Many today wonder why we are united as a federation of churches. Especially today, "community churches," or independent churches are popular. Many think that a federation of congregations restricts the local church. Meanwhile, others are longing for hierarchical churches so that some are returning to the Roman Catholic Church or an Anglican/Episcopal church. The question may well be asked, what does it mean to be a federation of churches?

The New Testament⤒🔗

The New Testament uses the word "church" to designate either a local congregation or a fellowship of local churches in a certain area. Therefore, on the one hand, we may regard the local congregation as a manifestation of the body of Christ. Christ Himself is present there with the fullness of His grace and power. It is there, under the preaching of the Gospel, that sins are forgiven and sinners are convicted, converted and comforted. It is in the local church that God's people grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and are guided by the Holy Spirit.

On the other hand, we can say that local congregations need each other. Even though the Lord's saving work is experienced in the local congregation, an individual congregation does not posses salvation independently from others or by itself.

Salvation is a matter of "all the saints." We therefore are convinced that it is right for Christian congregations to associate and unite under a common government.

The tension between the local congregation and the churches that make up a federation is the same dynamic that exists in the life of every Christian. In Christ, every believer is perfect, but the perfection he has in Christ is also the goal for which he keeps striving. That is also how it is with the church. The Lord Jesus Christ is present with the fullness of His salvation in a local congregation. But salvation is present only in part because the local congregation does not yet enjoy salvation in communion with all saints. This is related to knowing only "in part" as Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13:9. One day the knowing "in part ... shall be done away" with (1 Cor. 13:10). Then the tension between "church" and "churches" will also be done away with. Then everything will be reduced to the simplicity of perfection.

The Pendulum Movement←⤒🔗

Until that time there will continue to be tension between a local congregation and the federation of churches, in more way than one. I wish to point to one facet of that, because this tension sometimes is resolved in a sort of pendulum movement, as is evident from church history. The one side of the pendulum swings to artificial unity that comes by way of denominational government from the top down. It is imposed by hierarchical church government and is not founded on confessional unity. The other side of the pendulum often swings to independence of the local church at the expense of unity with a federation of churches. In some church federations local churches practise a so-called right of ratification. That is, when a synod makes a certain decision, the consistories are only bound by this decision when they ratify it. Such a method makes every decision of a broader assembly debatable.

To be sure, independentism as an overreaction to denominationalism is understandable. It reacts against the usurpa­tion of power by a denominational "higher body" and goes beyond ratification. A denominational "higher body," however, may react against the pendulum swing toward the independentistic right of ratification. Sometimes churches that secede from a denomination ruled by a powerful synod or synodical standing committees swing so far to the right that they reject the Church Order and the authority of broader assemblies.

A Middle Way←⤒🔗

Independentism is a trend in history where the full weight is placed on the autonomy of the local church and the local church functions independently of a church federation. The congregation is fully autonomous. It may have a relation­ship with a fellowship of churches, but that relationship is not an essential part of being a church. That is not all that independentism entails, however. It does not only concern the relationship between the local church and other churches, but also the impacts on the relationship between the congregation and the consistory. It is also possible for the congregation to take a stand independently of the consistory. Independentism is representative of a view that impinges on the exercise of authority in the church. It is seen as lying in the assembly of the believers.

Hierarchical rule does precisely the opposite. This tendency, which surfaces repeatedly throughout church history, exists where persons place themselves above the inheritance of the Lord. This is the case in the Roman Catholic Church. The clergy is distinguished from the laity by possessing an innate, inherent authority. That is what gives the clergy the right to exercise infallible authority over the inheritance of the Lord. The Reformation rejected this hierarchical rule clearly and definitely. But has this leaven been cast out altogether? Can a synod not display hierarchical tendencies or — take note! — can a consistory not lord it over the heritage of the Lord?

Is the Reformed point of view then simply some sort of safe middle path between hierarchy and independentism? No; those who take the middle of the road run the real risk of being so occupied with their own position that they will never reach the goal. Middle-of-the-roaders run a real risk of ending up in an ecclesiastically neurotic position. The Reformed view of the church and federation of churches is not a safe middle of the road position. Rather, it is the way of the Word.

In both independentism and a hierarchical system authority is tied to a man or to a body of men who occupy a position in the church, or to men who are assembled at synod. The Reformed position precisely rejects such a view. It rejects all authority of men and desires only to bow completely under the authority of the Word, that is, under the authority of Him who speaks that Word through His Spirit. The Lord is enthroned as the King of His church and He proclaims His will in His Word.

That is why Reformed church government always seeks to keep open the way to the Word of God. It is the royal way and the way that is distinctly different from the middle of the road. It is a wholesome way and it is the only way. Where the Word of the King is, there is the rule of the King. Everyone who fears God will want to bow in obedience to that Word because it sets us free ... "The truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

The Way of the Holy Spirit←⤒🔗

Because the Reformed relationship is between church and the Word it also is the way of the Holy Spirit. This is so fundamentally Reformed that anyone who forgets this falls into tyranny. This viewpoint elicits courage because it gives one person alone the courage to stand up to a consistory, and if need be, to a synod. The Reformation is unthinkable apart from this fundamental point. The courage of Luther is rooted in it and so was Calvin's. His immovable stand was rooted in God's Word, which makes a person courageous.

This viewpoint not only makes a person courageous, but even more, it makes one humble. The Holy Spirit does not just give only one person an understanding of His will. Rather, He gives His gifts to everyone. The Lord makes His ways known to believers when they consult with each other and they together, prayerfully seek His will according to God's Word. The source that impelled people to speak out about the authority of synods in the days of the Reformation is found in the extraordinary light shed on the work of the Holy Spirit. One can also say that it is by faith in the presence of Christ Himself. It is significant that this is the primary motif in the synodical letters of invitation that have been preserved from the days of the Reformation. Where two or three are gathered together in the Name of Christ, there the Lord Himself is present (cf.Matt.18:20), and there we may pray for His guidance, trusting that He will not leave Himself without a witness.

Therefore, the pluriformity of the gifts of the Holy Spirit also has significant theological implications for churches when they gather in broader assemblies.

Only together, with all the saints, can we compre­hend something of the will of God, as Jesus said, where two or three are gathered together in the Name of Christ, there the Lord Himself is present (cf. Matthew 18:20). This motif we find in the letter sent to the churches that were invited to the founding assembly at Embden in 1571. This letter shows that our Reformed fathers knew very well how the Spirit works. It became very clear to them in the crucial situation of that hour. I would like to call attention to this historic background.

The Link to France←⤒🔗

The federation of churches as we know it in the Reformed tradition is part of the heritage of the great reformer of Geneva, John Calvin. He was the man who laid the foundation, in the first place, as it applies to the development of ecclesiastical life in the country of France, that by virtue of his birth and interest had always been close to his heart. It was there, for the first time, that in Paris, in 1559, the church assembled in a kind of synodical federation.

The occasion for this organizational structure is to be sought in the difficulties that had arisen in some congregations in France and that could not be resolved. For this reason some pastors of neighbouring churches met together after a celebration of the Lord's Supper. During this consultation, it was decided to convene an assembly in Paris, not only because of the importance of that city, but because it was easier to assemble there without being noticed.

The need was felt for some kind of church federation as it related to the circumstances that the churches were experiencing in France. They could not count on help from the governing authorities. On the contrary, they encountered a government that fiercely opposed any ecclesiastical renew­al. In this common need of the hour, the church-federation was born.

Essential for the French churches to come to a union was the Confession of Faith and the Church Order. The French Confession of Faith, which was strongly influenced by Calvin, formed the bond by which the spiritual unity of the churches came to expression. The Church Order formed the basis for the organizational union. The spiritual unity was expressed in the Confession of Faith and therefore the churches could effectively organize by means of an ecclesi­astical arrangement.

Refugee Churches←⤒🔗

This also became the experience of the Reformed churches in the Netherlands. They discovered one another, so to speak, not in difficult circumstances in their own country. Rather, the Dutch Reformed churches discovered one another outside their homeland, in foreign countries, under extremely difficult circumstances.

It was particularly after the coming of the heavy-handed Duke of Alva, that various refugee churches were established in Embden (on the border of Germany and the Netherlands), in East Friesland, in Wezel, in the Pfaltz and Basel, London, and other places. Some of them had been there already for a while, because right at the outbreak of persecution the believers had been exiled or had fled. In Embden there was a congregation that was so large and so influential in the reformation of the Netherlands that it was called the mother-church of the Dutch Reformed Churches. It provided pastors, gave advice, sent help, and received displaced persons. That is why Embden deserves to be mentioned with honour.

Also London was such a place of refuge, where a large congregation had been established already in the days of Edward VI. When in 1567 the persecution became fiercer than ever, such congregations received and took care of refugees. One might think that these refugee churches would not have to wrestle with problems that we encounter today. But that was not the case. Also in those days, when believers were burned at the stake, all kinds of difficulties occurred in the churches. Where people meet, there sinners meet. The churches were also young and the Reformation was still very much in flux.

It was in that great need that there were people who strongly urged the congregations to meet as a federation of churches. Persons who strongly urged them to do so Philip Marnix¹  and others — pointed to the example of the French churches. From Geneva it was Theodore Beza²,  Calvin's successor, who stimulated this development. That is how it happened in 1571³  that the Dutch Reformed Churches met for the first time in an official assembly of delegates. It was organized when an annual market day was held that was visited by a large number of people, so that the delegates might not be noticed.

United in the Faith←⤒🔗

At the Synod at Embden (1571)⁴  the foundation for the unity of a church-federation was laid. What was the essence of this unity? Nothing less than unity of faith and agreement of doctrine, as they expressed it. In Embden, the churches chose for the Reformed doctrines without being overly restrictive. They desired not only to subscribe to the Heidelberg Catechism, but also the Genevan Catechism and the French Confession, thereby manifesting true Reformed ecumenicity. They knew themselves to be related to foreign churches as well.

This Synod at Embden, "strove after the greatest possible unity among the churches for the maintenance and growth of the churches in general or also some in particular, and that they may especially warn one another concerning heretics, schismatics ... and other such dangerous people so that the churches can be on guard against such. They ... expressed unity in the faith which was once delivered to the saints (Jude 3) and in doctrine.⁵

The account of this assembly evokes jealousy. If only we today in our country, could be as unprejudiced, stop making things so complicated, not ask so many questions and give so many answers, but simply subscribe to the Confessions! Were these Reformed brothers then all like-minded? Not at all. There were those who later were regarded as too accommodating. There were those who later would be regarded as too "precise." There were those who were convinced Calvinists and also those who had to be persuaded. But they confessed their unity in the faith, without disputing secondary matters. They helped each other, and the churches helped each other. That is what they had learned from the Word of God, and that is why they wished to place themselves under the authority of that Word of God.

This is how, in a difficult period in history, the church-federation of the Dutch Reformed Churches came into being. It was on the basis of the one confession of faith. When we today hear all kinds of objections to church-federation, which come in a variety of ways, we ought to familiarize ourselves with the history of these churches, and we ought to ask whether here is not an example for us.

To be sure, a church-federation can function wrongly. It can degenerate into a new kind of hierarchy and become a tool for lording it over others. Then it becomes a man-cen­tred organization of proud sinners, lusting for power. Then it functions wrongly, not because the structure is wrong in itself, but because people who are wrong administer it wrongly.

The Word must have authority, and the Word alone. Therein lies the unity of the churches. Where this unity is missing, a Church Order does not keep things together. A Reformed Church Order is for Reformed people, that is, for converted people. Where people refuse to deny themselves and bow before God, this means is not helpful. But where they meet each other on the one and only basis, that is, at the foot of that one cross of Jesus, there they recognize each other.

Sometimes God uses evil times for His church to experience unity. That becomes evident from history. Perhaps, today we enjoy too much prosperity for our flesh to experience the blessing of this spiritual bond of the churches in one church-federation.