The fourth vow of membership taken in most confessional Reformed churches says:

Fourth, do you promise to submit to the government of the church and also, if you should become delinquent either in doctrine or in life, to submit to its admonition and discipline?

As noted in part one of this series, there are two parts to this vow: submit and submit.

The first part is general the second is specific. The first part is relatively easy and the second part is relatively more difficult because it is more specific. The first part of the vow requires members to submit generally to the government of the church. The second requires members to submit in the case they are particularly called to repentance and faith for a specific sin. This is when the church has “quit preachin’ and gone to meddlin.”

This vow, of course, is the one that is most often forgotten. Folk take membership courses, read the catechism, confession, and Canons (the Three Forms of Unity) and are usually and rightly suitably impressed. Folk often unite with Reformed churches in the flush of enthusiasm for the new found freedom of sola scriptura and sola gratia and sola fide. For some new members it’s the first time they’ve ever been a part of a historic Protestant church. For others it’s the first time they’ve been part of an organized congregation, and for others membership in a Reformed congregation means freedom from oppressive moralism and legalism in the Christian life (”don’t touch,” “don’t taste”). Sometimes people unite with confessional Reformed congregations on the rebound from bad relationships with other congregations.

In these sorts of cases candidates for membership do not always stop to consider the implications of the fourth vow. The first thing to understand about vow four is that the church only acts ministerially. That is, according to the Protestant understanding of the Bible, Christ has endowed the visible institutional church with real authority but that authority is limited by the Word of God and that authority is not magisterial but ministerial. The church saying something doesn’t make it so. The church only speaks according to the Word of God and only has authority insofar as she speaks truly from the Word. The church only recognizes what is. Thus, in the case of church discipline, the when a consistory (the assembly of elders and ministers in a local congregation) makes a judgment that one has left the faith and is impenitent (refusing to repent and believe) an announces that fact in the sentence of excommunication, the church saying so doesn’t make it so. The church binds and looses but only ministerially, only in recognizing what is and in submission to and recognition of the teaching of God’s Word.

Nevertheless, Christ, the head of the church, has instituted real offices, to be filled with actual, sinful human beings, who must interpret and apply God’s Word, as confessed by the Reformed churches, to particular situations. Those offices are endowed with authority to make ministerial pronouncements. In other words, Christ is the head of the church but he administers his kingdom through subordinates: ministers, and elders.

Therefore, it is impossible for a member to say, “Well, I’m following Christ but I won’t submit to the admonition of the elders and ministers” if those officers are acting according to God’s Word. If they come to one and admonish one to repent (stop!) of some sin (e.g. adultery) and the adulterer refuses, the latter cannot plead, “But God brought us together.” No God most certainly did not bring you together! One may not plead one’s bad interpretation of providence over against the clear teaching of God’s Word: “You shall not commit adultery.” To refuse the admonition of the consistory in this case is to refuse Christ himself. This is true when the minister preaches the law and the gospel and calls people to repentance and faith. These words are Christ’s words. To refuse them is to refuse the Christ who gave them.

When members finish the a new members class or when catechumens finish their instruction and appear before the consistory to make profession of faith, they are entering into a binding relationship that removes their free agency. Does this mean the the believer has no liberty whatever? Not at all. It has already been mentioned that the authority of the church is limited by God’s Word. The church cannot require one to do anything contrary to the Word and, as touching worship, the church may not ask or require anything of anyone that is not expressly or implicitly commanded in God’s Word. For example, congregations may call special services on days other than the Sabbath but the church has no authority to compel attendance to non-Sabbath-day services. Such services are useful and edifying but they are not taught or implied by God’s Word therefore attendance to them is a matter of liberty. Churches may sing uninspired songs or other elements (e.g. non-canonical responsive readings) but they cannot compel one to use them as the Scriptures not teach nor require the use of non-inspired elements of worship.

This is one reason why we have multiple assemblies in our churches. If a consistory oversteps its boundaries the member has a right and even a duty to complain against that action first to the consistory and then, if that fails, to classis and, if that fails, to synod. There is at least one striking case in recent years in our own federation where such action by a lay couple helped bring about significant reformation. The process is difficult and often painful but it does work.

If, however, an assembly (consistory, classis, or synod) is speaking according to God’s Word, members are bound to submit.

If for some reason, however, one chooses to leave a congregation for another, one’s options are limited. One may seek dismissal to another URCNA congregation to another confessional Reformed (or Presbyterian) congregation. Asking for dismissal to a non-Reformed congregation or to a congregation that does not have the marks of a true church (Belgic Confession Art 29) is not contemplated in our church order. Why would one who has made profession of faith in a Reformed congregation, who has said, “The Three Forms of Unity is my faith. I want to be united formally to this congregation and to be under the oversight of ministers and elders” later say, “I wish to be dismissed to the care of a congregation that denies the faith I professed when I joined the congregation?” If one’s views have changed and one no longer confess the Reformed faith then, frankly, one should be subject to patient, gracious instruction and admonition. If that fails, then that one should be placed under discipline just as if one had committed a more obvious moral sin.

This also means that members should take care of their souls when they change employment or move house. Frequently it seems to be that economic considerations trump the spiritual so that Christians find themselves in a place with no congregation and no means to plant one. This is, to be sure, highly problematic. Would you move to a community where there was no oxygen? Would you move to a community where there was no food? Of course not! Why would you move to a place where there is no place to worship?

I realize that Christians find themselves in difficult circumstances. Sometimes people become Reformed and then find themselves abandoned where they are or they find themselves unable to find a confessional congregation. This is a grievous problem that requires pastoral wisdom. Persons in such a state should consult with the nearest confessional Reformed consistory (session) or minister to get advice as to what to do. It might require moving house and changing jobs or perhaps there is a church plant that could be considered.

To conclude this second (of three) part: the point of vow four is that, having married a confessional Reformed congregation, as it were, one is no longer free to play the field. Making profession of faith is not dating or courting. It is marriage. If a divorce is necessary there must be grounds (adultery or desertion) and those grounds must be manifest. This means profession of faith and union with a true congregation is a momentous and solemn act not to be taken lightly and not to be set aside without the most grave reasons. To simply walk away from that relationship, as with marriage, is to invite–indeed it is to require–admonition and even discipline by the congregation.

Next time we will consider some of the questions raised by this series.