The word, “authorized” will sound familiar to the ears of most consistories. It is written on the letters of the consistories to classis — the letters in which they announce the names of the brothers who will be delegated to attend classis.

The text of the letter (we call it the credentials letter, or originally, letter of faith, this name can be found in Article 32 of the church order) reads:

The consistory of the Christian Reformed Church in the Netherlands at…during the consistory meeting of…appointed and delegated to the classical meeting which is to be held on…at…the brothers…with an authorization, to decide and carry out, together with the delegates, on the basis of God’s Word, the accepted forms of unity, the Church Order of Dort, and further synodical agreements of our churches, all the work which belongs to this classical gathering.

I wrote out the complete text because I need it later in this article. The letters of credentials pertaining to those sent from classis to regional synod and from regional synod to general synod have the same content.

Intent of the Letter of Credentials⤒🔗

The intent of the credentials letter is to make clear to the concerned gathering who has been delegated and by which consistory (for simplicity, I will continue with this example). Those brothers have the right to speak and the right to vote; others do not. It can happen that, besides the delegated brothers, other concerned individuals also wish to attend the assembly. Then it needs to be clear who exactly has a seat at the discussion table. Imagine someone invading the assembly and presenting himself as a delegate. The assembly would not know what is going on and the president would not know who he should allow to vote and who not. The situation presented above is not entirely theoretical; in the Netherlands Reformed Church (where people, for emotional reasons retained from past history, are sometimes very scared of an all too formal procedure), it sometimes happens that the regional classis is held without, at the beginning, determining from written documents who is actually a participant and who is there out of interest (and that happens now and then). Then it falls to trust. In itself, there is nothing wrong with that, but if problems do come up… Therefore, at the beginning of every major assembly, the hosting church opens and reads all credentials, the names of the delegated brothers are announced, and then the work begins!

The Burden←⤒🔗

Delegated members of a consistory thus go to the classis with a “burden.” They carry that with them, so to speak. Sometimes, in special cases, a consistory can have a specific wish for discussion — an instruction — at the classis. The consistory has already thought about this extensively and asks the classis to do that as well. That instruction can be included in the letter of credentials. That is the way it used to be done; nowadays the consistory sends the text of the proposal (instructions) to the hosting church which sees to it that the text together with other pieces for the agenda is sent to all consistories in a timely manner. That allows them to peruse the pieces and if desired speak about them together at an church council meeting prior to the gathering of classis.

The Power←⤒🔗

But when you get to this point, you have to be careful. The brothers are delegated, not only with a burden, but also with power. It is of concern to weigh that word “power.” What are the delegates allowed to do? The text says that they receive power “to make decisions on all things and carry out all tasks that belong to the work of the assembly.” That is therefore a mandate with a lot of room to maneuver. Naturally, it must happen within the bounds of Scripture, confession, church order, and synodical decisions, but within those boundaries there is a lot of room. When we speak about power here, we are naturally not speaking about a greater authority. That is not common in our church society. Church gatherings are, in principle, equal. Only the consistory has permanent authority, derived from the authority of Christ. Classis and other major assemblies have only derived authority given to them by the consistories¹. Moreover, that is at the same time a sign of the good mutual spiritual understanding within the federation of churches; one trusts that the other brothers, together with those from your own consistory, will be able to come to good decisions about their own and others’ presentations with spiritual wisdom and understanding.

It is self-evident that those brothers must then also have the room (the authority) to discuss, to weigh options, to compare, and so together with the others, grow toward a decision. Consistories therefore must not send their delegates with strict orders to make a decision on a certain issue in a certain way. Is that obvious? It should be, but history teaches that it was not always the case. In October 1618, synod was constituted at Zierikzee and gave the delegates to the national synod of Dordrecht specific orders as to how to vote. If the issue should take a different direction, then the brothers would first have to return to those who delegated them (that is in Zierikzee). They went, as it were, with an imperative mandate, a forcing mandate. Also, a few years ago, I heard of a classis in our churches, where the brothers from one consistory came with the proscribed mandate to vote in the way the consistory had ordered when a certain issue came to order. Undoubtedly, they had good intentions in doing this, but it must be said: in principle, this goes beyond the rules stating that everyone at classis is seated with an authorization. Just imagine what the results would be if every consistory bound its delegates in this manner; then the chairman would be justified in immediately calling for a vote on a particular issue when the specific issue appears on the table; discussion and the forming of an opinion have become redundant. More than this, it presumes the thought (although not intended by anyone) that the local consistory is of the opinion that it possesses just as much wisdom as all the brothers from the other churches together. You understand the tension this will bring to the gathering of classis.

Holding Back, Also in Committee Tasks←⤒🔗

The meaning of the word “authorization” implies that the consistory will be reserved as they view the agenda of classis together beforehand. Some discussion in advance can be useful and is certainly not wrong; it can help the brothers to orient themselves around the topic and be well prepared. However, they always need to receive sufficient room to openly and uprightly enter into and participate in discussion from their informed position and eventually cooperate in coming to an amenable decision which may develop in a different direction than what was previously foreseen by the consistory.

That same reservation is also valid when it comes to the weighing of the decisions made by the assembly at the classis: the brothers report to the consistory. The consistory is not called to reassess everything or to repeat it in liturgical terms — to ratify the decisions. There are churches with Reformed principles where that is the rule: the Free Reformed Churches, for example. I agree with Prof. Van ’t Spijker’s opinion that that in effect takes away the basis of trust placed in each other, grounded in brotherly fellowship (“Het gezag der meerdere vergaderingen” — Ambtelijk Contact 1977, p. 112). This leaves unimpeded that, when a consistory believes that a particular decision is in conflict with principal boundaries, they can make use of Article 31 Church Order. They can submit an appeal. However, we proceed from the principle of trust, and not of the principle of trust after reassessing decisions.

That same reservation is especially important for committee affairs. A while ago a consistory considered in this context how delegates could decide on a difficult personal matter without consulting with the consistory: items for committee affairs are not distributed among the consistories prior to the assembly. From the explanations given above, it will be clear, I hope, that this consultation is also not necessary; the brothers have authorization to do everything at the assembly. A consistory can take extra care in appointing the delegates and appoint specific brothers for the purpose. Then, as members of that assembly, the brothers are especially dependent on each other, praying for wisdom from the Spirit. The report from the committee affairs to the assembly should be extremely brief and reserved since it is about a person. That is not a bad thing; the consistory trusts that the issue was dealt with wisely by their own brothers and by the others. That seems unsatisfactory, but it is good in the deepest sense from a church point of view. Since office-bearers are bound to their promise of confidentiality (promised at their installation), committee affairs remain extremely delicate, so great reservation must be enacted when the meeting is closed. Documents with information that serves for such a matter is always handed in when it is concluded. However, it is desirable that during the discussion, if this should prolong over multiple days/weeks, the relevant material remains in the possession of the members of the assembly, under the bond of secrecy. How else could one prepare himself in a well-founded way?