church authority

Status
Not open for further replies.

Preach

Puritan Board Sophomore
My question regards the seat of authority in the local church. I clearly see a plurality of elders taught in the Bible. But what about the keys of the kingdom and their relationship to excommunication and the Lord's Table? Does the congregation as a whole have the power to excommunicate or the elders alonb, etc? What does the keys of the kingdom mean? I'd appreciate responses from the Baptists and the Presbyterians. Thanks,
Bobby
 
The keys are administered by the elders. Doesn't mean we as individuals don't have a say. If some one is living in sin and you wish to correct the problem then you go through the biblical steps of discipline to accomplish that, from personal admonition to bringing it before the elders.
 
I do not see anywhere in NT scripture where the keys are administered by the elders. According to Matthew 18:17, "...if he [the supposed offender] shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.

This could be by way of a trial as Paul, as Paul indicates in 1 Cor. 6:1, 2 (either by one or many). And in the context, elders seem to be excluded, they not being among the "least esteemed," v.4.
 
[quote:c8c0c749da][i:c8c0c749da]Originally posted by ss385tm[/i:c8c0c749da]
I do not see anywhere in NT scripture where the keys are administered by the elders. According to Matthew 18:17, "...if he [the supposed offender] shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.

This could be by way of a trial as Paul, as Paul indicates in 1 Cor. 6:1, 2 (either by one or many). And in the context, elders seem to be excluded, they not being among the "least esteemed," v.4. [/quote:c8c0c749da]

If I understand this correctly,
"Tell it to the church":
In the Presbyterian setting, the session & presbytery "represent" the church......In this way are -the keys- and it's components administered and carried out. The sessions are appointed individuals (by the body at large) to oversee management of "the keys" locally. ThePresbytery, the universal.

[Edited on 3-21-2004 by Scott Bushey]
 
The final step of discipline is taking it before the whole church and if the person is still unrepentant then the whole church excommunicates him and treats him like a tax collector!

Whether or not the elders actually "ban" the person is immaterial. If it is broadcast before the entire congregation and there is no repentance then it should simply be announced that the person has been disfellowshipped (almost said dismembered...hehehe).

The session cannot be "the church". The church is the assembly of believers.

Matthew 18
15 "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, [b:54b26778c1]tell it to the church[/b:54b26778c1] [church = ekklesia]. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you [the church] bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them."

Phillip
 
[quote:e8b10d1ec9]
The session cannot be "the church". The church is the assembly of believers.
[/quote:e8b10d1ec9]

Phillip,
Just as your eldership represents your local body, the session represents our local body of the universal church.

[Edited on 3-22-2004 by Scott Bushey]
 
By its nature, an organization acts through its representative. I can say, for example, that I made a contract with IBM (a corportion). Yet, only one person from IBM would have signed the contract. It is not the case that every employee of IBM needs to have signed the contract to bind IBM. A single duly appointed signatory, as an agent of IBM, may act to bind IBM. It is the same with nearly all organizations.

Nothing in the Bible suggests that local congregations are pure democracies (although they are allowed to vote for their rulers). In contrast, throughout the Bible we see the duly appointed few acting for the many. Of course, the highest examples of this principle are Jesus (who acted as a covenant head of the elect) and Adam (who acted as a covenant head of all mankind). We see the principle applied in the tribal structure of Israel, etc.

Anyway, I think it is sufficiently clear that the NT church does not need democratice approval to excommunicate someone. The keys of the kingdom were give to the apostles, not the the laity. Matt. 16:19; John 20:22-23.

This is natural, because it is the elders (who were appointed by the apostles to rule over the church and of which Peter was one) who are charged with ruling the congreation. The congregation is charged with obeying them.

· Hebrews 13:7, 17, 24. Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.... Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.... Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the saints. They of Italy salute you.

See also 1 Thes. 5:12 and 1 Tim. 5:17.

Scott
 
As to what the keys of the kingdom are, I think that the Westminster Confession rightly summarizes the biblical teaching about them.

See especially paragraph 2.

Chapter 30 - Of Church Censures

1. The Lord Jesus, as King and Head of his church, hath therein appointed a government, in the hand of church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate.[556]

II. To these officers the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed; by virtue whereof, they have power, respectively, to retain, and remit sins; to shut that kingdom against the impenitent, both by the Word, and censures; and to open it unto penitent sinners, by the ministry of the gospel; and by absolution from censures, as occasion shall require.[557]

III. Church censures are necessary, for the reclaiming and gaining of offending brethren, for deterring of others from the like offenses, for purging out of that leaven which might infect the whole lump, for vindicating the honor of Christ, and the holy profession of the gospel, and for preventing the wrath of God, which might justly fall upon the church, if they should suffer his covenant, and the seals thereof, to be profaned by notorious and obstinate offenders.[558]

IV. For the better attaining of these ends, the officers of the church are to proceed by admonition; suspension from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper for a season; and by excommunication from the church; according to the nature of the crime, and demerit of the person.[559]

Scott
 
I never said take it to the church for a vote!

You publish the offense before the entire church. If the person does not repent, the church puts him out. The elders, those who lead, announce to the church, that the person has not repented as so is put out of the membership.

What you cannot have, and be faithful to what Jesus said in Matthew 18, is to have the elders decide behind closed doors and just inform the congregation that the person has been excommunicated. You do not inform the church of the decision after it has been made, as it is clear that telling the assembly (ekklesia) is part of the process before the offender is removed.

Phillip
 
In all the passages that talk about Church Discipline, do any talk about a vote?

It says if they refuse to repent after being confronted by one person, go with witnesses. If they refuse even after witnesses affirm the admonition, take it to the church, if they refuse to hear the pleas of the church to repent, they are put out.

No vote there that I can see. Just the fact. If you sin, are disciplined, and refuse to repent through the whole process you are put out of the church.

If you go through the whole process and vote and the offender gets to stay then the church has proven that the majority rarely speaks for God!

I fear that we have made church a parliament and think we can decide God's will by democratic process and sound argumentation.

Where in the NT did the church ever vote? (hint....they did....but it did not turn out well!)

Phillip

[Edited on 3-22-04 by pastorway]
 
No vote.

the church is INFORMED. Thus, among the elders the excommunication takes palce - which fits with the binding and loosing (forbidding or allowing) in fellowship and the power of the keys.
 
Correct, no vote. That was silly of me. I meant to use the word -decision- and that decision would be the outcome of discussion. So, even though it is not technically a vote, it is a place where the outcome is discussed. In this discussion, would it need be unanimous. Some items discussed are not cut and dry. Assuredly, decissions have been made of sessions and presbyteries whom the outcomes were less than unanimous.

As I said previously, the session, which represents the local body, makes the decision in proxy for the local body.

Phillip,
You previously said:
"The session cannot be "the church". The church is the assembly of believers."

The session DOES represent the local body.
 
I agree that the elders decide. I do not agree if you are saying that the church at large, the entire congregation, is not informed before the decision is made though.

Jesus said tell it to the [i:7f876c8429]ekklesia[/i:7f876c8429], then ban them.

Phillip
 
I think that we are all agreed that the church officers (not the congregation) have the binding and loosing power of the keys, which includes the power to retain and remit sins.

I am not sure that I understand Phillip's concerns.

Scott
 
[quote:45ebc80399][i:45ebc80399]Originally posted by Scott[/i:45ebc80399]
I think that we are all agreed that the church officers (not the congregation) have the binding and loosing power of the keys, which includes the power to retain and remit sins.

I am not sure that I understand Phillip's concerns.
[/quote:45ebc80399]
I think his concerns are that the congregation is informed of all that takes place. That way elders are not secretly banning people or ruling the church tyrannically. But at the same time, it is the elders ruling on behalf of the people and therefore not mob rule.
 
Right! The elders act on behalf of the church, but the church must be informed throughout the process.

In other words, you don't have the elders call a secret meeting and remove people from the church roll and then just tell the church next Sunday that these people are no longer members.

In the process of discipline, you must tell the whole church when gathered who the person is being disciplined and what they are being disciplined for...and if after telling the church the person does not repepnt, then action may be taken to ban him.

I just want to be sure that the elders do not abuse their "powers" by removing people with whom they disagree, etc.

There is an explicit process for discipline and I want to be sure that it is followed.

We must also remember that the whole purpose behind discipline is repentance and restoration.

Phillip
 
This is for both pastorway and the Presbyterians: How is the Lord's Table employed as a means of discipline? What is its relationship to the "keys of the kingdom? For example, in the New Testament chronological progression which ultimately leads to excommunication, I do not recall mention of the Lord's Table. In addition, pastorway, do you define excommunication as terminating a person's membership from the church role, or preventing that person from the Lord's Table, or something else?
Thanks,
Bobby
 
If a person is in the process of discipline but the matter has not been concluded then they should not partake of the Table. If there is a circumstance where an offense has occured between believers in the church and it has not been resolved then those people should refrain as well.

When it comes to the point that they are excommunicated, they are no longer members of the church and are treated as a lost person (a heathen or tax collector). Certainly we would not knowingly allow a lost person to partake of the Table would we?

I do not believe that an excommunicated individual should be allowed into the worship service of the church! Fellowship is withdrawn until they repent and then are restored.

Phillip
 
As to the what, the WCF describes the process: "IV. For the better attaining of these ends, the officers of the church are to proceed by admonition; suspension from the sacrament of the Lord's Supper for a season; and by excommunication from the church; according to the nature of the crime, and demerit of the person."

Here is an excerpt from the PCA Book of Church Order, which describes how suspension is applied.

30-1. The censures, which may be inflicted by church courts, are admonition, suspension from the Sacraments, excommunication, suspension from office, and deposition from office. The censures of admonition or definite suspension from office shall be administered to an accused who, upon conviction, satisfies the court as to his repentance and makes such restitution as is appropriate. Such censure concludes the judicial process. The censures of indefinite suspension or excommunication shall be administered to an accused who, upon conviction, remains impenitent.

30-3. Suspension from Sacraments is the temporary exclusion from those ordinances, and is indefinite as to its duration. There is no definite suspension from the Sacraments.


Scott
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top