I. What is being confessed in this article?⤒🔗

It discusses the usefulness of good regulations for church life — order and discipline — and especially what requirements need to be met.

1. The office-bearers are to lead in the church. That is why they are called to "govern." It is expedient and right that such rulers should establish a set order among themselves to maintain the body and life of the church.
2. Yet we believe that they should beware of deviating from what Christ, who has the ultimate authority, has commanded us. That is why we reject everything that men invent and devise and all self-made laws that bind the consciences in whatever way as a means to dictate how God should be served.
3. This implies that only those things that are conducive to harmony and unity are acceptable to us, and only in such a way that it preserves us all in our obedience to God.
4. To that end there is an obligation, if necessary, to exclude any unfaithful person from the fellowship of the church in accordance with God’s Word. This obligation also includes everything that is attached to such an excommunication or banishment.

II. The benefit of establishing a proper order←⤒🔗

1. This article speaks of “establishing a certain order In doing so, we should first think of the many rules that apply in church life. They regulate both the interactions within a local church and the inter-church relationships in a particular country or even in various countries.
   It is impossible to list all these rules. For example: at what time the church services start, what the liturgy should look like, which rhymed version of the Psalms is to be used. Very much is regulated in a church order that many churches in a particular country have in common, such as the number of church assemblies (classis, regional synod, general synod), how office-bearers will be ordained and dismissed, on which special days church services will be held, and so forth. Many of these rules are practical in nature and based on agreement, because they cannot be derived directly from the Bible, like, for example, when it comes to the starting times of church services or the number of times a synod should meet. Incidentally, that does not mean that the Bible has nothing to say about these matters, as we will see later.
   An apparently special part of this order is ecclesiastical discipline, for the article calls special attention to this in a final sentence. We will return to this separately in Section IV.
2. Extensive and powerful warnings are given against an order based on laws and rules that deviate from Scripture. This is no surprise because when this article was written, Rome served as the appalling example of a church with an unscriptural order, invented by men. Therefore, on December 10, 1520, Luther rightly allowed the ecclesiastical law books to go up in flames — along with the papal bull — at the waste incineration site of Wittenberg near the Elbe River.
   In reaction to these Roman Catholic abuses, the Anabaptists believed that no new rules should be introduced at all. They thought that that was best for the church. This reactionary attitude can be found time and again in church history. After one has fought against a wrong or an abused church order, some do not want to have anything to do with any church order anymore. They would, as  Calvin put it, seek to wipe out all the laws by which the church order is composed with one stroke of the pen. Over against this we point to the balance that this article provides. However acutely it sees the dangers and warns against them extensively, it still professes that it is “useful and good” that the office-bearers “establish a certain order to maintain the body of the church” amongst themselves.
3. Why is a fixed order useful and good? Rather soberly Calvin remarks that it will simply never happen that all church people will agree on and appreciate the same thing. That is why many matters need to be clearly set in place. Otherwise disorder and arbitrariness would reign supreme.
4. What is decisive, however, is that the Bible itself teaches us that there ought to be good order. In the church at Corinth, people did not care so much about each other. Each went his own way. Sometimes several people prophesied at the same time during the church service. Even at the Lord’s Supper table the rich did not care about the poor. But this was not allowed to be that way and therefore Paul gave various kinds of rules for the celebration of the Lord’s Supper (1 Corinthians 11:28-34), for prophesying in the church service, and about the position of women (1 Corinthians 14:26-40).
   The main argument for this order is: “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace” (1 Corinthians 14:33a). The contrast between "confusion" and "peace" is instructive. That is to say, the ultimate goal is not order in itself, but peace. There should be no order for the sake of order. Then the door is opened for the dangerous religion of "rules and regulations" as put in place by Rome. It is especially against this that the article warns strongly when it rejects “all human inventions and laws introduced into the worship of God which bind and compel the consciences in any way.”
   Even with rules that are inherently good, idolatry is committed as soon as these are intended to be relied upon “instead of, or in addition to, the only true God” (see Heidelberg Catechism, answer 95).
   That is why the church is not where it should be if it would only have a well-functioning form of organization. Peace with God and with each other is to be enjoyed in her. That is what the established order should be aimed at.

III. The conditions for a proper order in the church←⤒🔗

1. The church has a certain freedom in making laws that are to guarantee good order. But the end of the established order does not justify the means. We will cite an example. Some denominations opt for a hierarchical organization. Their local churches are the subdivisions under progressively higher administrations, with a synod at the top. But even if one were to maintain a fixed order in this way, such systems must still be rejected. Why? Because the Holy Spirit did not appoint a classis, synod, or pope over his churches, but elders (Acts 20:28). The decisive question is not what men deem useful and efficient for a fixed order, but what Christ wants. And therefore we shall “at all times watch that they do not deviate from what Christ, our only Master, has commanded.”
   The one great condition is that Christ is to remain Lord and Master in his church (Matthew 17:5; Matthew 23:8).
2. Meanwhile it is not as if the church can derive all rules directly from the Bible. While our confessions are derived directly from Scripture, that is not the case with many rules from our church order. To give an example: Nowhere does the Bible say that the consistory needs to convene the congregation on Christmas Day, but the church order makes this stipulation. This is related to the fact that one church may have arranged all kinds of things differently from a neighbouring church, while the church customs may differ even more from country to country. So there is a certain freedom, but it is not unconditional. Our article puts it this way: “We accept only what is proper to preserve and promote harmony and unity, and to keep all in obedience to God.” All rules need to comply with this dual standard.
3. This implies that in the church all kinds of matters have to be arranged about which the Bible does not make direct statements and about which people do not judge equally. Then the agreement of the Church Order applies which stipulates that decisions made by majority vote shall be considered as settled and binding, unless it is proven that it is contrary to God’s Word or to the Church Order.
   Once a decision has been made on a matter, everyone is to abide by it, including those who voted against it, except, of course, if that decision would go against God’s Word or the church order.
4. Rules that are not directly derived from Scripture may be changed if necessary: “It will be proper,” according to Calvin, “as the interest of the church may require, to change and abrogate the old, as well as to introduce new forms. I confess, indeed, that we are not to innovate rashly or incessantly, or for trivial causes” (Institutes IV.10.30).
   These are wise words. We should therefore not cling rigidly to (for instance) an outdated rhyming of the psalms, nor should we make all kinds of changes quickly and without urgent reasons.        

IV. Discipline as an integral part of the order in the church←⤒🔗

1. After the article has dealt more generally about the order in the church, it draws attention in a closing sentence to a specific aspect of this order, namely the exercise of “discipline and excommunication,” to be observed by the church.
2. The article is very short on this matter of discipline and excommunication. Yet in those few words exactly the necessary points are mentioned:
   a. the purpose ("to that end") of the steps of discipline is the unity of the congregation and its obedience to God;
   b. it is required ("it ought to be exercised...");
   c. it is in agreement with God’s Word;
   d. In view is not only the final step of discipline, in other words, the actual exclusion, but also the process that precedes it.
   Some comments on these points follow below.
3. According to the article, the purpose of the suspension and the final step is therefore to preserve both the unity of the congregation and its obedience to God. We can expand on this objective as follows:
   a. Excommunication is the last resort for the sinner concerned. It is a measure to bring him back to this unity and obedience (1 Corinthians 5:5; Hebrews 12:4-11).
   b. Also for the congregation it is the saving means to keep its own unity and obedience pure, because without it the evil will proliferate (1 Corinthians 5:6), and God’s wrath is to be feared upon all the members of the church (1 Corinthians 11:30-32).
   c. Excommunication is, in a sense, also the remedy for the name of God, because a church that leaves public sinners in their wrong ways gives the outside world an opportunity to defame God’s church and thus God’s name.
4. Discipline is required because Scripture prescribes it. More than one objection has been raised against the enforcement of this discipline. It was believed, especially in the nineteenth century, that the church got in the way of the Holy Spirit with her "harsh" discipline. Being under discipline would only frighten and harden the sinner.
   Another objection is that the one who exercises discipline acts as if he knows and does everything better.
   In the face of such kinds of objections, we need to listen to Scripture. Paul was indignant when the church at Corinth did not exercise discipline where it was needed (see 1 Corinthians 5). And even in Jesus’ brief epistles to the seven churches in Asia Minor, he raises this matter several times (Revelation 2:2; 14-16, 20; see also 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15).
5. Discipline ought to be exercised “in agreement with the Word of God.” This also means that attention needs to be given as much to doctrine as to a person’s life. Now it is often thought that one’s teaching is only the theory he holds, and that it is much more important what he does in practical living. It is not so much someone’s words, but especially his actions that would be important. There is an element of truth: We may not put on a false front. But anyone who preaches or believes a doctrine that deviates from God’s own Word is on a perilous path. Why? Because he is in the process of poisoning the well from which he is to drink. That is why we are not allowed to reason that while someone may deviate from the Bible, he lives a decent and exemplary life, and that makes up for a lot. For the Scriptures teach us that deviation from the Christian doctrine—, deviation from God’s own Word—also requires discipline. See Romans 16:17; Galatians 1:6-9; 1 Timothy 1:20; and the texts mentioned under point 4 (above) from Revelation 2.
6. Discipline ought to be exercised "according to God’s Word," which also means that it must be established that there has been [or "is"] sin against the Lord and not merely against "human inventions."
   Foundational to all steps of discipline is Jesus’ word: “Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 18:18). That means that the boundary drawn by the church on earth must coincide precisely with the boundary drawn by Christ in heaven. In other words, the boundary drawn by the church and the consistory is the boundary drawn by Christ. In every disciplinary procedure Christ goes first and the church follows. Here applies the guideline: as in heaven, so also on earth. Unfortunately, it has often happened that things were bound on earth, thus declared binding, which were definitely not binding in heaven. That is why Luther rightly burned his papal bull (an act of excommunication) at the time. And office-bearers have also rightly continued their service in office after having been suspended or even deposed on unscriptural grounds.        

Points to discuss←↰⤒🔗

1. One of the articles of the Church Order reads, “Each year the churches shall, in the manner decided upon by the consistory, commemorate the birth, death, resurrection, and ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ, as well as his outpouring of the Holy Spirit.” Make it clear why a New Year’s Eve service, New Year’s Day service, and the so-called prayer and thanksgiving services for crops and labour do not fit in this enumeration.
2. Article 74 of the [Dutch] church order states: “When someone has been admonished about a secret sin according to the rule of Matthew 18 and he does not heed it, or when someone has committed a public sin, this will be reported to the consistory.”
   What is the rule of Matthew 18? And why does this rule apply to secret and not to public sin?
3. Review how the steps of discipline are applied when someone continues to harden in his sin. Identify the four stages as described in the Church Order.
4. An argument against discipline would be that in the church the weeds need to grow up among the wheat and that they should not be rooted up according to Matthew 13:29-30. Why is this application of the parable incorrect? See especially the conclusion of Matthew 13:37.
5. It is argued that a church that suspends ministers when they deviate from the confession is actually jeopardizing the unity of the church. However, who is threatening the unity of the church, according to Romans 16:17?
6. Another view is that the church may clearly reject a minister who expresses a dissenting opinion (this is called "judicial" discipline), but she may not suspend and remove him (this is called "jurisprudential" discipline). As an argument for this, it is claimed that “God’s Word is sufficiently strong to overcome error.” What is the error in this kind of reasoning?