Basic HTML Version
571
consistory, though exercising this on a broader scale. McGill speaks of them as higher and
remoter tribunals.[Church Government, p. 457.]
(3) That the authority and prerogatives of the major assemblies are not unlimited, but have
their limitation in the rights of the sessions or consistories. They are not permitted to lord it
over a local church or its members, irrespective of the constitutional rights of the consistory;
nor to meddle with the internal affairs of a local church under any and all circumstances. When
churches affiliate, their mutual rights and duties are circumscribed in a Church Order or Form of
Government. This stipulates the rights and duties of the major assemblies, but also guarantees
the rights of the local church. The idea that a classis (presbytery) or synod can simply impose
whatever it pleases on a particular church is essentially Roman Catholic.
(4) That the autonomy of the local church has its limitations in the relation in which it stands to
the churches with which it is affiliated, and in the general interests of the affiliated churches.
The Church Order is a sort of Constitution, solemnly subscribed to by every local church, as
represented by its consistory. This on the one hand guards the rights and interests of the local
church, but on the other hand also, the collective rights and interests of the affiliated churches.
And no single church has the right to disregard matters of mutual agreement and of common
interest. The local group may be even called upon occasionally to deny itself for the far greater
good of the Church in general.
3. THE MAJOR ASSEMBLIES.
a. Scripture warrant for major assemblies.
Scripture does not contain an explicit command to
the effect that the local churches of a district must form an organic union. Neither does it
furnish us with an example of such a union. In fact, it represents the local churches as individual
entities without any external bond of union. At the same time the essential nature of the
Church, as described in Scripture, would seem to call for such a union. The Church is described
as a spiritual organism, in which all the constituent parts are vitally related to one another. It is
the spiritual body of Jesus Christ, of which He is the exalted Head. And it is but natural that this
inner unity should express itself in some visible manner, and should even, as much as possible
in this imperfect and sinful world, seek expression in some corresponding external organization.
The Bible speaks of the Church not only as a spiritual body, but also as a tangible body, as a
temple of the Holy Spirit, as a priesthood, and as a holy nation. Every one of these terms points
to a visible unity. Congregationalists or Independents and Undenominationalists lose sight of
this important fact. The existing divisions in the visible Church at the present time should not
cause us to lose sight of the fact that there are certain passages of Scripture which seem to
indicate rather clearly that, not only the invisible Church, but also the visible Church is a unity.
The word ekklesia is used in the singular as an indication of the visible church in a wider sense