The Congregational way; a hand-book of Congregational principles and practices

Introduction

CHANGES AND CONDITIONS

Congregationalism, being a live organism, is progressive, and, not being fossilized by fixed law, applies its principles to

that

This first edition of The Congregational Way is issued with ^^^

the thought that it is probably incomplete, that there must be ndi-

cases and perplexities arising for which advice is not specifi- ^j^gg

cally provided, or to which the principles stated may not be easy of application. Those who have difficulties which it does

not solve, or suggestions as to better usage, or corrections of brn-

any kind to make, are earnestly requested to correspond with mall

the author, that a later edition may be made more complete or lUm-

correct. ry.

George M. Boynton.

Congregational House, Boston, Mass. ison

ated the former to the latter. The need has become felt of some voluntary continuous organization, within which the autonomy of each individual church should be assured. So from the local conferences of churches, the slate associations naturally grew, and from them in turn the National Council was evolved composed of delegates from these smaller bodies.

The ministry has changed from the time when one was only considered to be a minister while he ministered to some local church, and when installation was in some sort a reordination. It has come to be a profession, in which the man once ordained has a standing of his own in the churches and in the ministerial association.

Congregationalism has no adopted statements of belief to 3

FEB f 1904

Copyright, igos ^ By George M. Boynton

This first edition of The Congregational Way is issued with the thought that it is probably incomplete, that there must be cases and perplexities arising for which advice is not specifically provided, or to which the principles stated may not be easy of application. Those who have difficulties which it does not solve, or suggestions as to better usage, or corrections of any kind to make, are earnestly requested to correspond with the author, that a later edition may be made more complete or correct.

George M. Boynton.

Congregational House ^ Boston, Mass.

INTRODUCTION

CHANGES AND CONDITIONS

Congregationalism, being a live organism, is progressive, and, not being fossilized by fixed law, applies its principles to new conditions as they arise. It is in view of this fact that from time to time new statements of Congregational usage are indispensable, bringing down the record to the present and indicating the tendencies of the future. The spread of the churches of the denomination brings in important changes.

Methods of fellowship which were adequate between a limited number of churches located within a comparatively small area were insufficient when these churches came to be numbered by thousands and separated by thousands of miles. The value of the pro re nata Council has changed in comparison with conferences which have continuous existence and stated -neetings, and the tendency is to increasing transfer from the former to the latter. The need has become felt of some voluntary continuous organization, within which the autonomy of each individual church should be assured. So from the local conferences of churches, the slate associations naturally grew, and from them in turn the National Council was evolved composed of delegates from these smaller bodies.

The ministry has changed from the time when one was only considered to be a minister while he ministered to some local church, and when installation was in some sort a reordination. It has come to be a profession, in which the man once ordained has a standing of his own in the churches and in the ministerial association,

Congregationalism has no adopted statements of belief to 3

4 INTRODUCTION

which it requires individual or church subscription. As expressing the general faith of the churches it has in turn referred to the Westminster Confession, as approved for substance oi doctrine in 1648; to the Savoy Confession, substantially adopted in 1680, the Burial Hill Declaration adopted by the National Council in 1865, and the statement or doctrine of the Creed Commission of the National Council presented in 1883. These statements have become less philosophical and more practical. The Congregational churches are not anchored to a past statement, but are able to express their common faith in the language and the thought of the day, and to define their positions not for the purpose of cutting off those from whom they differ, but of uniting those who agree.

In its form of worship the Congregational churches show growth, variety and, in places, a tendency to a more liturgical worship. Doctrinal instruction and practical exhortation were the main objects of the coming together in the days of the. fathers. Even the reading of Scripture was omitted or greatly curtailed, as part of the formal service against which the reaction had come. The great idea was simplicity and sincerity. But it has come generally to be realized that there may be sincerity in a fuller service, and that an atmosphere of worship is helpful to worship.

The missionary societies had their origin independently of the churches, individuals of our own and other denominations associating themselves for special work. In the process of time those connected with the churches of other orders withdrew to their own organizations for such purposes, leaving these societies necessarily Congregational. Accepted by the Congregational churches as their organs, the churches began to consider that they should be more directly represented in the management of them. The National Council has been a natural mouthpiece for the expression of that wish. Concessions have been made so that, in most of these organizations, the states may be represented, if they will, and steps are being taken slowly, too slowly for the impatience of many, but we think

CHANGES AND CONDITIONS 5

surely towards a more complete unification of the various departments of this great work.

We do not doubt that, as there have been changes in the past and adaptations to new conditions, there will be new changes and adaptations in the future. The Congregational churches need be afraid of nothing, so long as the autonomy of each is regarded. Nor need they be afraid to combine in any way in which they can together accomplish desired results better than alone. The freedom of Congregationalism includes liberty to organize for protection or for aggression. One great problem now is how best to do the work of church extension in our large cities, a problem which is receiving much attention and for the accomplishment of which experiments at least are being made.

This volume is intended to show the Congregational Way, to state its fundamental principles and its varying practices and tendencies. There is always need of such books to instruct the younger ministers and laymen, especially those trained in other denominational households, and to bring before all the questions which have been decided in the past and as well those which need to be decided in the future. In addition to his general interest in these matters, the final preparation for this task was the close association of the writer with Dr. Alonzo H, Quint in the preparation of The Council Manual. This book is issued at the urgent request of many friends, with the prayer that it may be a help in the practice and in the further development of the Congregational Way.

Especial thanks are due to Dr. A. E. Dunning and Dr. Chas. B. Rice for important help in the chapters on polity, and to Dr. Williston Walker for his revision of the sketch of the rise of Congregational fellowship.

Contents

Chapter Pack

1. The Fundamental Principle of Congregationalism 9

II. The New Testament Basis for Congregationalism i6

Appendix

(Consisting chiefly of portions of the Council Manual.) I. How to Organize a Congregational Church . 155

II. By-Laws for a Church 164

8 CONTENTS

III. Congregational Statements of Doctrine . .176

IV. Form for the Reception of Members . , . .181 V. Rules for the Joint Action of a Church

and Society 186

VI. Forms of Letters Missive 188

VII. Rules of Order for Ecclesiastical Meetings, 202 Index 216

Chapter I The Fundamental Principle Of Con- Gregationalism

It has been common to speak of two principles as being equally fundamental to Congregationalism, independence and fellowship. They have defineT^'^ been called the two foci of the Congregational ellipse. But we are disposed to consider that Congregationalism is a more iierfect form of church organization than can be symbolized by the ellipse, and to regard fcllowshii) as its one central principle. For fellowship can only exist in its truest and most perfect form between those who ai-e mutually independent. Fellowship is not the distinctive word which describes the relations of a king and his subjects, or even of a president and the citizens who elect him, or even of a father and his children, but of neighbors or brothers ; of those who are equals and independent of each other, excejn as all are dependent upon all. This indei)endence, or autonomy, has not been dwelt upon in what follows. That is implied. The ways of fellowship are fully considered.

The followers of Christ in a community, equal, not in brains or purse or opportunity, but in rights and lO THE CONGREGATIONAL WAY

relations and possibilities, unite together J °^ , in the fellowship of a local church. The

basis of this union is a purpose to live lives founded on Christian principles, for which the need of regeneration and the aid of the Holy Spirit is realized. On this common ground these Christians come together in mutual agreement or covenant. They make rules for their own guidance, elect officers to assist in spiritual and financial matters, choose a pastor and teacher, and are a church of Jesus Christ so far as they are sincere in their purpose and earnest in desiring to edify one another and to extend the kingdom of God. They need no authorization from pope or presbytery, but are competent to constitute themselves and to begin at once their life and work. But this is an independent, not a Congregational church. It is complete, but lacks the strength and comfort of companionship. This was exactly the condition of the earliest churches in New England. In the weakness of isolation and in the emergencies of their condition, they felt the need of fellowship. They sought it and enjoyed it, and thus developed from independent into Congregational churches. So Congregationalism springs from and is the fellowship of independent churches.

Fellowship takes the place of government. Government makes laws and punishes those who disobey Takes place them. Fellowship makes agreements, has of govern- understandings ; those who do not keep ™®^* the agreements violate the conditions of

fellowship and ultimately destroy it. Indeed, in our American churches with no authority of the state be-

PRINCIPLE OF CONGREGATIONALISM II

hind them, this is about all that can be done even under the name of government. Unless the property is held by somebody outside of the local church, there can be no compulsion of obedience and no enforcement of law. A local church which does not approve the general administration or which refuses to obey in a particular case has always the power of withdrawal, and thus claims and supports the claim that the only bond which can hold together is a bond of fellowship. What others in such cases are driven to acknowledge, Congregationalists openly profess. Advice takes the place of legislation. When laws cannot be enforced, what are they but advice, the efficiency of which depends on the consent of the advised ? Thus from the simplest case of disagreement in the local church to the matter of supremest importance to the whole circle of churches, the maintenance or the withdrawal of fellowship is the ultimate issue. Our Saviour said, ''If he refuse to hear the church, let him be also unto thee as the Gentile and the publican," /. <?., let him be an outsider, the fellowship withdrawn, and he no longer regarded as one of the brethren. There is no harshness in the words ; it is the simplest, gentlest way of treating an offender.

It is said that this is too weak a bond to be efficient

for aggressive work, such as missions at home and

abroad. It seems a plausible suggestion,

eason o ^^^ ^j^^ ^^^^ ^j^^^ Other denominations

have grown more rapidly has been claimed as a witness to the fact. But there were other causes of this slow growth. In the early days the line was not very clearly drawn between Presbyterianism and Congregationalism, and Presbyterianism, as more fully organized, came earlier to self-consciousness. Our Congregational fathers were in fellowship with their Presbyterian brethren and ministered to them as of the same household of faith with themselves : witness the Plan of Union. When they came to themselves and realized that they were contributing largely to build up churches on another pattern, they gravely considered that Congregationalism with its autonomy might be a privilege reserved for the intelligent and freedom-loving people of New England, and might not be adapted to those in the then new regions of the West, e. g., New York and Ohio. They questioned whether they had a mission beyond the Hudson River, and did not assert it until the Albany Convention in 1852. This was largely the cause of the restriction in the growth of the Congregational churches and, considering their early start, of their comparatively small number.

There may be something too in the suggestion. A republic is not as strong for wars of conquest as a monarchy. Fellowship must win its adherents ; Strength for -j. ^^^ compel no one. And yet in the Aggression ^ •'

long run fellowship is stronger than force ;

love is better than law. Mere increase in numbers is not growth. The nations of Europe have grave problems with their colonies and have to keep up great standing armies to hold them to the acknowledgment of a rule which they did not choose and of a govern-

PRINQPLE OF CONGREGATIONALISM 1 3

ment to which they pay unwilling tribute. A republic must win its adherents, must promise them self-government in order to gain them, and must fulfil the promise in order to hold them. If Congregationalism grows — and it does grow — it must be because it is so illustrated to those who are not to the manner born, that they choose it; — and there are many who do. A keen observer in the West has said that if there were no such thing known as a self-governing church in relations of fellowship to other such churches, they would spring up on the prairies by spontaneous generation.

What better gauge is there of the missionary power of a church than its gifts ? and it is an acknowledged

fact that the gifts of Congregationalists Its Gifts are larger in proportion to the membership

than those of any other communion in our land, except possibly the Moravians.

As to the strength of fellowship as a bond of union, it has borne the test, and with reason. Bodies, either

material or spiritual, which are held to- 0/ Union gather by external bonds, may be violently

ruptured. This has been experienced in the various denominations held together by creeds and governments. The number of separate communions which bear the name of Presbyterian and Methodist are in evidence. They are the result of disruptions. The only separation from the Congregational fellowship has been in the case of the Unitarian churches. The New England churches were originally connected with the state. In order to hold property, they were associated with civil corporations, and it was through these that the societies, as they were called, composed largely of non-communicants, with which the civil authorities and the courts were largely in sympathy, separated from the churches, and under the decision of the courts took the property, the records and even the communion-cups from the churches. But the Congregational churches as such have never been divided. They have disagreed, have had violent discussions, have included some who were disposed to invoke the aid of the law, and yet the unity has been kept. You may rend chains and cut straps ; but you may run the sharpest knife through a bucket of shot and the contents will close in after the blade has passed and be as close together as before, especially if the individual spheres are magnetized and have a powerful attraction for one another. Unless the real fellowship is broken, you cannot separate those among whom this is the only bond. No sudden act can do it. It is only as they grow apart that they can be divorced. *' Shall two walk together, except they have agreed?" Then they can walk apart with equal good will, only apart. The history of the last hundred years testifies to the tenacity of fellowship as a bond beyond that of government.

The liberty of fellowship does imply for its safe use a certain degree of intelligence and Christian principle. The Congregational plan is adapted Needs ^* to be used by Christian people, who are not seeking selfishly their own advantage or their own way. It is presumed that they desire to dis-

PRINCIPLE OF CONGREGATIONALISM 1 5

cover and to do what is right. Some system of church authorities and courts may perhaps be better adapted to others than those of this character and purpose. Congregationalism, to work at its best, requires intelligence and fairness, but nothing develops these qualities like having a reasonable degree of liberty and of responsibility.

Chapter II The New Testament Basis For Congre- Gationalism

According to the belief of the early fathers of modern Congregationalism, ^'the facts of church government are all of them exactly described in p^^J^"" ^ the Word of God . . . and therefore to continue one and the same unto the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ. ... So that it is not left in the power of men, officers, churches, or any state in the world to add, to diminish, or alter anything in the least measure therein." ^ This was a natural reaction from the authority of tradition and the interpretations of the Romish Church to the explicit authority of the Scriptures, which it was held must contain everything essential to Christian thought or life. We are disposed to claim in these days only that the principles for the organization of Christian churches are given us in the few commands of the Master and the apostles, and in the wider illustrations to be seen in their example. We do believe, however, that, <' Congregationalism has given a normal value even to the most incidental variations as to Church usages of the New Testament, more fully than any other system of Ecclesiastical polity." ^ But we

^ Cambridge Platform, 1648.

2 A History of the Congregational Churches, Prof. Williston Walker, Ph. D., D. D.

do not claim that Jesus or his first disciples set out to organize a form of government, or that, if they had done so, it would have been the unvarying duty of their successors exactly to follow the pattern at all times and under all circumstances. We have no objection to a number of churches organizing under a bishop of their own appointment, to whom a large amount of responsibility for their general conduct shall be given. Indeed, we can see under many conditions how this may be proper and wise. Nor do we know of any reason why it is not allowable for individual churches to put authority, which they might not think it best to exercise alone, into the hands of the whole or of a group. We only claim that, as we study the New Testament churches, we find more which bears resemblance to fellowship based upon independence than to anything which might be called church government.

During the presence of Jesus with his disciples, he was their head and no organization was needed. The only matter connected with the administra- Je^us^°'^^ tion of church life which the Master specifically laid down, was that which we rather unfortifnately call church discipline, or the method of dealing with an offending brother, the thing of all connected with the life of the church which most needs to be guarded by deliberation and fairness and kept in an atmosphere of brotherly kindness. This teaching of our Lord will be cited later.

The salutations and addresses in the epistles of

Paul, his apostolic letters to the churches, are full of Apostolic suggestion as to the individual character Salutations and the democratic organization of these to Churches churches. They are addressed *'to all that are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints;"^ ''unto the church of God which is at Corinth, even them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints ^"'^ ''unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints that are in the whole of Achaia ; " ' "unto the churches of Galatia; "* "to the saints that are at Ephesus, and the faithful in Christ Jesus; " ^ "to all the saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons; "^ "to the saints and faithful brethren in Christ that are at Colossae ; " ^ '< unto the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." ^ In all these cases it is the church as a whole which is addressed, — the brethren, the saints, the faithful, or in the one case, where the various assemblies in a province are included, it is not the church in Galatia but the churches which are named. There is in one of these salutations a naming of their officers, but the churches are not addressed through them, and when these officers are named, it is not before but after the whole brotherhood. This is in accord with the incidental allusions in the Acts of the Apostles, as will appear in what follows.

These apostolic churches appear to be independent

2 I Cor. I : 2.

3 2 Cor. I : I,

6 Eph. I : I.

6 Phil. I : I.

8 I Thess. I : I ;

2 Thess. I : i.

and complete each in itself, to constitute together not

a compact and unified body, but an I d^vid^al 'Aggregation of independent bodies, united

only by fellowship with a divine Head and a human brotherhood. The church is not a national or universal organization, but the assembled Christian people of a definite city, or those habitually meeting in the house of a disciple. There is only this probable exception to this usage of the word : <*So the church throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being edified." ^ The readings are various but the weight of evidence is for the singular number. All that can be said is that it is a distinct exception to the general usage, the usage probably representing the facts. Churches are usually referred to as local and distinct even when they were quite near each other, as Corinth and Cenchreae, Laodicea and Colossae. If the church is spoken of in this one instance as including the organizations of a whole province, the word is probably used as a collective term, not in the sense of a single or complete organization. So all Christians speak of the Church Universal or the Church in America, not intending thereby that it is in any sense one organization. The suggestion of the salutations is that the church was a democratic body, that membership rather

than official position in it was recognized. Democratic Indeed, the assumption of official dignity

was directly rebuked by our Lord, as he compared the kingdoms of this world with the kingdom 1 Acts 9: 31.

he had come to found. ''Not so shall it be among you," he said : *'but whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister (^margin, servant) ; and whosoever would be first among you shall be your servant" Qjiargin, bond-servant).^ Thus, as also in connection with the washing of the disciples' feet, he laid down the principle of service as the only real dignity. Peter exhorts the elders to tend the flock of God, exercising the oversight not as "lording it over the charge allotted to you, but making yourselves ensamples to the flock." ^

According to these salutations, too, these churches were composed of those who had experienced the Composed of saving grace of God in their hearts, not Converted of those bound to the church by any ex- People ternal bond or any ceremony or formality. The letters are to those "who are in Christ Jesus" and "called to be saints" and "faithful in Christ Jesus." This is a characteristic of at least the ideal of the Reformed and Protestant churches. Members of Christ's body are not made such by birth or by baptism, but only by repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. They are saved not by their relation to the Church, but to its Head. This was one contention of the fathers of Congregationalism, as against the claim of a state or national church. It was one of the evils brought in later by the Half-way Covenant but finally and successfully resisted. It stands as against sacramental regeneration on the one hand, which makes the new birth a change not of heart but of external relation, and as against so-called liberalism on the other hand, which denies the necessity of the new birth. It claims that the church of Christ should be composed of those who are in Christ and are at least trying to be saints and to be faithful.

The address to the church at Philippi salutes the saints that are in that city ''with the bishops and Bishops and deacons." These are the only two orders Elders the of officials named, in a connection where Same -j. ^yguld be strange if others existed and

were omitted, and indeed these seem to be the two classes which, under various names, appear in the New Testament. As is shown later, elders, bishops, pastors, teachers, evangelists, angels stand for the same office in its different functions and as seen from different standpoints. It is noticeable that in this single church there is a plurality of bishops as well as of deacons. So on a missionary tour in Asia, ''they had appointed for them elders (bishops) in every church." ^

There is no superior order in this ministry, and no suggestion that the bishop is a general officer with a relation to all the churches of a province or nation. When Paul sent from Miletus to Ephesus he "called to him the elders of the church. And when they were come to him, he said unto them, . . . Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops." Here the apostle calls the elders to him and addresses them as bishops.

They must have been the same.^ So the same apostle writes to Titus, *'I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge." "^ Then naming the quahfications of those thus to be selected as elders he adds, ''for the bishop must be blameless, as God's steward." ^ Here surely the elder and the bishop are identified. So also the quahfications of an elder here given are identical with those named for a bishop in i Tim. 3:1-7. In addition, '' the fact that there is not a passage in the New Testament which asserts, or justifies the assertion of, any superior function on the part of the bishops, completes the proof that only two orders of officers were known to the churches of the New Testament, and that these were the pastors — or elders, presbyters, bishops — and deacons." * Certainly, if the appointment of bishops was necessary to the apostolic character or to the completeness of the church, it would have been made plain and not have been left so that it can hardly be inferred. Even Peter, who was, if the Romanists are right, the very chiefest of the apostles, says, ''The elders therefore among you I exhort, who am a fellowelder."^ Nor could he well have been the primate, the first bishop, when the apostles which were in Jerusalem sent him with John into Samaria.®

It seems reasonably clear, too, that the eldership

* Dr. Dexter, Handbook of Congregationalism.

exercised the ministerial function of teaching and Elders and guiding the church, and the deaconship Deacons Dis- the lay function of ministering to the criminated poor, or '< serving tables."^ The latter office was apparently before the eldership in its origin and the deacons aided the apostles in the external part of their work, while the elders took up their work of witnessing to the Christ who had been raised from the dead and of instruction in regard to the things of the kingdom.

That the source of authority was in such churches, alone and working together, appears (i) in the election of officers ; (2) in the sending forth of missionaries; (3) in the decision of ecclesiastical questions, and (4) in their instructions as to their conduct toward an offending member.

(i) The independence of these local churches, their power of self-government, is evidenced in their election of officers. The church was be- Offi^ ^°" ° ^°^^ ^^^ officers, and although the apostles were divinely commissioned they did not apparently assume the authority of appointing them. Thus even in the election of one to succeed Judas, whose office (not bishopric) another was to take, the method of procedure is given thus: ''Peter stood up in the midst of the brethren," and presented the need of taking this action to them, whereupon these

' For the historical origin of the diaconate see Acts 6 : 1-6.