One Church, Many Congregations
Doug Banister. All Rights Reserved.
What is God doing through His Church?
We spent a full year crafting a mission statement for our church. Writing a mission statement for the church is a challenging task because the bible is filled with many images, statements, and descriptions describing the church and why she exists. Not surprisingly, good Christians disagree on exactly what God is doing on earth through his church.
One answer everyone agrees on is this: God is revealing himself to the world through the church. The church displays God’s character to a world that desperately needs to know him. The church reveals the image of God to the world. The early Christians faced a unique challenge in fulfilling this mission.
First of all, the early Christians, most of whom were Jewish, were fiercely monotheistic.1 Secondly, the early Christians believed that this God had revealed himself through his son Jesus Christ. They believed that Jesus, as the son of God, was also divine and worthy of worship.2 Finally, the early Christians had experienced the Holy Spirit as God at work in their midst. They believed that the Spirit, like the Father and the Son, was both a person and divine.3 The church eventually brought together these three strands in the doctrine of the Trinity. One of the reasons it took so long to find the language to describe their God is because the God revealed to them was both a unity and a diversity.
God is one. God is three.
God is unity. God is diversity.
How do you explain such a mystery?
Modeling the Mystery
As if finding language to describe the triune God were not hard enough, the early church had an even tougher job on their hands. She had to find a way to live that modeled the God of unity and diversity to the watching world.
Jesus, in his high-priestly prayer for the church, prays: “I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”4
Jesus is praying for the church. The church is to be one. When the world sees us as one, the world sees God. Yet the oneness Christ describes is a oneness with diversity. The Trinity is one essence, but includes three diverse persons.
The apostle Paul also relates the church’s unity to the trinity in his letter to the Ephesians: “There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all, and through all and in all.”5 There is one body; one church. Yet in our oneness we reveal a triune God: one Spirit, one Lord and one God and Father of all.
Theologian Miroslav Volf, in a ground-breaking book exploring the relationship between the trinity and the church, reports that among biblical scholars the conviction that the church should somehow reflect the trinity is “an almost self-evident proposition.”6 He later argues that this conviction should have a practical impact on the life of the church. “The church reflects…the triune God” Professor Volf writes. “Its institutions should thus correspond to the Trinity as well.”7
We live in a community with over 600 different congregations. The believers who make up those congregations are to live together in a manner that reveals the mystery of the trinity to our neighbors. We are to live as one church.
We are also to embrace the rich diversity of our many congregations. How should we relate to one another in a way that visibly expresses our unity
while celebrating our diversity? Before we answer this question, let’s consider how the church has answered it throughout history.
The Early Church Period
33-100 AD
The early church embraced the tension between unity and diversity with the city church model. The New Testament writers do occasionally refer to the church universal, a mystical term describing all believers everywhere throughout all ages.8 They use the term “the church” much more frequently to describe all the believers living in a particular city:
“On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem.”9
“In the church at Antioch there where prophets and teachers…”10
“When he landed at Caesarea, he went up and greeted the church.”11
“Paul sent to Ephesus for the elders of the church.”12
“I commend you to our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church in Cenchrea.”13
“To the church of God in Corinth....”14
“To all the saints in Christ Jesus at Philippi…”15
“After this letter has been read to you, see to it that it is also read in the church of the Laodecians.”16
“To the church of the Thessalonians…”17
“To the angel of the church in Ephesus write….”18
“To the angel of the church in Smyrna write....”19
“To the angel of the church in Pergamum write…”20
“To the angel of the church in Thyatira write…”21
“To the angel of the church in Sardis write…”22
“To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write…”23
“To the angel of the church in Laodecia write…”24
The New Testament writers stressed the church’s fundamental oneness by continually addressing all the believers in the city as the one church of the city. Yet they also recognized that many diverse congregations meet within the one city church: “Greet Priscilla and Aquila…Greet also the church that meets at their house.”25
“Aquila and Priscilla greet you warmly in the Lord, and so does the church that meets at their house.”26
“Give my greetings to the brothers at Laoedecia, and to Nympha and the church in her house.”27
“To Philemon our dear friend and fellow worker, to Apphia our sister, to Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church that meets in your home…”28
The early church, then, was both one yet diverse. Every believer was a part of the one city church that at the same time found expression in a congregation meeting at a particular home.
A city-wide leadership team provided leadership for the diversity of congregations making up the one city church. Paul tells Titus to “appoint elders in every
city according to my direction.”29 Luke tells us that Paul “sent to Ephesus for the elders of the church.”30 These evidently are the elders of the city church of Ephesus, not just the elders from one particular house group.
Abraham Malherbe summarizes how the early church structured itself: As the church grew in a particular locality, more than one house church would
be formed…Although they may have formed separate communities; such groups were not viewed as being separate churches. Luke’s description of the church in Jerusalem is not clear on this point, but it does convey the impression that he thought of it as one church despite the smaller groups that composed it… This is supported by his relating presbyters, or bishops, to cities rather than to individual groups…More significant is that Paul and his followers, although they knew of separate groups in the area, wrote one letter to the church in the immediate area…One this understanding, the individual house churches would together have represented the church in any one area.31
We may summarize the early church’s approach as “one church, many congregations.” The church’s trinitarian oneness was expressed as every believer saw themselves as a member of the one church in their city. The church’s trinitarian diversity was expressed as every believer belonged to their own home congregation. The three members of the trinity coordinate their activities in humble, loving submission to one another. Similarly, the city’s diverse congregations coordinate their activities in humble, loving submission to one another through a city wide leadership team.
The Patristic Period
100- 312 AD
Early in the second century, the church father Ignatius of Antioch wrote of single bishops who had emerged to take over the leadership of the city church. By the end of the century, bishops, tracing their heritage to the first apostles, had taken control of the churches in their cities.32 The church began to adopt a very hierarchical leadership style, similar to the top–down organizational style of the Roman government.33 Ignatius emerged as a bishop among all the bishops, and acts with the authority to address other churches. He wrote several letters while on his way to martyrdom in Rome, commanding the churches to do nothing without the permission of their bishop.34
By moving the church towards a hierarchy governed by bishops, the church fathers were remarkably successful in unifying the Christian movement. This solidarity came, however, at the expense of diversity and freedom. Now, nothing could be done without the permission of a bishop. Rather than a network of mutually submitting congregations partnering together in a city, power and authority flowed downward from the bishopric.
Theologians writing about the trinity sometimes use the Greek word “perichoresis” to describe the way the members of the trinity relate to one another. The
word means “interpenetration” and tries to describe what Jesus meant when he said the Father and the Son were “in” one another. Stanley Grenz tells us that the scholars use the term “to refer to the interrelation, partnership, and mutual dependence on the Trinitarian members.”35 Volf builds on the idea and argues that churches should relate to one another in a way that resembles the “interpenetrating” way the members of the trinity relate to one another. In other words, if the church is like the trinity, then congregations that make up the church should relate to one another as partners, mutually dependent and
interrelated.36
The church begins to lose this since of mutual interrelatedness and partnership early in the Patristic period. Churches become less like mutual partners and more like children in a large patriarchical family. The church strengthened its unity but weakened its diversity.
The Medieval Period
312 – 1500 AD
The conversion of the Roman Emperor Constantine on the battlefield in 312 dramatically altered the shape of the church. Christianity became the state religion. The church’s organizational structure began to reflect the structure of the Roman Empire even more fully than it did during the patristic period. The church organized around geographic regions. These regions, called dioceses, are presided over by bishops. Districts are grouped into provinces led by a metropolitan bishop. The Council of Nicea in 325 agrees that even within the bishops there is a hierarchy: the cities of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Rome and Constantinople carry the most authority. Rome emerged as the premier region by the fifth century, with the bishop of Rome clearly rising to be
top of the hierarchy as the pope.37
The medieval model sought unity in submission to Rome and to the pope. The medieval model succeeded, like no model before or since, at forging a unified church. The model struggled, however, to celebrate diversity within this unity. Some of the most brilliant minds of the church lived and thought during the medieval period. Like all great thinkers, they did not always agree. The Roman Catholic Church did have doctrinal and practical diversity gurgling up within it, but struggled to embrace this diversity within its hierarchical understanding of the church. 38 Reform- minded Catholics like John Huss, Martin Luther, and John Wycliffe, whose beliefs differed from Rome but fell within the broad outlines of biblical orthodoxy, were eventually forced out.
The Protestant Reformation Period
1500 – 1700 AD
“Reformation theology” writes Paul Avis, “is largely dominated by two questions: ‘How can I obtain a gracious God? And ‘Where can I find the true Church?’ The two questions are inseparably related.”39
Martin Luther had no intention of separating from the Roman Catholic Church when he posted his ninety- five theses on the Wittenberg door in 1517. Rome’s inability to embrace diversity eventually led to his departure and with it the birth of the Protestant Reformation. Luther and his followers were wounded by charges that they had left the true church, firing back in return that they were the true church; Rome had gone apostate a long time ago.40
The Reformers argued that the unifying marks of the true church were not loyalty to the Pope but the true preaching of the word and the sacraments. Still clinging to the Constantine marriage of church and state, they established their newly formed Protestant churches as the state church in countries that also rejected Rome. The Reformers rejected the catholic idea of oneness as the visible expression of the one church around the world. In its place, they stressed the doctrine of the invisible church, and said that the church was one not on earth, but in its invisible form.41
Diversity exploded after the Reformation, and the Protestant churches splintered (or multiplied) into hundreds of different sects. Theological creativity was unleashed; God’s people were free to experiment with new forms and thoughts and modes of worship. Yet the tremendous diversity came at a tremendous cost. The monolithic oneness of the medieval period, flawed as it was, was shattered forever. The new Protestant churches quickly broke into warring factions themselves. The Thirty Years war (1618-1648) nearly destroyed Europe and was rooted in different understandings of the church and the gospel.
If Rome sacrificed diversity for unity, the result of the Protestant Reformation was a sacrifice of unity for diversity.
The Modern Period
1700 – 2000 AD
Churches during the modern period took a variety of organizational approaches to being both one and diverse.
The free-church movement grew up alongside the state churches of the Reformation. The free churches sought a clear break from the state. They emphasized the local congregation as the basic expression of the church, and cared little about a larger organizational structure tying churches together.
The free churches, like all churches before them, wrestled with the tension between unity and diversity. They came up with a brilliant solution: the denomination. Denominationalism allowed believers to associate with believers of similar values and belief, while not proclaiming that their group was the one true church. 42 Church historian Martin Marty notes that “nothing so basic as this change had occurred in the administrative side of the church life in fourteen hundred years…”43
.American Christianity quickly became very diverse. Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans, Congregationalists, Quakers, Moravians, Presbyterians and numerous other sects planted churches, started seminaries and held evangelistic revivals.
The desire to work as one amidst denominational diversity also led to another new organizational strategy: voluntary societies. Churches within denominational structures concluded that they could advance the gospel more effectively by cooperating with other denominations. The voluntary society was “a stroke of genius” 44for it allowed the churches to maintain their historic distinctives while they worked together in visible unity as the one people of God. The early nineteenth century witnessed the birth of the American Bible Society (1816), the American Sunday School Union (1824), the Young
Men’s Christian Association (1855) to name a few.
A third way the modern church sought unity amidst diversity was through the ecumenical movement. The movement began at the famous World Missionary
Conference in Edinburgh in 1910 and focused on bringing the leaders of various denominations together to seek grounds for unity and even merger.
A fourth way the modern church has tried to fulfill Christ’s prayer is through the para-church. Organizations like Young Life, Campus Crusade, Navigators, Inter Varsity and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association allowed believers to remain in their denominations but work together for a common mission.
The modern church has worked hard to express the unity of the church while celebrating its diversity. Yet everyone agrees that we are still a long way from answering Christ’s high priestly prayer for unity.
The Post Modern Period
2000 - ??AD
We are living in a time of awesome transition as the world leaves the modern world and enters a postmodern one. “A massive intellectual revolution is taking place that is perhaps as great as that which marked off the modern world from the Middle Ages,” writes Princeton theologian Diogenes Allen. “The foundations of the modern world are collapsing, and we are entering a postmodern world.”45 The church is also in the midst of sweeping change. Church futurist Richard Kew reflects the conviction of many when he writes, “We are at the starting line of a major ecclesiastical reconfiguration.”46
God’s people in every age have wrestled with what it means to be both one and diverse. Now it is our turn. Interestingly, believers around the world are going back to the future. They are returning to the first century way of being the church to respond to the challenges of the twenty-first century. God is once again raising up a city church. “By the mid-90s, the paradigm of the city Church…was erupting across America” writes Jack Dennison in his recent book City Reaching. “The city church…is rapidly gaining prominence again.”47
Dennis Fuqua, a leader in the city church movement has given the clearest vision statement I have found of what the city church can be: The biblical perspective of the church is clearly the gathering of believers of a given location, regardless of their (nonessential) doctrinal or practical differences…Geography was the only boundary the New Testament writers allowed in the church…So, the New Testament knows nothing of “First Baptist
Church” or “Memorial Presbyterian” or even “Maple Lane Community Church’ in the way we speak of them today…It sees the individual congregation…as a vital part of the church of the area…
When our view changes, our vocabulary changes. Instead of referring to First Baptist Church as a church, we would refer to it as a congregation. Instead of
saying “there are 350 churches in our area”, we would say there is “one church with 350 congregations” in our area…What would it be like if many leaders in the church of an area began putting a common sub-line on their letterhead and said something like “part of the church of Atlanta”? What would it be like if a
missionary were sent out from “The Church of Detroit”? 48
Hundreds of church leaders around the world are beginning to think of the church
in these terms. The city church is emerging as a way for God’s people to reflect God’s
unity and diversity to the world. Let’s review: The city church expresses oneness by
focusing on one church in the city. The city church expresses diversity by celebrating the
many different congregations in the city. There is one church with many congregations.
These many congregations mutually submit to one another in love. A network of servant
leaders serves as the connective tissue bringing the different parts of the body together.
Eight Signs of an Emerging City Church
Is a city church emerging in our city? Here are eight signs to look for.
1. Increasing numbers of Christians crossing the boundaries of their local church to experience fellowship with other believers. Today in our city over a hundred pastors meet together in prayer cells each week. Seventy pastors typically participate in the annual 3-day prayer summit. A Christian youth workers network has emerged, as has a network for children’s workers. The Compassion Coalition draws together compassion ministers from across the body. Believers across the denominations burdened for theological training are exploring ways to partner. Hundreds meet in groups like Bible Study Fellowship.
We are likely to see affinity groups of every kind gather around the city in the years ahead. Christians will not cease fellowshipping in their congregations. They will add a new dimension to their fellowship when they discover like- minded soul mates in congregations across the city.
2. Churches partnering together in ministry projects. The five downtown churches came together to co-sponsor a counseling center. Five churches recently participated in Operation Backyard, a week long youth service camp that repaired homes in inner city Knoxville. Dozens of churches partner together every year to build Habitat for Humanity houses. A bible church and a charismatic church took joint mission trips together for several years.
We have much to learn about partnering in our city. But we are making progress.
3. Citywide worship and prayer events. When God’s people catch the vision for the city church, they come together to worship and prayer together. These events don’t replace worship and prayer in the local congregations. They are not focused on a particular speaker or worship style. City wide worship nights reinforce the reality that we are all part of the same spiritual family.
The week after the crisis of September 11, 2001 three thousand people came out for an evening of prayer and worship at the Civic Coliseum. Hundreds of believers in dozens of churches prayed through a shared prayer calendar during the month of October. The annual March for Jesus brings together several hundred Christians in a public expression of worship. The Knoxville House of Prayer hosts 24 hour a day prayer for believers from a number of different churches. We can expect more city-wide worship and prayer as we more fully embrace the city church vision.
4. Increasing communication, coordination and trust among the different parts of the body of Christ in our city. When local churches feel no connection to the broader city church, they rarely think to communicate with other churches to coordinate their activities. The result is painful overlap of activities and a tragic waist of resources. We hold expensive, valuable conferences that compete with each other for participants and resources. We hurt one another’s feelings by not supporting one another’s dreams and plans. What is worse, we don’t share the collective wisdom, discernment, and spiritual
giftedness that is resident in the whole body of Christ in a city.
When God begins to raise up a city church, he begins to connect the different body parts together. The head of the body restores the communication network with his hands, legs, ears and feet. We are beginning to see this happen in our city. Some are working on a citywide website. The prayer ministry has gone online, communicating prayer requests to hundreds on an almost daily basis. There is an increasing awareness of how one plan might impact another, though we still have much to work on in this area.
5. A city-wide leadership network. Today’s city church, like her first centurycousin, will be served by a leadership team. These teams will not be hierarchical. While they will respect traditions with bishops and popes; there will not be any one “bishop” of the city church. Consistent with the flat, organic leadership networks that are emerging throughout the postmodern world, the leadership network serving the city church will be much more relational than institutional, though some organization will be involved. We do not yet have a recognized citywide leadership network. The birth pangs are evident, however. More and more leaders are emerging with a heart for the whole city. These leaders are finding one another and seeking ways to journey together.
6. The church speaking with one voice to the community. When the leaders of New York City decided to have a city-wide religious event after September 11th, they could not figure out who to invite from the Protestant church. Consequently, a large part of the body of Christ was not represented in the prayer meeting. It is difficult for the people of God to speak to the community with a common voice when we are not speaking to one another.
When the city church begins to work together as it should, it is then able to speak with one voice on issues addressing the community. Several years ago racial tension erupted into a near crisis in our city when a young African American man died after an encounter with the police. Noticeably lacking from the dialogue in the days following the death was any word from the church. Why? The media did not know who to ask. Our inability to speak as one to the needs of our city reinforces the perception that we are irrelevant to the real life of the community.
7. A common, shared vision. It is difficult to imagine the entire body of Christ in a city having a shared vision for the community. Yet if Christ is truly the head of his church, and if his church finds local expression in the city, shouldn’t we expect him to share his vision for our city with us? We wouldn’t expect the vision to be overly specific, for that would dishonor the rich diversity of churches in our city, each with their own special vision. We should expect Christ to have a general word for the church in our city, just as he did for the seven cities mentioned in the Book of Revelation. Together, the city leaders could ask, “Lord, what is your word for us as a city church at this season?” He might call us to a season of evangelism, a season of deepening our spiritual roots, a season of reconciliation, or a season of focusing on a particular social problem. Imagine what might happen if a majority of churches in our city all focused on a common need!
8. An invitation from community leaders to partner with them in solving the problems of the community. Community leaders are weary, worn out and overwhelmed with the demands of their positions. With federal aid shrinking and more and more responsibility put on the shoulders of local communities, local officials are desperate for help. When the city church begins to come together as one to serve her community, the local leaders will take notice. Gradually, they will come to see us as co- laborers working for the good of our community, and invite us to the table with them.
This is already happening. City officials invited Knoxville Leadership Foundation to help broker a group of volunteers with a housing ministry. City leaders see groups like the Knoxville Area Rescue Mission as an ally in the fight against homelessness and hunger. City social service agencies are working with the Compassion Coalition to meet their client’s needs. We can imagine this partnership between the city church and city leaders strengthening in the years ahead.
A final word
We began our study by asking how the mystery of the trinity could best be expressed by the 650 congregations that make up the one church of Knoxville. How can we ever hope to fulfill Christ’s prayer for oneness, while honoring the rich diversity that we find in our city? The city church may be God’s answer to this most important question: One church, expressed in many different congregations, mutually submitting to one another in love.
There is a reason why the church has never fully experienced unity amidst diversity. It’s hard. I’ve not found anything more difficult in 16 years as a pastor than trying to preserve the unity in my own church. I cannot imagine how much more difficult it will be as we work for unity in our own community. I know my own heart – how easily I am offended, how often my ego is bruised, how dark my motives can be. I like unity on my terms, not yours. This will not be easy. It is much easier to give talks on unity than to live it out.
Satan is terrified of what we are trying to do. He will take no prisoners as he tries to keep us from living together and serving together as one. Yet that is precisely what Christ calls us to do.
We can settle for nothing less.
1 Deut. 6:4
2 Titus 2:13
3 Acts 5:3-4
4 John 17:20-23
5 Ephesians 4:4-6
6 Miroslav Volf, After Our Likeness: The Church as the Image of the Trinity (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1998), 191.
7 Volf, 235.
8 Matt. 16:16-19; 1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 1:22; 3:10; 3:21; 5:23-32; Col. 1:24.
9 Acts 8:1
10 Acts 13:1
11 Acts 18:22
12 Acts 20:17
13 Romans 16:1
14 1 Cor. 1:2
15 Phil. 1:1
16 Col. 4:16
17 1 Thess. 1:1
18 Rev. 2:1
19 Rev. 2:8
20 Rev. 2:12
21 Rev. 2:18
22 Rev. 3:1
23 Rev. 3:7
24 Rev. 3:14
25 Rom. 16:3-4.
26 1 Cor. 16:19
27 Col. 4:15
28 Philemon 1-2
29 Titus 1:5, Phillips
30 Acts 20:17
31 Abraham J. Malherbe, Social Aspects of Early Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), 70.
32 Gerald Vallee, The Shaping of Christianity (New York: Paulist Press, 1999), 131-132.
33 Ramsey MacMullen, Roman Social Relations ( ), 88-120.
34 Vallee, 131-132.
35 Grenz, 68.
36 Volf, 208-215
37 Vallee, 132
38 Jaroslav Pelikan, Reformation of Church and Dogma (1300-1700) (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1984), 10-13.
39 Paul Avis, The Church in the Theology of the Reformers (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981), 1.
40 Avis, 1
41 Van Gelder, 56
42 Stanley Grenz, Renewing the Center: Evangelical Theology in a Post-Theological Era (Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker, 2000), 296.
43 Martin Marty, Righteous Empire (New York: Dial Press, 1970), 67-68.
44 Grenz, 295
45 Diogenes Allen, Christian Belief in a Postmodern World (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1989), 2
46 Richard Kew, Brave New Church (Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse Publishing, 2001), 18
47 Jack Dennison, City Reaching (Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library), 13, 44-45.
48 Dennis Fuqua, A Third Paradigm of Ministry, Training handout, International Renewal Ministries.
