Basic HTML Version
572
than that of the purely local church, Acts 9:31 (according to the now accepted reading), I Cor.
12:28, and probably also I Cor. 10:32. In the descriptions of the Church in I Cor. 12:12-50 and
Eph. 4:4-16 the apostle also has its visible unity in mind. Moreover, there are reasons for
thinking that the Church at Jerusalem and at Antioch consisted of several separate groups,
which together formed a sort of unity. And, finally, Acts 15 acquaints us with the example of the
council of Jerusalem. This council was composed of apostles and elders, and therefore did not
constitute a proper example and pattern of a classis or synod in the modern sense of the word.
At the same time it was an example of a major assembly, and of one that spoke with authority
and not merely in an advisory capacity.
b. The representative character of the major assemblies.
In the abstract it may be said that the
major assemblies might have been composed of all the representatives of all the local churches
under their jurisdiction; but, on account of the number of the churches represented, such a
body would in most cases prove unwieldy and inefficient. In order to keep the number of
representatives down to reasonable proportions, the principle of representation is carried
through also in connection with the major assemblies. Not the local churches, but the classes or
presbyteries, send their representatives to Synods. This affords the gradual contraction that is
necessary for a well-compacted system. The immediate representatives of the people who
form the consistories or sessions, are themselves represented in classes or presbyteries; and
these in turn are represented in synods or general assemblies. The more general the assembly,
the more remote it is from the people; yet none of them is too remote for the expression of the
unity of the Church, for the maintenance of good order, and for the general effectiveness of its
work.
c. The matters that fall under their jurisdiction.
The ecclesiastical character of these assemblies
should always be borne in mind. It is because they are Church assemblies, that purely scientific,
social, industrial, or political matters do not, as such, fall under their jurisdiction. Only
ecclesiastical matters belong to their province, such as matters of doctrine or morals, of church
government and discipline, and whatever pertains to the preservation of unity and good order
in the Church of Jesus Christ. More particularly, they deal with (1) matters which, as to their
nature, belong to the province of a minor assembly, but for some reason or other cannot be
settled there; and (b) matters which, as to their nature, belong to the province of a major
assembly, since they pertain to the churches in general, such as matters touching the
Confession, the Church Order, or the liturgy of the Church.
d. The power and authority of these assemblies.
The major assemblies do not represent a
higher kind of power than is vested in the consistory or session. The Reformed churches know
of no higher kind of ecclesiastical power than that which resides in the consistory. At the same