In responding to what are really a series of questions, it should first be pointed out that the matter raised here has a long history attached to it. One surmises that ever since the time of the Reformation this matter has been in discussion. Indeed almost every professor of Reformed church polity whether in Europe or North America seems to have spoken out on it.

Recently in the Netherlands the issue surfaced anew as the result of a book published by Dr. J. van Bruggen called Ambten in de apostolisch kerk (Offices in the Apostolic Church). In it van Bruggen expresses the opinion that the manner in which the deacons in Reformed churches are currently involved in the government of the church is a departure from both Scripture and from the history of the early Christian church. According to him, there should be a stricter and more precise division of labour result­ing in a clear distinction between the consistory (minister and elders) and the deacons.

Naturally, Prof. van Bruggen is entitled to his opinion but can he prove his case conclusively? A careful scrutiny of what Scripture teaches does not lead to any definitive conclusions. True, it refers often enough to the offices of bishops, elders and deacons, but it does not speak as such about whether all three or only two belonged to the ruling body of the church. If Phil. 1:1 hints at anything it would appear to support the case for the inclusion of the deacons when it refers to "the bishops and deacons". On the other hand, if Acts 15 is used as a point of reference the argument would side more for their exclusion for it is clear that the matter of circumci­sion by the Gentiles was considered only by the "apostles and the elders" (v.6).

Turning next to the confessions, we find that they too fail to answer our question conclusively. Only the Belgic Confession touches on the matter when it states in Article 30 that "there should also be elders and deacons who, together with the pastors, form the council of the Church." From this and from what else is mentioned in this Article it appears that the Confession is of the opinion that deacons can and should partake in the government of the church, also in matters of discipline and oversight. Consider for example this quote from Article 30 and note how it combines in one and the same sentence matters of doctrine and matters of benevolence:

By these means they preserve the true religion; they see to it that the true doctrine takes its course, that evil men are disciplined in a spiritual way and are restrained, and also that the poor and all afflicted are helped and comforted according to their need.

But, if the Confession seems to respond posi­tively to the involvement of the deacons, the Church Order does not clearly follow suit. On the one hand, it allows for the possibility that in small congrega­tions the deacons may be added to the consistory (Article 39). On the other hand, it also states that the consistory is in reality only composed of the minis­ters of the Word and the elders (Article 38). The result is that in some cases they belong and in others they do not.

Needless to say, all of this does not give us a conclusive answer. And perhaps that is how the Lord meant it to be! What He appears to be saying to His church is that while there should be no doubt about the number and duty of the respective offices, how those offices function and interrelate in a local congregation does not need to be stipulated. This is an area where the wisdom and guidance of the Holy Spirit must be sought and implemented. Hence an arrangement that may work well in one congrega­tion may not work well in another. In short, there is freedom and discretion in this matter. No one is able to say conclusively, "thus says the Lord."

Hence this is not so much a matter of legislation as of consultation. I have served in churches where both approaches were used. In one the deacons met monthly with the elders and the minister in what was called the "consistory with the deacons" or the "council." In another the deacons only met with the consistory two or three times a year.

Reflecting on those situations it has to be said that both "worked." Yet perhaps that is not really the issue. At bottom the debate here may not be about what "works" but about what "works best." And in that case I have to come down clearly on the side of deacons meeting monthly with the consistory. True, it requires more meetings; however, in terms of promoting real teamwork and pastoral profi­ciency in the congregation, it cannot be surpassed.

My experience has been that in places where the deacons rarely meet with the consistory there exists an almost constant friction between the elders and deacons. For one the deacons develop this feeling that they do not really belong and are but second-rate office-bearers. For another, the elders begin to take an almost condescending attitude to the dea­cons and view their occasional joint meetings as an opportunity to call the deacons on the carpet.

On the other hand, when the deacons are regu­larly present at the consistory and even see themselves as members of the church council, a lot of the competitiveness is taken away. It is no longer a matter of higher or lower, belonging or not belong­ing, ruling or not ruling. It becomes more a matter of being in this work of the Lord together.

Of course, that does not and should not mean that the distinction between the respective offices disappears. No, each office needs to know its task, focus and responsibilities. Preaching and teaching remains the calling of the minister. Overseeing the doctrine and life of the congregation remains the calling of the elders. Ministering to those in need remains the calling of the deacons.

Nevertheless, it is not possible to draw strict lines of division between these tasks. There is overlap. There is spill over. Often a financial problem has a doctrinal side to it. The Bible says that there is wisdom in many counselors and the same applies to the offices. It is a mark of wisdom and maturity when elders, deacons and ministers can together deal with pastoral problems and work towards their proper resolution.

Do the deacons belong? In my mind there is not any doubt about it.