This address was given at the annual meeting of the Reformed Fellowship on Thursday afternoon, Oct. 14, 1982, at the Kelloggsville C.R. Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Mr. Ingeneri is Director of Education and Evangelism at the Seymour C.R. Church at Grand Rapids, a student at Calvin Theological Seminary, and a board member of the Reformed Fellowship. An article on the role of Elders is especially appropriate in January when many are installed in office.
Years ago Dante said that “the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crisis remain neutral.” About nineteen hundred years ago the Spirit of Christ said something a bit similar to the church at Laodicea . . . Rev. 3:16 . . . “Because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.”
If the eldership has charge of the flock, as indeed Scripture says it does, then a clear unmuted voice should be heard from the consistory room . . . a voice that entones straightforwardly the Reformed faith in both its defensive and aggressive aspects. By and large, in my opinion, this voice has not been clearly raised.
These are times of moral crisis. The Moral Majority has categorized for us an impressive list of societal ills from which the Church, indeed our own churches, have not been exempt . . . the greater acceptance of pornography, homosexuality, divorce and the dissolution of the God–ordained family structure, humanism in schools and the culture at large, the rule of the 51% with morality divorced from divine law. From a reformed perspective, we could add even more challenges in the areas of poverty and social justice.
And who of us is not aware of our own denominational crises, around the issues of women in leading, teaching offices, Scripture’s authority vis-a-vis cultural, anthropological, scientific and historical studies, regarding Adam and Eve as teaching models only and not real people, and a lack of zeal for evangelism and real Biblical fellowship?
The future of our world is dependent on the church which God in His sovereignty uses as “salt” and “light.” And the ongoing progress of the Church is dependent to a large extent on the eldership. The work of the Church is of course just that, the work of the Church and not peculiarly of the eldership, but that body is entrusted by God’s Spirit with the task of spiritual leadership. We desperately need that leadership now!
Why are our elders not speaking out? And why do we speak in muffled tones when we do speak? Based partly on my half dozen years as an elder, I would like to put forth for your consideration several reasons.
One, I believe, comes from the church growth movement. This movement, though it has been much used by God, seems to put forward the idea that the pastor must “run the show.” We owe him total allegiance and only if we follow his lead in this way will our local church grow. There is, of course, some truth to this teaching, but it seems to have silenced many in the consistory room, men afraid to speak their piece or to disagree with the Pastor. We have to remember that God alone is Lord and rules through His Spirit and Word . . . the Pastor is not Lord, though he should be listened to and respected.
I believe that we have a Roman Catholic clergylaity distinction in our denomination which is not at all taught in Scripture. There is no apostolic succession in this sense and elders should not fear to speak up.
Secondly, I see our elders silenced by a gradual drift toward a hierarchical view of church government with synods calling the shots. Some have been saying that synods have no authority, but that’s the opposite extreme and simply not true.
What I see operating to a greater extent is the extreme of elders abdicating their voice—indeed their entire thinking and discerning functions—to Synods. “We’ll wait and see what Synod decides” is heard all too often in consistory rooms. We should respect good scholarship, but we believe in the perspicuity of Scripture and should never surrender our task of holding under Biblical criticism those who supposedly “know more” than we. The entire Church is called to discern the spirits. Those in charge of the local flock should take up the challenge to lead the way!
Thirdly, I see the long term blurring of the distinction between the offices of elder and deacon as another inhibitor of the elders’ voice. I have studied the Christian Reformed Church orders from 1914 to the present and have seen a marked change only from 1965 on, with respect to the relation of deacons to the consistory. Before that time, “consistory” meant elders and pastors. Since that time, however, deacons have been included in the government of the church on the basis of interpretations from Philippians 1:1 and Belgic Confession Art. 30. This blurring of distinction between the offices has not only led to the problem of deacons co-governing the flock, which appears nowhere in the Scriptures, but of elders’ speech being relegated to disciplinary matters. In the actual local church situation, elders too often do not speak out on matters that are outside this restricted area of discipline, without the deacons. The phrase “this is a matter for the full council” is too common among us.
Fourthly, I see elders’ fear of acting decisively as also rooted in our denomination’s pitting of authority against service.
The 1972 report on office and ordination so limited the function of office to a kind of service that the Synod had to append several guidelines on authority to achieve somewhat of a Biblical balance. Furthermore, many in the movement promoting women in ecclesiastical office have also confused elders by ridiculing any ideas of ruling authority as tyranny.
This is not just some abstract theological reflection. This pitting of authority against service affects the actual day–to-day functioning of elders. Some examples may clarify this point:
When dealing with people considering divorce we often hear, “they’re seeing a counselor, so we’ll hold off on any official action.” We abdicate our responsibility as those who have charge of the flock. What often happens is that counselling breaks down, there is a filing for divorce and then we act with official steps of discipline which are usually too little too late and often interpreted by those affected as some kind of punishment. If we want to send out a clear signal to our congregations (especially to our young people) and to the separated couple that we believe that marriage is a covenantal relationship-that God as Malachi states “hates divorce” and at the same time a message that we love the distressed couple, we must quickly and forthrightly express our love, express our concern for the seriousness of the situation and apply silent censure and the other steps of discipline quickly if there is no change. We should not surrender our responsibility to the flock to some professional counselors.
A second example of the way in which this misunderstanding of authority comes out is in our basic approach to erring members.
Often there is too much meekness—we feel timid because we’re not perfect either. Dare we approach another to correct him? This view misunderstands the nature of our authority. It does not come from some righteousness in ourselves, but from Christ and His Word, and is invested to an extent in the elder’s office itself. We, as the guardians of the flock, are approaching straying sheep in order to bring them back to the flock and save them from the wolfs grasp—that’s the actual situation. We must approach people humbly, for we are fellow sinners, but boldly because the Word of God which is the authority over us all, says that they are in error. We must understand that the authority is not in us or in some notion of our subjective opinions of right living, but in Christ and His objective Word and in the office that we hold.
A third example clarifying how the pitting of authority against service weakens decisive action is our dealing with those on our concern lists. In the typical CR church many of these are baptized members in their twenties who have been worked with for 5 to 10 years. It is far more loving to declare many of these people as unbelievers, as far as the church is concerned, than to delude them and their parents into thinking that their enduring of an elder contact a few times a year is a sign of their faith.
Fifthly, elders must be putting forth a clear voice in the areas of evangelism and real Biblical fellowship. We seem to want to use the Church Order selectively and only when it is comfortable, however c.o. article 24 states that the elders are to exercise admonition, discipline and pastoral care and engage in and promote the work of evangelism.
Considering t he tasks of admonition, discipline and pastoral care, even a cursory reading of Scripture shows us that all believers must be active in exercising mutual discipline and pastoral care of one another. They must encourage, admonish, support, discipline, rebuke, teach, bear and forbear, joy with and cry with one another. Part of the task of the eldership is to promote these attitudes and actions among the flock. This is real Biblical fellowship in action. Feeling comfortable because we are related to Jack or know his uncle from the old country has little to. do with the.depth of relationships that should characterize the life of the congregation. Elderships simply cannot continue to try to bear the load that Christ has laid on the entire body in this area!
With respect to evangelism, elders are not merely called to rubber-stamp church evangelism programs but they are called to be evangelistic–people! We can talk all we want about the riches of the Reformed Faith, but unless our voice is clear that evangelism is so important that elders do it, live it and promote it, the world will be more Arminian or even more pagan tomorrow! Where the elders put their time and energy speaks loudly to the congregation.
Some may feel that in this short sketch of concerns I have been unduly critical of our elders, but in these critical times we must, if we love Christ’s people, stop patting ourselves on the back because we still do family visiting. We must work hard at propagating the Reformed Faith, setting evangelism as a priority by engaging in witness ourselves. Only in this way will our flocks begin to make Reformed witness a priority.
We must not give over our responsibility to think and discern to pastors, or study committees or synods. We must read and evaluate through the grid of a Reformed systematic understanding of the Word. And the only way we’ll develop this is by making the time to read and by really believing that one man can stand up with the Word of God and tell the majority they are wrong!
We must regain a consciousness of the unique authority of our elder’s office and the proper focus of our office-service. This proper consciousness will affect our approach to people in a God–honoring way. We must take t he lead in helping our flocks to be the best they can be in Christ. But in doing so we may have to make some painful decisions along the way.
If we want our church’s voice to be heard in the world—if we want God’s Word to be cherished in our schools, colleges, seminaries, classes and synods, elders must again take the lead in speaking out with clear, unmuted voices. Only in this way will our flocks—the Lord’s flocks—remain good and faithful servants.