What is a Presbyterian General Assembly?

A (possibly radical) proposal for a fresh answer.

What is a Presbyterian General Assembly. The short answer is it’s the highest court of the Church, but the terms in that short answer deserve further elaboration.

For instance, what is the church? In the standards of The Presbyterian Church in Canada, such as Living Faith, “The church is Christ together with his people called both to worship and to serve him in all of life.” That’s in line with earlier Reformed statements, such as the Westminster Confession’s description of the church as people who “being of age, professed faith in Christ, and obedience unto Christ, according to the rules of faith and life taught by Christ and his apostles; and of their children.” This puts the focus of the church on the people in the pews.

“Councils since the apostles’ times, whether general or particular, may err, and many have erred; therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practice, but to be used as a help in both.”

The importance of that focus on the professed faith in the pews becomes clearer when contrasted with other possibilities. In hierarchical views of the church, such as some strains of Roman Catholic thought, the focus of the church is on leaders who follow a received apostolic tradition. Under the leadership of the Spirit, the leaders have the magisterium, the teaching authority, and are preserved from serious error. The church, in this view, is faithful as the people follow the lead of those anointed teachers.

The Reformed tradition was never so optimistic about the possibility of any group of people being preserved from error. The authors of the 16th century Scots Confession, while they appreciated the wisdom of decisions church leaders “assembled together in general councils lawfully gathered, have set before us… [did] not receive uncritically whatever has been declared to men under the name of the general councils, for it is plain that, being human, some of them have manifestly erred, and that in matters of great weight and importance.”

“In the Reformed tradition, leaders make decisions which the congregations follow because they find them in agreement with the word.”

A century later, the Westminster Confession builds on that insight when it explains, “councils since the apostles’ times, whether general or particular, may err, and many have erred; therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practice, but to be used as a help in both.” Only the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments can serve as the trustworthy rule of faith or practice.

The Scots Confessors knew church councils could offer valuable guidance as long as their decisions met the standard: “as the council confirms its decrees by the plain Word of God, so far do we reverence and embrace them.” This is paralleled in the Westminster Confession’s affirmation a council’s “decrees and determinations, if consonant to the word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission, not only for their agreement with the word, but also for the power whereby they are made…”

“A few people at the top of a hierarchy often make decisions removed from the grass roots where decisions will be implemented. Church hierarchies can fall victim to this tendency as well.”

In a hierarchical church, leaders make decisions which congregations are expected to follow. In the Reformed tradition, leaders make decisions which the congregations follow because they find them in agreement with the word. Entrepreneurial leaders often find Presbyterian-Reformed decision-making by consensus frustrating. They tend to think, “God so loved the world he didn’t send a committee.” Broad consultation takes time.

But there is safety in numbers of counselors. While novelty mugs may have slogans like “Be reasonable: do it my way,” we know a second opinion is usually useful. “Two heads are better than one” is the cultural proverb. The biblical proverb is “For lack of guidance a nation falls, but victory is won through many advisers.” (Proverbs 11:14)

Decisions that seem wise in the corporate boardroom are often impractical or unworkable on the shop floor. A few people at the top of a hierarchy often make decisions removed from the grass roots where decisions will be implemented. Church hierarchies can fall victim to this tendency as well. The Reformed-Presbyterian preference for leadership by persuasion rather than prescription is a kind of protection against this.

“The Book of Forms begins with the reminder a fundamental principle of The Presbyterian Church in Canada is ‘the organic unity of the church is maintained in a hierarchy of courts (in contra-distinction to a hierarchy of persons)’ ”

This is one of the reasons why the Book of Forms begins with the reminder a fundamental principle of The Presbyterian Church in Canada is “the organic unity of the church is maintained in a hierarchy of courts (in contra-distinction to a hierarchy of persons) …” (Book of Forms § 3)

Contemporary usage defines courts as places of judgment where verdicts are rendered and punishments declared. But the Presbyterian usage goes back to an earlier understanding of court. Even the most autocratic kings needed help: dukes and earls could help turn his desires into laws and rules the subjects could follow. These nobles were the king’s court. Church leaders function as courtiers to King Jesus, helping church members know how to follow His rules.

Earthly nobles tended to see their position as an opportunity to claim privilege and authority, to “lord it over” others. Jesus said leadership was an opportunity for service: “…whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:43-45)

“While a General Assembly may function like a legislature passing laws and regulations, that’s not its primary function. Its most important function is to be a gathering in which church leaders meet to listen and discern the will of Jesus and find ways to put it in practice.”

For that reason, the Book of Forms is clear that the authority of courts (in particular, and church leaders generally) “is ministerial and declarative, announcing what Christ has revealed…” (Book of Forms §3) While a General Assembly may function like a legislature passing laws and regulations, that’s not its primary function. Its most important function is to be a gathering in which church leaders meet to listen and discern the will of Jesus and find ways to put it in practice.

The authority of the council is “ministerial” because it seeks to serve, not rule. The courtiers of Jesus must follow the example of Him who came “as one who serves.” (Luke 22:27) As Paul wrote to the Ephesians, church leaders “equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up…” (Ephesians 4:12)

Thus, their authority is “declarative” rather than “regulatory” or “directive” because their work is “announcing what Christ has revealed, and applying his law according to his direction.” (Book of Forms §3) The ties binding the Presbyterian Church are not the straightforward bonds of governors and governed.

“Members of the Presbyterian Church are not employees following corporate policies. They are brothers and sisters working together for the advancement of the Kingdom of Heaven.”

Instead, those ties are the more subtle bonds of family members sharing a common mission. A General Assembly’s decisions gain authority as the family as a whole sees them as “consonant to the word of God,” and sees them as ways of working together in the mission Christ has given us. Members of the Presbyterian Church are not employees following corporate policies. They are brothers and sisters working together for the advancement of the Kingdom of Heaven.

For that reason, there is (or should be) sadness and regret when a church court feels compelled to act judicially. They’re not calling out a kind of Royal Presbyterian Mounted Police to enforce order. They’re recognising a breach has occurred in the family about what is “consonant to the word of God.” They’re seeking to restore the family relationship. The goal of faithful church discipline isn’t enforcing compliance but restoring relationships and getting back together in the mission Christ has entrusted to his family.

“There is (or should be) sadness and regret when a church court feels compelled to act judicially. They’re not calling out a kind of Royal Presbyterian Mounted Police to enforce order.”

When the larger church family sees the members of church courts acting as courtiers following the lead of the King of kings, not seeking to advance their own agendas but faithfully serving the Kingdom, the family gains confidence in the court’s actions. Then they are able to receive them, as the Confession says, “with reverence and submission, not only for their agreement with the word, but also for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God, appointed thereunto in his word.” It depends on whose voice the sisters and brothers hear in those decisions.

For example, in 2005, the General Assembly adopted “Leading with Care,” declaring “It is the policy of The Presbyterian Church in Canada that all persons, and in particular all children, youth and vulnerable adults, who participate in the denomination’s programs/ministries and/or use the denomination’s facilities will be cared for with Christian compassion and will be safe.” Over the years, Presbyterians across the church have come to embrace the policy because they heard in it the voice of the One who warned, “It would be better for [people] to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.” (Luke 17:2)

“The goal of faithful church discipline isn’t enforcing compliance but restoring relationships and getting back together in the mission Christ has entrusted to his family.”

Westminster’s affirmation, “All synods or councils since the apostles’ times, whether general or particular, may err, and many have erred,” is undeniable. A hundred years ago, the dominant controversy was church union. Less obvious, but still real, was a dispute about the residential school system. Some Presbyterians denounced the cruel conditions at the schools and urged reform. The General Assembly disagreed and endorsed the schools. Over the years, Presbyterians across the church have learned who spoke with the voice of the One who came to “gather the people of all nations and languages, and they will come and see my glory.” (Isaiah 66:18)

The Presbyterian Church in Canada faces increasingly urgent challenges. It is tempting to seek a visionary leader who can tell the church what to do. But the Reformed tradition has been suspicious of such leaders. All of us together are wiser than any of us alone. All of us are more likely to see what a few of us would miss.

“The most recent Assembly empaneled a Commission to solve the crisis facing the church, giving them authority to act . . . Maybe they will find the right answer and this speed will be a blessing. But it’s also likely they’ll miss something.”

The most recent Assembly empaneled a Commission to solve the crisis facing the church, giving them authority to act because the urgency of the task does not leave time for broader consultation. Maybe they will find the right answer and this speed will be a blessing. But it’s also likely they’ll miss something, and that will knock their plans off course. The traditional Presbyterian pattern of consultation and consensus building offers some protection against that possibility. We ignore that at our peril.

“The General Assembly is not the church. It’s a group of church members who meet for a few days to decide certain specific questions, then disperse back to their places of worship and service.”

The General Assembly is not the church. It’s a group of church members who meet for a few days to decide certain specific questions, then disperse back to their places of worship and service. General Assemblies come and go; the church continues. The General Assembly is not the church; its decisions are not automatically decisions of the church. The larger church accepts and follows an Assembly’s decisions as it finds them “consonant to the word of God,” as it hears in them the voice of the one true living God.

The Presbyterian-Reformed tradition strives for balance in relating to councils like the General Assembly. We receive The Acts and Proceedings neither critically (“you can’t make me”) nor customarily (“whatever you say is fine”). We receive them expectantly, openly, hopefully. We seek to hear the voice of Jesus, ready to lead where he calls. We seek to follow the example of the Bereans who received the apostolic teaching: with great eagerness, examining the scriptures every day to see whether these things are true. (see Acts 17:11)

We do this because we seek to follow Jesus, the Good Shepherd, who said, “his sheep follow him because they know his voice. But they will never follow a stranger…” (John 10:4-5) May we always be people of whom Jesus can say, “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.” (John 10:27)