The Confession of Faith (34)

We have already heard that the church must be governed by the spiritual policy which the Lord has taught us in His Word. Christ is the Head of the church and exercises His power by office bearers. Our present article speaks mainly about the election of the office bearer—how a person comes to that office. The confession does not describe literally how this must take place, for we know from the history of the church that different methods have been used, and this is still true today. The confession states that office bearers must be chosen but does not prescribe how this is to be done. Again, our fathers have given us a scriptural view; they were always concerned lest they go their own way; therefore, they let God’s Word speak. This is also the rule for the election of office bearers.

In Acts 20 the Apostle Paul writes, “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood.” It is clearly stated that the Holy Ghost has made them overseers, and we also read it in this article, “We believe that the ministers of God’s Word, and the elders and deacons, ought to be chosen to their respective offices by a lawful election by the Church, with calling upon the name of the Lord, and in that order which the Word of God teacheth.”

God’s Word itself shows the way we must go in these matters. After Judas had committed suicide, the congregation was called together to choose another in his stead. Two men were set as a duo, and after calling upon the name of the Lord, one of these two was chosen. The calling upon the name of the Lord is a very important part since His guidance cannot be missed. The election is not merely a human thing; no, the Lord has given authority to the office bearers, and He calls them through the congregation. As shown in Scripture, the congregation received this power, not only when Matthias was called but also when the deacons were chosen.

Office bearers must be men of honest report, which includes their whole life—daily, social, family, spiritual, and church life. It is possible that the church makes a mistake in these things since we see only the outward appearance of man, but the Lord knows what is inside. It also happens that the same ones are always chosen; personal liking can be a reason that more fit persons are not chosen. How important is the vote which each male member casts, but then also the manner in which it is done. The election is preceded by prayer, but has it already been a matter of prayer before that? Did we also need the Lord in these matters, as to for whom we should vote?

To become an office bearer, a lawful election is necessary. This calling to the service of the church is twofold, internal and external. Internal calling is the inner desire which the Lord gives in the heart to do this work out of love toward God in Christ to the welfare of the church. With such an internal calling the Lord inclines the heart to give oneself unconditionally to Him; the Lord will give the ability to fulfill this task. Such persons have the qualifications or receive these gifts of the Lord. He does not promise how many talents He will give, but they will be sufficient to do the labor in His vineyard.

The external calling to the office takes place under the leading of the consistory, for which we also find a basis in God’s Word: “And when they had ordained them elders in every church” (Acts 14:23a). The church elected, but it took place under the leading of the apostles, who took care that everything was done orderly. This is entirely different from the church of Rome. There the government is in the hands of the priests; more important decisions are handled by the bishops, and the pope, as the head of the church, has the last word.

The Reformers returned to God’s Word and again placed the election of office bearers in the hands of the church. Different ways were used by them to elect, but the freedom of the church was guaranteed. The three different methods used in electing church officers were the aristocratic, the democratic, and the aristocratic-democratic. It probably sounds confusing, but we will try to explain them.

In the French churches the aristocratic method was commonly used. The consistory then chose the elders and deacons, and these choices were presented to the congregation only for their approval. The democratic method, used by the Dutch refugee church in London, consisted of three steps. The members first, by a free ballot, selected a list of candidates. From this list the consistory chose those persons whom it considered most qualified. Those chosen by the consistory were then presented to the congregation for approval. In the aristocratic-democratic method of the Scottish churches and the Churches Under the Cross the consistory presented a list of twice the number of office bearers needed, from which the members then chose half. The names of those elected were then presented to the congregation for approval, that is, their names were read in the congregation on the two following Sundays. If no lawful objections were brought in against them, installation would take place.

Our Reformed fathers have always objected against the democratic method as being too independent. In our denominations the aristocratic-democratic method is always used. Only in exceptional circumstances, for instance, in time of war when it is not possible to call a congregational meeting, the consistory may follow the aristocratic method.

Also, is it a prayer in our life that the Lord may remember us, our churches, and our consistories?

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen