Rendimiento académico

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.

3.3.3.Offices: instruments of Christ and the Holy Spirit

Who governs the Church in the name of its Head, Christ? By what means and through who does Christ rule the Church? Calvin (Institutes, IV, Vl, 1, quoted in chapter 1, section 2) says that Christ uses ‘the ministry of men’. He also stresses that these men rule through the Word and the Holy Spirit.

‘...the Church is Christ’s Kingdom, and He reigns by his Word alone. ... .the Church is governed by the Spirit of God’ (Institutes, IV, ll, 4; lll, 13).

De Brès works this out:

‘We believe that this true Church must be governed by spiritual polity which our Lord has taught in His Word; namely there must be ministers or pastors to preach the Word of God and to administer the sacraments; also elders and deacons who together with the pastors, form the council of the church; that by these means the true religion may

be preserved, the true doctrine everywhere propagated, likewise transgressors punished and restrained by spiritual means; also the poor and distressed may be relieved and comforted according to their necessities (Guido de Brès, Belgic Confession, article 30).

The fact that Christ uses office-bearers in his government through Word and Spirit does not mean that office-bearers can pocket the Word and the Spirit, as if they could control them.

There is a danger of hierarchicalism and clericalism, which may creep in. Let us look at some comments that may function as warnings against this danger

‘We speak of the execution of Christ’s government in the Church as something that takes place by means of the Word, the Holy Spirit, and people’s ministry, does not mean that the latter can equate to Spirit and the Word- far from it.’ (Coertzen, 2004:99).

On the same note Vorster elaborated:

‘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.’ Vorster (2003:15).

He (2003:35) concludes:

‘Every office-bearer is an instrument in the hands of Christ and is therefore responsible to Christ. There is equality in responsibility and this principle constitutes the equality of the offices. The three offices in the Church are also not subordinate to each other.’

The danger threatens all three offices, including the relationship between ministers. Here is De Jong’s warning:

‘This emphasis on the equality of all ministers of the Word must be zealously guarded against another form of attack. The modern emphasis on efficiency has invaded the precincts of Christ’s Church. In its interest, numerous executive and administrative

posts have been created and assigned to ministers ordained to preach the Gospel. … Not infrequently such men be it with the best of intentions exert influence on church assemblies which in time may undermine the principle of equality to which Reformed believers have always subscribe. Here we do well to be warned before it is too late’

(De Jong, 1980:310).

Warnings against hierarchicalism and clericalism are not given without reason, because office-bearers may draw wrong conclusions from the special position of their office. Office-bearers are visible human means used by Jesus Christ to execute his government in the Church, Jesus. Calvin says that they are servants used by God, and do not receive their command from a Church Council or Presbytery or Synod but directly from God. God calls, equips and sends office-bearers to minister to His Word. The ordination, induction, and installation express that these servants are to serve under Christ in direct relation to God. For this reason they are simultaneously servants and representatives of Christ and of the Church.

Executing and representing Christ’s direct rule requires from the office-bearer being born again as a child of God and tender humility towards Christ and the members of his Church.

The Church and its office-bearers have found it difficult to live under the reality of the direct rule by Christ, and therefore tend to neglect it and supplant it with the rule of man, thus bringing down Christ and the members of his body, the Church.

‘Historically this tendency may be traced in the development of church polity of the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Church stresses the power and dignity of the office-bearers of the Church whom it sees identical with Christ. The result is that man in the person of the office-bearer, who claims to be in unchangeable possession of the power of Christ to rule the Church infallibly, takes over the rule of Church, and the direct and actual rule of Christ is excluded.” (Jonker 1965:32)’

It was further asserted that

The historical development of church polity in the churches of the Reformation in the 18^th and 19^th centuries offered the second illustration of man 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 Reformation did not develop independent church polity along biblical lines, but were subject to the rule of the noblemen’ (Jonker, 1965:32).

Wrongly understanding the term office has contributed to wrong practices. Borght says that in the Reformed tradition office refers to: (1) helpfulness, (2) service, task, ministry, and (3) duty. He thinks the second meaning is most important. ‘To function as a minister implies involvement as a servant and not as a ruler’ (Van de Borght, 2007:54). The term office does not mean or imply rank, status or dignity. Of course one of the functions of the servant’s office is to rule, to govern, and to provide leadership. However this is not done in the way of a free human institution, but has to be carried out in accordance to the Word of God and the Holy Spirit.

In which way office-bearers represent and execute the rule of Christ through his Word and the Holy Spirit? Is it possible for them to allow Christocracy and Pneumatocracy to be realities in the Church, in accordance to what Calvin taught? (cf. Calvin, Institutes, IV, Vl, 1; ll, 4; lll, 13).

For Vorster (2003:55) this is only possible when delegates in the ecclesiastical assemblies persuade each other from the Word and being convinced by the Holy Spirit. He points out that every decision must be preceded by thorough discussion, and every contribution or opinion must be weighed and evaluated in the light of Scripture. Thus, appeal must prove beyond doubt that the decisions are compatible with the Word of God. The authority of an ecclesiastical assembly must be based on the Word and the authority of an ecclesiastical decision lies in its foundation in the Word. In being Leader of the Church, Christ has final authority and his Word is the final court of appeal (Vorster 2003:54, 55).

To sum up, office-bearers and ecclesiastical assemblies are organs or instruments.

One of the relationships between Christ and offices is that office-bearers are organs of Christ’s Church. In being organs, Christ himself acts in the Church through them. One of the reasons is that officers came from Him and that they are responsible to Him alone. Thus, Christocracy and Pneumatocracy are only possible if the offices are viewed as instruments of Christ’s rule and the rule of the Holy Spirit. Office-bearers are instruments of Christocracy and Pneumatocracy. If all office-bearers including the general office accept this reality any tendency that may hinder or prohibit Christ to rule over his Church would be renounced (cf.

Osterhaven, 1971: 62, 63, quoting Van Ruler).