RSSThe Spirituality of the Church and 1 Cor. 6:1-11
I am no opponent of the grand Presbyterian doctrine of the Church’s spirituality. I have a question that in unresolved in my mind.
In 1 Cor. 6:1-11, Paul warns believers not to go to the courts of the world for justice against other believers. Rather, he declares that jurisdiction belongs to the church courts, “are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angel? How much more, them, matters pertaining to this life!”
It appears that Paul’s sees the Ruling Elders “ruling” function pertaining to more than the “spiritual” but rather including the temporal and secular. Do you have a property boundry dispute with your believing neighbor? Take it to the Elders and not to the magistrate. Do not look for justice among those who mock Christ.
Further, does such an interpretation of the temporal work of the Elders make sense in light of classic three office distinctions? Ministers are primarily charged with matters spiritual but engage in judging some temporal matters as members of the Session. Ruling Elders are primarily engaged in ruling on temporal matters as the God’s ordained leaders of the eschatological community but also deal in spiritual matters as part of the Session?
Of course, the RPCNA is officially 1.5 office. Not sure what this means for the spirituality of the church. Any ideas?
D Hart
May 12th, 2007 at 9:40 am
Bill, I don’t see this as a violation of the spirituality of the church, only as a reflection of authority within the community of faith. Session’s decision in such a dispute would not be binding on the civil courts, if for instance one of the parties didn’t like the church’s settlement and wanted to appeal to civil authorities.
I also would hope that if session had to resolve something really complicated beyond the scope of biblically informed wisdom, they would go to people with experience in the dispute for help. Hint, I think sessions and pastors should generally take an invisible part in marriage counselling.
stevez
May 12th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
what if, as reality almost always seems to dictate, my neighbor does not come under the jurisdiction of any reformed or presbyterian authority; to the right is roman catholic and to the left is methodist, which is to say, christian folks who agree that we have a property dispute but will likely not be wild about my Session settling the matter? what then?
stevez
D Hart
May 13th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
The local branch of the World Council of Churches?
AKA, small claims court.
W.H. Chellis
May 15th, 2007 at 8:23 am
This is interesting. Darryl, what you say makes sense in the context we live. Our churches are like regional centers. People travel from miles around to gather to worship in our conservative Reformed and Presbyterian Churches. But this is a unique, and maybe unfortunante, aspect of our present setting.
What if our congregations served our neighborhoods, villages, ect. What if our neighbors where also members of our congregation. What if we all moved into the same neighborhood or village. How would this change the dynamic.
By your agreement, the Session would be answer many questions that were not “spiritual” in nature. The courts of the church would be a parallel court of originial jurisdiction not under the authority of the magistrate. Such courts would have a significant limiting impact on the civil courts, no? Set in an earlier context this explains the rise of canon law over against the civil law. At the very least this represents a Christian limitation on the soverignty of the state but it also implys that the church will have to deal with many “secular” issues.
I wonder if this change of context has caused the office confusion of the last three decades. What is the role lay elders if the church us purely spiritual and not also an incarnate community?
Interesting, right?