Based on the Scriptures

3.3.2. Based on the Scriptures

Has Reformed church polity grown out of the principles that are based on the Scriptures? The Belgic Confession demands this:

‘We believe that this true Church must be governed by that spiritual policy [polity]

which our Lord hath taught us in his Word’ (Article 30). ‘We also believe that although it is useful and good for those who govern the churches to establish and set up a certain order among themselves, for maintaining the body of the Church, they ought always to guard against deviating from what Christ, our only Master, has ordained for us’ (Article 32).

Although the Bible nowhere provides a clear-cut and complete system of church government it still it Bible contains some guidelines on how the Church ought to be organized (Coertzen, 2004:135). In other words, although the Bible does not prescribe any specific form of church government, it does contain a good number of principles, which are to be applied when governing the church. Also, Reformed Churches do not claim that their church government is perfect, but that it is meant to be based on the principles contained in the Bible (Coertzen 2004:135). Neither do the Reformed claim that their church polity is an imitation of the Church of the New Testament.

‘It is impossible to conserve or reproduce the New Testament Church in our age and day. Those who attempt to do so must remember that a mere repetition of the New Testament formulae and regulations does not guarantee the Church’s authenticity any more than the continuation of a line of the development within a given tradition does so’(De Ridder, 1983:4).

Janssen says that although church order and church government are not simply replicates of an order found outlined in Scriptures, the Bible should function as the norm for the Church.

‘Nonetheless the Reformed find in Scripture’s story a basic foundation for its understanding of the office and assemblies, While it cannot be claimed, and the Reformed have not claimed, that the offices have as described in their order exhausted the ordered ministry, the Reformed do discover outlines for their offices of elder, deacon and ministers of the Word in Scripture. Likewise, the Reformed detect in Scripture a communal away of decision-making, of a synodical system as for example in the Synod of Jerusalem (Acts 15)’ (Janssen, 2000: 3-5).

This leads us to the relationship between Scripture and church polity, which is defined by the fact that Christ executes his rule and authority in the Church through his Word and Spirit.

The Reformed tradition, following Calvin (Institutes IV, VI, 1, quoted in chapter 1, section 2), insists that Christ rules through Word and Spirit using office-bearers as instruments. In line with Calvin, Vorster (2003:15) says:

‘The offices … are instruments in the hands of Christ through which He institutes, conserves and builds the Church. … The officers are servants (diakonia), who primarily receive their mandate to serve from Christ. ... They are organs in the hands of Christ.’

The same thought is expressed in a document of the Canadian Christian Reformed Church (2006):

‘Christ governs the Church through a spiritual order, a manner of government empowered by the renewing work of the Holy Spirit. Christ uses men, men of Spirit to lead and govern his Church. These men speak from God and their authority lies only in the Word. This means that authority of assemblies is in their use of the Word of God.’

Concerning the relationship between Reformed church polity and the Scriptures we conclude that the authority invested in the Church by the Triune God and contained in the Scriptures is

exercised through the general office of all believers and through designated special church offices and their ecclesiastical assemblies not in a fundamentalistic way. Those who take leadership are directly responsible to the Head of the Church, Jesus Christ. The authority of the offices is the authority of Christ through Word and Spirit (cf. Nel, 1980:30, 31).

Finally, according to the Scriptures, who has the final say in the church? Although all traditions accept the headship of Christ, they differ on the representation of Christ’s final authority by men. Basically there are three positions, representation of Christ by one person, by all, by a few. In the Roman Catholic tradition the Pope is the highest authority, the court of last resort implying that there is no appeal from his decision, no going over his head and he is subject to no one‘s judgment (The Codex of Canon Law, 1983, art. 333; cf. James A.

Corriden, 2004:73). The Orthodox and Anglican Churches have also adopted systems that allow for one person in the seat of highest authority, although in a more moderate form. In the Congregational Churches decisions of all the members of the local congregation constitute the highest authority and the final court of appeal (cf. Gray and Tucker 1999).

Reformed and Presbyterian polities accept final authority by some designated members in their assemblies, though in a different way. In Presbyterian polity the Synod or General Assembly has a final say and is the final ecclesiastical court of appeal or a supreme court of the Church. Reformed church polity expresses that basically the Holy Scriptures, i.e.

the Bible have the final say and are the supreme court of appeal. (Van Wyk, 2004:165; De Ridder, 1983:4). How can the Bible become the final court of appeal in the Church from a Reformed perspective? Vorster tries to answer this question by first saying that church matters must be resolved in an ecclesiastical manner. However, what is an ecclesiastical manner?

‘Ecclesiastical assemblies do not work in the same way as secular assemblies which decide based on majority votes. Christ is the Head of the Church and in every assembly people should convince and convince each other from the Word of God.

The Word must rule. Therefore, ecclesiastical matters should be debated until there is a consensus on Biblical principles. … Christ is the King of the Church and rules with his Word and Spirit. Therefore the highest authority in the church and in any major assembly is the Word of God. Every decision of an ecclesiastical assembly must be based on the Word. The authority of an ecclesiastical decision lies in its foundation in the Word’ (Vorster (2003:54, 55).

For Vorster the ecclesiastical manner of reaching a decision does not agree to vote.

‘Decisions are made by voting and majority of votes carries the decision. However, that should never be the premises for an ecclesiastical decision. First and foremost the members of an assembly should seek to persuade each other from the Word of God.

The Word must rule. Therefore, discussions should receive ample time and attention and purpose should be to come to a mutual agreement or consensus. A division of votes is not desirable. In the case of division, the minority is not compelled to consent to the majority until they can prove that the decision is not according to the rule of Christ in the Church.’ (Vorster, 2003:55).

We conclude this section by saying that the distinctiveness of the Reformed church polity is displayed in the way the Bible is the used as a source of Church polity, as a source of ecclesiastical authority and as a final ecclesiastical court of appeal. This means that office-bearers and ecclesiastical assemblies execute authority over the Church, but Word of God is the authority over the Church, the court of last resort.