Presbyterian government in practice

[Montanablue]

One of the things that has always appealed to me about the various Presbyterian denominations is the form of government. I'm wary of church leaders abusing their power and being able to appeal the decisions of sessions before one's presbytery really appeals to me. Lately though, I've been wondering how often this actually happens and if the theory actually works in practice. Do any of you have any insights or experience with this?

A real life situation (of course) has brought on my question. I have a friend who was a member of a presbyterian church (I won't say what denomination, but everyone here would recognize it as legitimate, reformed, and biblical). In a certain situation, she feels that she was wrongly rebuked and disciplined by the session. (I won't go into details and I don't know all of them, but she does seem to have legitimate concerns about the way she was treated). She wanted to bring the issue up before the presbytery, not only to clear her own name, but also because she was concerned for others, but has been unable to do so - and its been almost a year. First, her session would not tell her the process that she needed to take. Then, after figuring it out via the church's book of church order, she was warned that she risked soiling her reputation even if she was found to be without blame. Other obstacles also seemed to be put in her way. The end result has been that she finally just gave up, deciding that it wasn't worth it, especially since she moved to another state and had joined another church in a different presbyterian denomination.

So, how difficult to you think it is to bring a charge against your session before the presbytery? How often does it happen? Can sessions block this sort of thing? It seems as though in some denominations one almost has to have the consent of the session to bring up a charge against them - which I would think could be problematic!

I would be interested in hearing about the process from people from a variety of denominations. I've never been a member of a presbyterian church (among geographic issues, I'm not paedobaptist), but I've always been interested in joining one. I love the organization, but now I wonder if the system doesn't always match up with its design.

Edit: Oh dear, I mean to post this in church order, not church office. If a mod sees this and would charitable enough to move it, I would appreciate it. Sorry guys.

 

[TimV]

First, her session would not tell her the process that she needed to take.

She needs to get that in writing, like sending a certified letter to the church asking for an advisor to be appointed to help her.

So, how difficult to you think it is to bring a charge against your session before the presbytery?

Super easy. With in the time frame allowed by the BCO, just send a certified letter off to the Presbytery Stated Clerk.

How often does it happen? Can sessions block this sort of thing?

Not near as often as it should, and no, a session can't block it.

It seems as though in some denominations one almost has to have the consent of the session to bring up a charge against them - which I would think could be problematic!

I can't believe that any NAPARC denomination would tolerate this for a second. Rogue Presbyteries like the NorCal Presbytery in the PCA has in the past placed pressure on people not to take action against their sessions, but then you just go over their heads and they panic, since they know the GA would slap them on the heads, and end up doing more or less what they are supposed to. If it comes down to it, I can provide you examples of what I went through, since it's all (to my knowledge) public, and the Presbytery didn't force the session to apologize like they agreed to, so I'm under no obligation to keep silent.

 

[Montanablue]

Interesting. Thanks Tim I don't need specific examples, I was just curious as to how this works in practice since I've never been involved in any kind of Presbyterian government myself. (Not even a congregational meeting). It sounds so great in theory - I wondered if the practice matched up.

So basically, in your denomination, it would have been relatively easy for her to go over their heads even if they were trying to block her.

 

[Wayne]

Kathleen:

Thank you. I do commend your discretion.

"Godly discipline always bears a good fruit, but it is easier to pick lower on the tree."

Disputes should always follow the process outlined by our Lord in Matthew 18:15-17. Always attempt to win your brother or sister in private, before involving others. Work patiently and lovingly.

In the case you describe with your friend, the matter is now moot, since she has moved to another state and since a year has gone by. That year is the limit on bringing a charge.
(Not that I think either of you were intent on bringing a charge in that situation--you are just asking in principle).

The individual can always go directly to the Stated Clerk of the denomination for expert advice on how to proceed. Or with some well placed questions, might find a trusted advisor in the Presbytery who can give advice. Each Presbyterian denomination is going to vary a bit in their Book of Church Order or Form of Government, and so the process of bringing a charge may differ from one denomination to another.

 

[Scott1]

If one is committed to biblical authority and following the process, there are many avenues of appeal- both formal and informal.

One needs faith that, over time, God is going to make things more clear. That's why the process is deliberative.

And remember, church authority is not infallible. Its authority is not based on it always being right in the eyes of one receiving discipline.

One example is one person, basically appealed to His session informally, then formally, then to presbytery, then to a committee of presbytery, then through some maneuvering it got to general assembly (which overturned the lower rulings). It wasn't quick, some people did not understand, but the perseverance with a right attitude paid off.

 

[Montanablue]

In the case you describe with your friend, the matter is now moot, since she has moved to another state and since a year has gone by. That year is the limit on bringing a charge.
(Not that I think either of you were intent on bringing a charge in that situation--you are just asking in principle).

Exactly. She decided that it wasn't worth it and would be too hard to do since she had left (for un-related reasons - namely, a new job). The situation just piqued my curiosity and I wondered if it was a common one.

 

[lynnie]

One thing I do know is that the process can be slow. For example, a person who leaves and wants to go to another church often needs a letter of transfer from their first church, to become a member at the next one. If there is a problem with the session such as you mentioned, and they think the person is not receiving rebuke and discipline or has not properly given the session time to try and work out the conflict, they may not release you from membership. Then you have to appeal to the presbytery to be released from membership, and in the PCA that process could possibly take up to two years.

On the plus side it prevents divisive and bitter people, or those who hold to error, from going to another church and stirring up trouble or bringing in rotten doctrine. But on the minus side, if the session is being unreasonably authoritarian you might wait a long time until the Presbytery clears it up.

Ken Sande's Peacemaker's ministry is used by a lot of Presbyterian churches to expedite things, and there are other biblical reconcilation ministries out there too. In a situation where emotions run high and people are hurt and have agendas, sometimes an objective outside voice can intervene helpfully and faster. Practically speaking the Presbytery is spread out and busy and can't always get together quickly for every problem that comes up. So some churches are real big on utilizing a group like Peacemakers...justice delayed is justice denied as the old saying goes. Others are real strict with protocol and going to the Presbytery even if it takes months or even years.

Does it work? Well, I would say that with the Federal Vision error it worked great. It took time for the GA to get a committee to study and write up a paper but when they finally did it was a great report and the FV was pretty well smashed. I don't think you can teach it and stay in the PCA now at all ( although some keep trying). I think it will work eventually with women deacons also, although it might take a while. As far as personal conflicts with a session, well, that could vary so much you can't make a general rule. But for doctrine, by the time it gets to the GA, they are upholding truth real well.

 

[Rev. Todd Ruddell]

One particular aspect of discipline and order that is often overlooked is that it is and ought to be a process to which all parties are committed for the good of the Church. Only then does the system do what it has been designed by the Lord to do. Too many times we give up, decide it's too much trouble, etc. and wrongdoing is never addressed. It's because we've forgotten that we're a Church in Covenant, and quite more than collected individuals. When we do the hard work of pursuing discipline, even to Presbytery and GA as individuals, or even as sessions, we are working for the good of the Church overall, for our brothers and sisters in the Church. It is not just "our business" as a private matter when sessions or presbyteries over-reach or abuse authority. Such affects our brethren as well, and as a people in covenant with one another we are required by love, and by our vows, to pursue these avenues to their ends. If in the end the GA itself proves unjust, then seek an amiable transfer.

If we were having difficulty in our families, we would not simply leave--but would stay and work it our to the best of our ability and with the lawful means the Lord has given. How much greater is this requirement pressed to our notice in the Church, who are our true "brothers, sisters, and fathers, and mothers". (Luke 8.21)

 

[Scott1]

Chapter XXX
Of Church Censures

I. The Lord Jesus, as king and head of His Church, has therein appointed a government, in the hand of Church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate.[1]

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.[2]

III. Church censures are necessary, for the reclaiming and gaining of offending brethres, 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.[3]

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.[4]

.