|32|
English Summary
It is the basic principle of all true Church polity that Jesus
Christ is the only Head of the Church and that His direct and
actual reign should be acknowledged in the practical polity of
the Church. Yet it seems that the Church finds it difficult to
live under the reality of the direct rule of Christ and therefore
tends to neglect it and to supplant it with the rule of
man in the Church.
Historically this tendency may be traced in the development of the Church polity of the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Church stresses the power and dimity of the office-bearers of the Church, whom it sees as identical with Christ. The result is that man, in the person of the office-bearer who claims unchallengeable possession of the power of Christ to rule the Church infallibly, takes over the rule of the Church, and the direct and actual rule of Christ is excluded.
In sharp contrast to this concept stands the conviction of the Reformers that Christ as the living Head of His Church rules directly and actually through His Word and Spirit. For this reason the Reformers reject the idea of identity between Christ and the office-bearers as well as the idea that the office-bearers possess any personal authority to govern the Church. They contend that the Word of God alone should rule in the Church and that the office-bearers have no other duty than to administer the Word through which Christ rules. For this reason they see Church government as simply making room for the rule of the Word of God alone, the Word having free course throughout the Church. That is why the character of Church order in the Reformation period consists not in law or statute, but simply in a few general directives to protect the preaching of the Word in the local congregation, such preaching having its centre in the Church service.
The historical development of Church polity in the Churches of the Reformation in the 18th and 19th centuries offers a second illustration of man’s supplanting the direct rule of Christ in the Church. The violation of the Reformation principles during this period has its roots in the historical position of the German Churches. These, after the days of the Reformation, did not develop an independent Church polity along biblical lines, but were subject to the rule of the noblemen. Then, during the 18th century, the idea of natural law was applied in the field of Church polity. This resulted in a totally secularised idea of Church polity
|33|
which spread over nearly all European countries during the period of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution. It was held that the visible Church may be regarded as a purely human society which should be governed on the same lines as any other human society. Thus democratic principles invaded Church polity and the authority of the Church leaders was based on the fact that they represented the Church membership and should conduct the rule of the Church in accordance with the formulated „laws” of the Church. This idea of Church polity was embodied in a number of orders drawn up in various Churches and has been overcome only in our own age under the influence of new theological ideas. In Germany this happened during the Church Strife under the Nazi regime. The „Bekennende Kirche” formulated a number of biblical principles concerning Church polity, which were afterwards incorporated in the new Church orders drawn up in the German Churches after the war. In the Netherlands the change came during World War II. As a result of this change a new Church order, which aimed at returning to the ideas of the Reformation, was accepted by the Dutch Reformed Church (Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk) in 1950.
However, it is obviously very difficult to give concrete expression in Church order to the confession that Christ alone rules the Church directly and actually. It can only be done by formulating the Church order in such a way that the free course of the Word of God is in no way obstructed. This entails the elimination as far as possible, of every occasion for office-bearers and Church councils to rule the Church without the Word of God, and the giving of free reign to the controlling action of the Word of God as it is heard and understood by the whole congregation. Members of the Church should be encouraged to test every single action and decision of the the Church in the light of the Word of God and to bring their objections and criticisms before the Church in an orderly way. It should always be made clear that the Word of God is the only authority in the Church and that all decisions and actions of the Church are authoritative only to the extent that they are in accordance with the Word of God.
The conflicts in the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands, ending in the so-called „Liberation” of 1944, offer a good illustration of the problems confronting the Church in this regard. If the Church accepts that the Word of God alone should rule in the Church, the following problems become acute: (a) Who is to decide whether a decision of the Church is in accordance with the Word of God?; (b) May any individual Church council or member of the Church disregard decisions which seem to them to conflict with the Word of God? — The „Independent” answer would be that individual members or local Church councils should decide whether a decision is in accordance with the Word of God and
|34|
may reject decisions which are, in their estimation. in conflict with the Word of God. The „authoritarian” answer would he that members and local councils must simply accept any decision of the Church, because only the Synod (or other representative body') can decide ultimately whether or not a decision is in accordance with the Word of God. They are free to differ from decisions that are taken, but it is made as difficult as possible for them to voice their criticism and there is the threat that disciplinary action may be taken against them to compel them to conform in spite of their convictions. The speaker is of the opinion that a way should be found between these two extremes. The decisions of Church Councils should be regarded as binding. but every one should be free to voice criticism based on the Bible. That is, nobody should be compelled to co-operate with anything against his convictions, unless he has been given the opportunity to put forward his arguments from Scripture, and these arguments have been thoroughly tested.
Even so it is impossible to ensure that the Word of God will be accepted in the Church. The Church may harden its heart and reject any form of scriptural correction offered to it. For this reason the Church should humbly pray for the grace of God, that it may remain willing to listen to His Word and to obey it.