who should lead the church. Specifically, who should be the elders of the church? Complementarianism affirms that only qualified men should be the elders of the church. This is found particularly in 1 Timothy 2:12-15, where Paul talks about prohibiting women from teaching and exercising authority over the men in the church. Then he grounds his instructions about women not teaching and exercising authority, in the creation order, as well as Eve’s fall into sin because of deception. Following this passage in Scripture men should be leading the church.
The question that emerges from Paul’s words is that he says, “I don’t permit a woman to teach or exercise authority.” Paul rightly prompts us to ask two questions. From whom should women be learning in the church and to whom should women be submissive in the church. If we keep reading Paul’s letter, we find it in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, women need to be submissive to elders, who bear the requirements to teach and to lead. This is true of not only women but all non-elder men. Women are called to engage in non-elder level ministries of the church. Women are not allowed to be pastors carrying out those elder-level responsibilities.
Zaspel:
Before we let you go, give us a brief overview of your book so our listeners can know what to expect.
Allison:
I begin by talking about the triune God in the church. I ground the existence, nature, marks, mystery, and identity of the Christ in the Church. The Church is the people of God, the body of Christ, the temple of the Holy Spirit. I believe ecclesiology, the doctrine of the church, just like all other doctrines should be grounded in God who is triune. I look at key passages about the church in Scripture. I build a biblical case for what the church is and what it is to do. In part two I look at mere ecclesiology and more ecclesiology. I apply it in this framework in six areas. The identity, leadership, government, ordinances, ministries, and the future hope of the church.
Zaspel:
Maybe one more quick question, one that compares this book with your previous book, Sojourners and Strangers. In Sojourners you have a more in-depth treatment of the doctrine of the church, of course.
Allison:
This current book, The Church: An Introduction, is much more basic. It does not develop any of the topics in depth like I do in Sojourners and Strangers. So that I did not bore myself in writing a second book on the church and to make a clean distinction between Sojourners and Strangers and this current book I use this framework of mere and more ecclesiology. I argue my position more in this book. I focus on two areas, complementarianism, and the idea of spiritual gifts. I make observations on how churches differ in these two areas. I present a spectrum of complementarian and continuationism. I hope that will be helpful for people to think through.
Zaspel:
We are talking to Dr. Gregg Allison about his new book, The Church: An Introduction. I love this Short Studies in Systematic Theology series from Crossway, and this book on the doctrine of the church continues the quality of work that marks the entire series.
Gregg, thanks much for your good work and for talking to us today.
Allison:
Thanks, Fred. Your questions are excellent, and I always enjoy being apart of your show.
