The local church is “the house of God,” it is “the church of the living God,” and it is “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15). The New Testament says much about the purpose of the local church and about its polity and practices. On the other hand, the New Testament does not say as much about multi-church, associational endeavors. Fundamental Baptists have historically, and rightly, emphasized the primacy, authority, and autonomy of the local church.

Nevertheless, although the New Testament says little about multi-church undertakings, it does say a few things. Certainly, a little is more than nothing——especially since all of God’s Word is authoritative. The New Testament records several cooperative ventures of some First Century churches. Now, while such examples should not be considered binding unless they are accompanied by commands (lest, for example, we all be required to meet daily for prayer in the Temple, Acts 2:46), these examples can be illustrative for local churches today. The New Testament depicts First Century local churches as associated by proximity, by pattern, by people, by practice, and by purpose, project, and procedure.

Associated by Proximity

The New Testament mentions the “churches of Asia,” a Roman province of Asia Minor (1 Corinthians 16:19a; also Revelation 1:4a), the “churches of Galatia,” another region in Asia Minor (Galatians 1:2), the “churches of Macedonia” in the district north of Greece (2 Corinthians 8:1; 11:9), the churches “in the regions of Achaia,” being the territory that comprised Greece itself (2 Corinthians 11:10; Romans 16:16), the churches in Syria and Cilicia (Acts 15:41), and the churches in “Judaea and Galilee and Samaria” (Acts 9:31; Galatians 1:22; 1 Thessalonians 2:14). First Century churches, therefore, were united by their proximity.

The modern practice of having state, regional, and national fellowships or associations of churches is something akin to this First Century phenomenon. In several of these Scripture passages, the regional fellowships of churches either sent or received collective greetings by the hand of the Apostle Paul, and this corresponds to the modern practice of church fellowships publishing statements of commendation and other public resolutions (e.g., the commendation to “all the churches of the Gentiles” in Romans 16:3,4).

Associated by Pattern

The New Testament explains how one group of churches can provide a pattern of behavior for a single local church. For instance, the churches in Judea served as an example to the church of the Thessalonians on how to endure persecution correctly at the hands of one’s “own countrymen” (1 Thessalonians 2:14). This means that churches which were united in proximity could also be united in persecution. By responding appropriately to suffering, the regional group of churches put forth a collaboratively positive reputation. This is analogous to the way, for example, that the oppressed Baptist churches in the former Soviet Union provided a pattern of endurance for other Baptist churches throughout the world. The reverse is also seen in the New Testament——a single local church provided a pattern of behavior for many other churches. Paul, Silas, and Timothy gloried “in the churches of God” because of the Thessalonians’ “patience and faith” in all their “persecutions and tribulations” which they endured (2 Thessalonians 1:4).

In order for a group of churches to rejoice over the advances and determination of single local churches, the group of churches must first be informed of what God is doing in the individual local churches. In the First Century, word spread by means of traveling apostles, teachers, and circulated epistles. Today, church groups utilize magazines, web sites, e-mail, mass mailings, and conferences. The modern practice of sharing local church and associational news is not new; it hearkens back to the First Century.

The impoverished churches of Macedonia sacrificially supplied Paul’s financial needs so that he could work in Corinth without being a burden to the wealthy Corinthians. Paul gave reports throughout Achaia concerning the Macedonians’ generosity. Doubtless, Paul’s “boasting” disgraced the proud Corinthians before all the neighboring churches in their region of Achaia (2 Corinthians 11:8,9). The Corinthians probably asked Paul to stop, but he responded that he did this because he loved them and that he would continue to do so in order that the church at Corinth and all the other churches throughout Achaia might follow the sacrificial example of the churches in Macedonia (11:10,11). Again, we see how one group of churches served as a pattern for another group of churches. Paul was not ridiculing so much as he was provoking to love and to good works.

Today, one region of churches can set the attitude and agenda for other regions of churches. If one group of churches, for example, is successfully planting churches, reaching young people, or training new converts, that group of churches can incite other groups of churches to excel as well. A church association that is lagging may well send its representatives to the thriving association in order to learn from those who are succeeding.

Associated by People

During the days of the New Testament, groups of churches provided the context for leadership recognition. Early in his ministry, for example, the Apostle Paul acknowledged that he was as yet “unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea” (Galatians 1:22), but as news spread concerning his dramatic conversion, the churches collectively “glorified God” because of Paul (1:24). Collectively, churches may acknowledge and rejoice in the ministries of individuals (e.g., 2 Corinthians 8:18).

Today, some church associations maintain lists of evangelists and Bible teachers who minister within the doctrinal frameworks of their associations. Furthermore, these fellowships of churches sometimes publish ministry updates and speaking schedules for these itinerant preachers. In this way, an association of churches acknowledges and rejoices in the ministries of individuals.

Associated by Practice

The Apostle Paul instructed the church at Corinth concerning the proper length of hair for men and women. Paul appealed to theology and to nature (1 Corinthians 11:5–15), but he also appealed to the common custom of the “churches of God” (11:16). Paul indicated that the general custom of the First Century churches supplied a solid reason for men to wear their hair shorter and for women to wear it longer——that there be a visible differentiation between the genders. Paul warned those who would contest his instruction that neither he nor the churches had any other custom.

Another Scriptural passage stresses an additional commonality of practice among the churches. Paul instructed the Corinthian believers that, when it came to the interpretation of prophecies, the women were to keep silent and to remain in submission to their own husbands. Why? Because God desires orderliness in church services. God did not want the women to interpret and judge the prophecies of their own husbands. God is a God of “peace, as in all churches of the saints,” and He does not want women usurping their husbands’ authority—not in the home and not in the church (1 Corinthians 14:33). The reference to “all the churches” underscores the common practice that should be evident in the churches, and these verses remind us of the great care that Paul took to maintain the connections of common customs. Within a group of churches, these commonalities of practices unite the churches.

Today, associational meetings provide an opportunity for expressing commonalities of custom and for articulating and modeling “good practice” (e.g., when it comes to expository preaching, God-honoring music, and the orderly conducting of business). Of course, final appeal should be made to Scripture, and Paul himself set the example for this; but there should be no shame in also appealing to common custom——again, Paul himself set the example. Associational leaders and local church representatives should first contemplate and deliberate, and then produce position papers on important issues facing the churches. Then, the conduct of the meetings should mirror the stated positions of the association. An association united in practice potently reprimands, tenderly by example and unmistakably by stated policy, those individual local churches that deviate from the associational practice. The process requires mature discernment, unmistakable clarity, and continual vigilance.

Associated by Purpose

The Apostle Paul led groups of churches, like those in Macedonia and Achaia (Romans 15:26), to contribute money toward the relief of the saints in Judea——saints who had suffered persecution and famine (Acts 8:1; 11:28). The churches who participated in this venture were united by purpose, by project, and by procedure. The Gentile churches were unified in their purpose “to minister” to their Jewish brothers and sisters in material things since they had benefited from them in spiritual things (Romans 15:27). The project had a biblical purpose.

Unity of purpose precedes effective enterprises. For this reason, it is essential that churches in association be united in purpose. Associational purpose statements must be the result of deliberate, prayerful, and biblical consideration. Purpose statements for associational existence and for specific projects should be widely publicized and uniformly understood. The previous issue of the Faith Pulpit mentioned the need for unity of practice. This issue mentions the need for unity of purpose. Consistently implemented in tandem, both purpose and practice eventually distinguish a group of local churches in association. These “distinctives,” over time, can profoundly enhance the ethos, traditions, and trajectory of an association. Churches in association that are united in purpose and practice are “on the same page”——literally.

Associated by Project

Being united in purpose, the churches then were united by a project to accomplish their purpose. They stood solidly behind the “Jewish Believers Relief Project.” The Macedonians, not surprisingly, gave so sacrificially toward this project that Paul cited their pattern of giving as an encouragement for the church at Corinth (2 Corinthians 8:1–6).

The Apostle Paul also reminded the Corinthians that they had agreed to participate in the project and that, in their zeal, they had set a lofty goal for their local church’s contribution to the project. Their enthusiasm had motivated many others to give sacrificially, and Paul warned the Corinthians that they were behind in their giving toward their own goal (9:1–3). In addition, Paul did not want the Corinthians unprepared and ashamed when the project representatives from Macedonia arrived in Corinth to receive their project contribution. Therefore, Paul urged the Corinthians by reminding them that the time had come to achieve their own predetermined contribution goal (2 Corinthians 9:1–8).

In the days of the New Testament, the local church set its own giving goal for an associational project, individuals within the local church purposed in their own hearts what they ought to give, and the association of churches did not set a levy against any local church but merely assisted the local church by receiving the offerings toward the project (9:2, 5, 7).

In another instance, the churches of Macedonia were united in their “Assist the Apostle Project” as he ministered in Corinth (2 Corinthians 11:8–11). The Macedonians provided for Paul so that he would not be a financial burden to those in Corinth.

Today, many churches participate in similar enterprises when they financially support church planters at home and abroad. Pastors of supporting churches, especially the commissioning ones, will sometimes write letters to other churches encouraging them to give toward the needs of the missionaries or their projects. The process binds churches together. They pray, give, and delight in project reports from the mission fields.

Today, groups of churches also support institutions like Bible colleges, seminaries, mission agencies, and social relief agencies. Institutions, in a sense, are on-going projects. Institutions refer to their supporting churches as “their constituency,” because the churches support them financially, and circumspect institutions view themselves as accountable to their supporting churches.

We praise God here at Faith Baptist Bible College and Theological Seminary because He has blessed us with a committed and growing constituency, and we pray that He will continue to work through us as we seek to assist the churches that support us. It is exciting to see churches stand united with us in purpose and also support us as an on-going project.

Associated by Procedure

New Testament churches were also united in their procedures for completing their projects. The Apostle Paul explained to the church at Corinth that they should receive offerings for the “Jewish Believers Relief Project” every first day of the week—–just as he had directed the Galatian churches (1 Corinthians 16:1,2). This was a procedural directive, and it unified the believers in Corinth with their brothers and sisters in Galatia.

Also, Paul directed the Corinthians to approve one of their own as their church’s courier to carry their offerings to Jerusalem (16:3). Even if Paul were able to go up to Jerusalem, he expected the Corinthian designate to travel, too (16:4). This was an important apostolic directive. It means that not even an apostle supplanted the decision of the local church to send its own representative along with the representatives from the other churches. This procedure united the churches as they determined to complete their project and realize their purpose.

Often, we moderns think that we alone have highly developed policies for carrying out our projects. Such is not the case. The New Testament churches appointed their own delegates for transporting the relief funds to Jerusalem. Then, the churches at large also selected one man as the general overseer for the handling of the funds. This man, unknown by name, was “chosen of the churches to travel” with Paul and his apostolic ministry team (8:18,19). Paul wisely directed in this procedural move, because he did not want anyone falsely accusing his team of stealing funds from the relief project (8:20,21). Paul also wanted someone of his own choice to travel with the church-chosen men who would transport the offerings, and so he sent his own representative to travel with the “messengers of the churches” (8:22,23). On the basis of this carefully laid out procedure of mutual accountability and financial integrity, Paul exhorted the Corinthians to “get on board” with the other churches and to give toward the para-church relief effort (8:24).

These passages from 1 and 2 Corinthians are readily applicable to church associations today. Groups of churches are wise to establish and to follow policies that assure financial integrity and project accountability. These policies should be widely publicized and carefully followed. Churches trust associational leadership when the leadership sticks with stated policies. Associations are also prudent to allow individual local churches the autonomy to select their own representatives to associational meetings. Large groups of churches need standing leadership for the more mundane, day-to-day maintenance of the association, for the completion of agreed-to projects, and for the communication of project vision and doctrinal position. In these instances, the churches should select the associational leadership. Some leaders may be salaried, others may be volunteers. Well thought-through systems for checks and balances go a long way to enhance associational credibility and functionality. The leadership appointees should be known throughout the associated churches for their admirable conduct and for the integrity of their ministries (e.g., 2 Corinthians 8:18-19). They must represent all that is good within the association of churches.

Conclusion

True, the New Testament says little about multi-church, associational endeavors. Nevertheless, it does depict the local churches as associated by proximity, by pattern, by people, by practice, and by purpose, project, and procedure. Taken in their entirety, these biblical accounts do provide a surprising amount of guidance for church associations today.