I need help to think through the Congregational form of church government. This has been my conviction for almost 20 years now until in the last couple of months when I have began to rethink this position. I must confess that my experience as a Reformed Baptist pastor has been very trying. This is what has led me to rethink the position. Your help will be much appreciated.
I would like us to discuss it from three perspectives.
A. Historical Perspective: what was the form of church government practiced by the early church soon after the Apostles? I have in mind Polycarp who saw the Apostle John. It seems to me that he wasn't Congregational (I stand to be corrected). Could it mean that Congregationalism is a later invention or could it be that Polycarp soon forgot what he was taught by John?
B. Biblical Warrant:
1. What are the major Biblical texts in support of Congregationalism?
2. What is the Congregational interpretation of Acts 15?
3. Was the church in Jerusalem a single assembly or various assemblies in various homes?
C. Practical Ramifications:
1. It seems to me that whereas church members are accountable to elders, a Congregational church as an entity is not accountable anywhere. The argument is usually that it is accountable to the Lord Jesus the head of the church. But a church member might argue the same way with respect to his accountability.
2. It seems to me that Congregational churches have no court of appeal for both Minister and member. So one's fate is left to a few men (elders) or the general membership. Isn't there safety in a multitude of godly and mature counsel as is to be found in Presbyteries, Synods and General Assembly?

May I suggest that we start with Part A.

A Debtor to Sovereign Grace