Who is the head of the church? The answer should be obvious, but for many in the Christian world it doesn't seem to be obvious. One group says a man that lives in some city somewhere is the head of their church. Another group says a different man founded their church in the 18th century. Do these statements have merit, or as Jesus says in Matthew 15:9, is it merely "teaching as doctrines the commandments of men" (i.e., is it from God or is it just something invented by man)? A logical examination of the Bible will provide the answer.
Paul said this in his first letter to the church at Corinth: "I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, "I follow Paul," or "I follow Apollos," or "I follow Cephas," or "I follow Christ." Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (1 Corinthians 1:10-13, ESV) We see that Paul is correcting them by asking some pointed questions. Who was crucified for you? Not Paul. Were you baptized in the name of Paul? No, you were baptized into Christ. He's telling them to stop talking nonsense about following someone other than Jesus. Later in the same letter, Paul writes "According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation and someone else is building upon it. Let each one take care how he builds upon it. For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." (1 Corinthians 3:10-11, ESV) God has already laid the foundation of the church, Jesus Christ, and he is the head of the church.
Can any man since Jesus truthfully claim to be the head of the church? In Hebrews 7:11-28 (ESV) we see the following: (a) God has made Jesus a priest forever by the power of an indestructible life (b) Jesus is the guarantor of a better covenant, a better hope through which we draw near to God (c) he holds his priesthood permanently because he continues forever (d) he always lives to make intercession for us and (e) God's oath appoints him as a Son who has been made perfect forever. Does any man since Christ have these qualifications to be the head of the church? No, and since Jesus continues forever and is perfect forever, why would we need someone else to replace him?
A final thought: anyone who claims to follow in the footsteps of Peter should consider Peter's statements after healing the beggar at the Beautiful Gate. "Men of Israel, why do you wonder at this, or why do you stare at us, as though by our own power or piety we have made him walk? The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified his servant Jesus, whom you delivered over and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release him. But you denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, and you killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses. And his name - by faith in his name - has made this man strong whom you see and know, and the faith that is through Jesus has given the man this perfect health in the presence of you all." (Acts 3:12-16, ESV) Peter realized that everyone who saw this miracle would worship him as a god if he let them. Did he take advantage of this situation for personal gain? No, he told them that only Jesus, the author of life, was responsible for this healing. If Peter saw himself as no more than a servant of Christ, surely all Christians should have the same attitude.
