The keys of the kingdom as paradigm for building up the church in reformed church government

The keys o f the kingdom , building up the church and reformed church governm ent This arlicle adopts an ecclesiological approach and concentrates on the prom inent concepts the keys o f the kingdom and building up the church. The article attempts to determine the significance those concepts may have fo r the governm ent o f the church and emphasises the close relationship between the keys o f the kingdom and the building up o f the church. According to Reformationul viewpoints the administering o f the keys serves the edification o f the church It becomes clear that the notae ecclesiae and the keys o f the kingdom function as the basic elem ents o f the church order and must be regarded as the basis or pillars upon which the church is built.


Introduction
This contribution adopts an ecclesiological approach and concentrates on the prominent concepts the keys o f the kingdom and building up the church.My intention is to investigate these concepts in the context o f Reformational literature, and to determine the significance they may have had and still may have for the government o f the church.
My hypothesis is that genuine reformed church polity or church government serves the aedificatio ecclesiae since it defines or stipulates from Scripture and confession the ways and means in which to administer the keys o f the kingdom.
It is essential to em phasise the importance o f church government and to put it into perspective, mainly for the following reasons: • On the one hand, all the tensions and disruptions which have characterised the family o f reformed churches throughout the world during the past two centuries lead some observers to the conclusion that church government may have been overrated in the past (Te Velde, 1989:23).One perceives a sense • o f mistrust towards church polity because, according to such sceptics, the Reformational church orders have failed and have in fact been responsible for the disruption and disintegration o f the church and o f the unity o f the church rather than for the building up o f the church.
• On the other hand, many theologians feel the need for, and realise the importance o f concentrating on the issue o f edifying the church.But the em phasis has changed -from church governm ent or church polity to Practical Theology.A tendency exists to associate church polity with rules and regulations and to reserve the edifying o f the church for Practical Theology.This symptom has already been discussed (Spoelstra, 1992:299-321; also see Nel, 1987:26-37).
Furtherm ore one feels the obligation to em phasise the mostly neglected reference to and the significance o f adm inistering the keys o f the kingdom when theologians do research on issues such as building up the church,

Scriptural concepts
The terms "keys o f the kingdom" and "building up the church" appear in St. M atthew 16:17-19: "... and upon this rock I will build my church ...And I will give unto thee the keys o f the kingdom o f heaven ..." .

Keys of the kingdom
In a com prehensive exegesis o f this text.Floor (1981:63-74) points out that the focal point is the church (verse 18).Scripture makes it clear that Jesus Christ is the one and only Head o f the church; He carries the keys o f the kingdom (Is. 2 2 :2 2 ; Rev. 3:7) and He will build his church.He is the rea/su b ject.
Christ gave the keys to the church, and this implies that the church now has the responsibility and the ministerial jurisdiction to serve Christ and his church (Ridderbos, 1972:309-320).This is also why the Holy Spirit descended on the church to equip and prepare it for its task and function as bearer o f the keys (Acts 2; St. John 20:22-23).
According to St. M atthew 16:17-19 and 18:17, the adm inistering o f the keys o f the kingdom is the responsibility o f the local church (Plomp, 1969:80-84;Ridderbos, 1972:314).C alvin's interpretation o f St. M atthew 16:17-19 and 18: 17 gives us the m eaning o f the potestas ecclesiae.This ministerial authority or potency o f the church is threefold?potestas doctrinae, potestas iurisdictionis and potestas in legibus ferendis.The disciplina ecclesiae is part o f the potestas iurisdictionis, the latter being the responsibility to govern the church.The adm inistering o f the keys o f the kingdom is therefore more than church discipline, but church discipline, on the other hand, is always the adm inistering o f the keys o f the kingdom.According to Calvin, it must be borne in mind that C hrist's purpose in giving the church these potestates is to build up the church, not to destroy it IV, 8, 1; IV, 11, 1; IV 10; Plomp, 1969:63, 73).
The verbs used in St. M atthew 16:18-19 have a voluntaristic meaning and are an indication o f the will and promises o f Jesus Christ with regard to the opening o f the kingdom o f heaven for believers.This aspect must be seen as the fulfilment o f the promises and prophecies o f the Old Testament and as proof that God "through his Spirit and Word, out o f the entire human race, from the beginning o f the world to its end, gathers, protects, and preserves for him self a community ..." (Heidelberg Catechism,21).
It is important to note that the building up o f the church and the opening o f the kingdom are relative concepts.The ultimate purpose or aim o f building up the church is not to establish or create a world-church, a landskerk or volkskerk: building up must be directed towards the kingdom o f God.This means that the significance and task o f church government is to serve the church in such a way that the church may grow in faith, obedience and submission to God as the people o f his covenant.

Building up the church
The fundamental promise in St. M atthew 16:17-19 that He will build his church, and the frequency with which this metaphor o f building occurs in the epistles o f St. Paul and St. Peter, lead us to conclude that the building up o f the church is a central theme in the New Testament.It has become a very popular subject in reform ed theology (see Roberts, 1963;Ridderbos, 1966:479-543;Coertzen, 1981;Te Velde, 1989, 1992, 1993;Nel, 1986;Noordegraaf, 1990: 123-145;Kellerman, 1993:331-345;Du Plooy & Venter, 1996).
There are many references in the new Testament to the ways in which God uses his church as instrument in the process o f erecting or edifying the church.In St.
Paul's epistles to the Corinthians (2, 12:28) and the Ephesians (4:7-16) it be comes clear that Christ as the Head o f the church has given the church the diakonia and the charism ata for this purpose (Versteeg, 1989:49-74;Du Plooy, 1982:188-198).

Reform ation and church governm ent
A study o f Reformational literature on the government o f the church makes it clear that the Scriptural terms keys o f the kingdom and edifying the church occur prominently and frequently.This is not surprising, since Calvin was very outspoken on this point, namely that the church must be governed strictly according to Scripture.
Allow me to focus briefly on the viewpoints o f some Reformers, namely Luther, Bucer and Calvin, and to refer to a few confessions and church orders.

Luther
Luther reacted against the successione apostolorum doctrine o f the Roman Catholic Church.According to this doctrine, the pope (and his delegates) as the successor o f St. Peter has received the keys o f the kingdom.This means that the pope has authority over the church.He is the vicarius Christi and carries the keys in his hand (Petro claves com m ittuntur coelorum).He therefore has the authority to be the adm inistrator o f the sacrament o f penance (Simpson, 1992(Simpson, :1501)).
Luther has a much broader perspective in this regard.According to Luther, the adm inistering o f the keys o f the kingdom includes proclaim ing the gospel, adm inistering the sacraments, discipline, absolution, deposition o f ministers, and so forth.In the light o f his em phasis on the priesthood o f believers, the believers or congregation has the power o f the keys.
With regard to the building up o f the church, one must rem em ber that Luther is primarily concerned with the doctrine o f righteousness by true faith.He is soteriologist rather than ecclesiologist.He did, however, show some interest in order and mutual discipline, and tried to establish orderly gatherings o f the congregation.ITiis proves that Luther had the building up o f the church in mind (V an 't Spijker, 1990a:311-315).
He, however, did not make any real progress in this regard, mainly because o f unfavourable circumstances in the country.The farmers were in revolt and most people were poorly educated and not capable o f governing the church properly.The development o f church governm ent in Germany in the 16th and 17th centuries led to a state o f affairs where the state obtained jurisdiction over the affairs o f the national church (landskerk).
Two Reformers who largely contributed to the developm ent o f reform ed church government were Bucer and Calvin.They understood the need and the necessity for the self-governing o f the church and for distinguishing between the affairs o f the state and those o f the church (V an 't Spijker, 1990b:86-i03;1993:178-201;Bronkhorst, 1947).

Bucer
Bucer proceeds from the viewpoints o f Lutiier, but goes much further.He believes that the church is a community o f believers, the one body o f Christ, gathered by the Holy Spirit, where it is everyone's task to contribute to the edification o f the congregation (V an 't Spijker, 1972:24).
Bucer is concerned not only with the righteousness o f the church (like Luther), but also with its holiness.He therefore stresses that the church, and not the public authorities, should adm inister the keys o f the kingdom in view o f the holiness o f the church.The church is essentially a community o f believers, o f love and discipline (V an 't Spijker, 1993:316).
V an 't Spijker (1993:317-323) clearly indicates that Bucer concentrated mainly on the aedificatio ecclesiae, and that he distinguished between extensive and intensive activities.
Bucer identifies three essential elements: the dispensation o f the doctrine, the sacraments, and the functioning o f the discipline (V an 't Spijker, 1993:192).These elements are not only the notae ecclesiae, but also serve as the design for the church orders because they constitute the main subjects dealt with in a church order.

Calvin
Calvin was a disciple o f Bucer's and followed him in many ways, but he also had his own views.
According to him, adm inistering the keys o f the kingdom on behalf o f the church is a very important concept, especially with regard to the government o f the church (Institutes III, 4, 10-14;IV, 11, I and 5-6;Plomp, 1969:72-75).He emphasises the ministerial aspect.Administering the keys does not mean that the church has any authority in itself The authority is vested in Christ, but He uses the church as his instrument (Institutes IV, 11, 1).
The local church is primarily the place where these keys have to be adm inistered (Institutes IV, 3, 8;IV, 11, 6;Plomp, 1969:62-75).The local church has to be organised and structured under the supervision o f the offices to be a holy community o f believers who partake o f the L ord's Supper and constitute a community o f disciplined people (V an't Spijker, 1990a:324).In his Ordannances ecclesiastiques Calvin does not make provision for major assemblies.This does not mean that he is in principle against major assemblies, but it must be em phasised that Calvin does not associate a major assembly with the church.He is prepared to accept the decisions o f major assemblies, provided that Christ is the chairman (president) o f the gathering and the decisions are taken according to Scripture under the guidance o f the Holy Spirit.
Calvin acknowledges the importance o f mutual assistance between churches in the governing o f the church {Institutes IV, 9, 1-13).In other words, Calvin believes that the pow er o f the keys rests primarily in the hands o f the local church and that it is primarily the duty o f the offices to adm inister the keys (/«jíi/wfój IV, 3, 8; IV, 11,6).
Calvin stresses the following aspects concerning the edification o f the church (V an't Spijker, 1990a:323-332): • The doctrine o f the church is not meant to satisfy curiosity, but to be taught in the grace o f God so that we may grow in piety and devoutness {Institutes I, 14, 3).
• Christ H im self is the One who builds up his church, and the offices in the church are the principal nerves by means o f which God binds the body o f Christ together.This point o f departure leads to the view o f the church as an institution {institutio), and to the instauration {instauratio) and building {aedificatio) o f the church {Institutes IV, 3, 2).
• It is the task o f each and every believer to assist in building up the church, since the gifts with which we have been blessed are not to be used for our own benefit but for the benefit o f the congregation (see C alvin's commentary on Heb.5:12 and 1 Cor.14:26).
• The very essence o f the building up o f the church is to grow in grace and it is based on faith and repentance.
• The doctrine {doctrina) and church governm ent {disciplina) can not be separated since the discipleship o f Christ is the result o f the preaching o f the doctrine.The church order is m eant'to be instrumental.It m ust serve as a channel or passage for the true doctrine which is the soul o f the church (V an't Spijker, 1990a:331-332).
• Hence the church order must be composed on the basis of, and in the closest relation with the Word o f God, in order to serve the building up o f the church.
In conclusion it is significant that, according to both Bucer and Calvin, the preaching o f the Word o f God, the administration o f the sacraments and the exercise o f church discipline function as the basic elements o f the church order according to the ius divinum.Unless these elements are part and parcel o f a church order, that order will have little substance or value (V an't Spijker, 1972:35-37).Pont, 1981;Du Plooy, 1982:342-365;Deddens, 1990:110-120).

Confessions and church orders
With reference to the content o f the church order o f Dordrecht 1618/19, V an 't Spijker (1993:197) remarks: "hat staat alles in dienst van de aedeficatio ecclesiae".
The aim and objective o f the church orders which culminated in the church order o f Dordrecht o f 1618/19 were the salvation o f the believers.It was meant to serve as a passage for the work o f the Word and the Spirit through which the believers may grow in faith, repentance, justification, holiness and perseverance.One can not speak o f the building up o f the church unless these aspects are realised.
According to Calvin, the father o f reformed church government, the emphasis o f church government focuses on communion with Christ and the fellow believers {Institutes IV, 1, 5), and is thus a service primarily in building up the church.

Criticism
In recent times we have noted various reactions to reformed church government: • Some theologians clearly state their discontent and fhistration.Botha (1993:1-7) criticises presbyterial church government and maintains that the exegesis underlying the church order is at fault.According to Botha (1993:1-7) presbyterial government fails to integrate contemporary critical and hermeneutical progress which has been made in the study o f the Word o f God.Botha argues that the content o f presbyterial church government is irrelevant and old-fashioned (also see Te Velde, 1989:19-21).
• Other theologians outrightly reject reform ed church governm ent and favour a charismatic approach com bined with sociological and psychological methods because they are strongly critical o f the Reformational doctrine o f the offices (see V an 't Spijker, 1990a:310).
In Reformational theology itself a tendency exists to blame reform ed church polity for the disruption o f the churches o f the Reformation during the 19th and 20th centuries.This may be one o f the reasons for the lack o f interest in church polity among the family o f reformed churches (Bakker, 1990:30).
There is reaction against the reformed structure o f the church, probably to a greater extent against the church as an impersonal institute or structure (see Spoelstra, 1986:94-110).

Perspective
1 am convinced that the Reformational approach to church governm ent is o f vital importance because it provides adequately for the edification o f the church and it teaches us how to adm inister the keys o f the kingdom in a proper way.We can endorse the points o f departure o f the Reformation, namely the authority and sufficiency o f Scripture and the authority o f the confession.
Our main objection and matter o f concern to the approaches which are critical o f reformed church government is that they are inclined to invert the order and the emphasis: from God to humanity; from the offices to the congregation; from offices to gifts {charismata)', from the church (congregation) as a community to single groups; from proclaim ing the Gospel to congregational activities; from Christ as the Head to the congregation as his body.O f course it is true that these elements should not be contrasted, but they have to be in the correct order to ensure equilibrium (see Te Velde, 1989:19-20).We should not lose the perspective o f the kingdom o f God, nor deviate from the correct concept or precise meaning o f the church, or from the relation between the diakoniai and charismata.These are fundamental factors.
It is significant that, for the third time in this century, the concept gem eentebou has achieved such w idespread popularity and has become a focal point o f theological interest, especially in the reformed world (V an't Spijker, I990a:309-310).Nowadays, however, it is a subject studied in the field o f practical theology.
It should, however, be noted that from an ecclesiological point o f view, there need not be tension between practical theology and church polity with regard to the building up o f the church.
1 shall therefore focus briefly on two more aspects, examining the second one in greater depth: • The relation between practical theology and church polity as far as the building up o f the church is concerned.
• The dilemma o f presbyterial church government which results from the many different opinions on the authority o f major assemblies, each o f which is based on its interpretation o f the concept "church".The real issue concerns the disciplinary authority o f synods, and the salient point here is whether a major assembly has the power o f authority to administer the keys o f the kingdom.

Gemeentebou
The church order o f Dordrecht 1618/19 is still widely accepted as a proper and Scriptural way o f governing the church.This is known as the presbyterial system.Some authors (Van Wyk, 1989:77) prefer to call it the presbyterialsynodical system, but they are criticised by others (see Boon, 1965:193, 201;Van Ginkel, 1975;Spoelstra, 1981:4-23;Coertzen, 1991a:329-342).This system o f government binds local churches together (mutuo consensu) on the basis o f the confession so that they constitute a structural unity.
The reformed church order (DKO) does not go into fine detail nor does it attempt to regulate the church by laying down rules and regulations.It merely provides the principles and ground structure.Te Velde (1989:28-29) distinguishes between this ground structure and a "fill-in" structure {invulstruktuur).The ground structure provides the outline or contours and describes ways and means for the adm inistering o f the Word, the assemblies, the sacraments and discipline.The fill-in structure provides detail and refinement.According to Te Velde this is the field o f diaconiology or practical theology.Both structures are concerned with the building up o f the church.
For a perspective on the interest, meanings and difficulties o f gemeentebou, see Kellerman (1993:331-334), Lategan (1992:54-84), V an't Spijker (1990a:309-311) and Du Plooy and Venter (1996:343-364).I should merely like to remark that the subject gem eentebou will have to be practised within the parameters of reformed church government.The fundamental and Scriptural principles concerning the edification o f the church through the service o f the keys were laid down in the Reformational period.These principles form part o f the content o f reform ed church polity, and further development in this regard may be significant, provided that these foundations remain intact.

Jurisdiction of major assemblies
It is necessary to focus briefly on the second part o f the church order which deals with major assemblies.According to Reformational viewpoints the major asemblies have to serve the building up o f the church.History reveals that serious questions about the authority o f major assemblies were asked and that much confiision existed about the responsibility and jurisdiction o f major assemblies with regard to the second key o f the kingdom, namely the discipline o f the church.
The authority o f major assemblies, the precise m eaning o f the word "church" and the influence o f state authorities in the affairs o f the church have been the subject o f controversy since the 17th century, and particularly during the 19th and 20th centuries (see Nauta, 1936;V an't Spijker, 1993:181;Du Plooy, 1979;Strauss, 1992:188-197).

Crucial questions in this regard include the following:
The keys o f the kingdom as paradigm fo r building up the church ...

What is the position and authority o f a major assembly in relation to the position and authority o f the local church?
• Is it correct to distinguish between a local church and a national church {landskerk), each with its own jurisdiction and authority?
For greater insight into these problems one has to remember that various emphases and schools o f thought can be identified in the broad Protestantism o f the 16th and 17th centuries.For instance: • The Calvinist tradition.Bucer and Calvin were strongly o f the opinion that the church has the responsibility to govern itself, but then according to Scripture (Calvin's Institutes IV, 3, 3; IV, 4, 1; IV, 6, 9).
The state-church tradition.Exponents o f this approach include Luther, Zwingli, Bullinger, the Anglican Church, Erastus and the Rem onstrants (see Bakker, 1990:25).This viewpoint broadly means that state authority is responsible for the sound government o f the church in that country.
All these traditions had a minor or major influence on the system or manner of governing churches with a Reformational background and tradition, particularly with regard to the issue o f authority in the church and the meaning and consequence o f the word church.
It is well known that, after the synod o f Dordrecht in 1618/19, the Dutch state government did not allow a synod to be held in the Netherlands until 1816 (see Spoelstra, 1993:350-353).
After the Enlightenment (Auflclarung), rationalism and the French Revolution, the church in the Netherlands (since 1816) and in South Africa (since 1804) was regarded as a voluntary association and under the jurisdiction o f state authority (seeJooste, 1946;Pont, 1991:28-250).
This development must be judged as directly contrary to the ideals o f Calvin and to the reformed confessions o f faith (see Confessio Belgica,.
It is interesting to note the different approaches in the development o f the Calvinist tradition, particularly with reference to the ecclesia instituta and the role, position and authority o f a major assembly: • It is remarkable that the French confession {Confessio fid e l Gallicana) o f 1559 differs from the Dutch confession {Confessio Belgica) o f 1561 on the point o f major assemblies.The confession o f 1559 states "that assemblies may be held in the name o f God, so that great and small may be edified".The church order (art.2-5) o f the same synod o f 1559 is in line with this point o f view and regulates the structural aspects o f these assemblies (see Pont, 1981:48-54).The Confessio Belgica (art.30) mentions nothing in this regard and merely refers to the council in the local church which consists o f pastors, elders and deacons.Since 1559 the French church has established the church as a synodical structure.This has evoked criticism, for instance from De Morely who (over)reacts and criticises the jurisdiction o f these synods over the affairs o f local churches (see V an't Spijker, I990c:315 et seq.).
• Scottish presbyterianism differs from the Reformational presbyterial system.The focal point o f Scottish presbyterianism is not the council o f the local church or congregation, but the presbytery.The presbytery consists o f the delegates o f a few neighbouring congregations, and they have disciplinary jurisdiction over the local churches.This means that they have the authority to adm inister the keys o f the kingdom.
The arrival o f Scottish ministers in South Africa (1820) led to the establishment o f this system o f church government in the South African reformed churches o f that time.According to this approach, a major assembly can be associated or identified with the church (see Brown, 1992:691-715).
• Prominent dates such as 1816 (\&16-Reglement), 1834 (Afskeiding) and 1886 {Doleansie) tell the story o f conflict and tension during the 19th century.It is as though the various traditions had come to the surface.Issues discussed during these periods included the disciplinary authority o f major assemblies, the relation between the local church and the algemene kerk, the question o f whether a group o f churches in a certain district or country could be called ecclesia instituta, and so forth (see Du Plooy, 1979:110 ei and1982:405-409;Spoelstra, 1993:349-369;Bouwman, 1937;Visser, 1982:304-389;Kleyn, 1888;Rutgers, 1887:184;Strauss, 1992:188-197).
I believe that this controversial phase had a negative effect on the church, especially as far as reform ed church government is concerned.It did not contribute to the building up o f the church, nor did it succeed in uniting the churches.On the contrary, it probably promoted the disruption o f the reformed churches.One has to beware o f associating the building up o f the church with visible establishments and large church structures, and o f operating with a dualistic concept o f the church.We have to speak o f churches in major assemblies, and not o f the major assemblies o f the church!This terminology accords with the Reformational system o f church government.
Major assemblies have a functional significance for the edification o f the churches w herever they exist.They also serve the attributes o f the church, such as unity, holiness and catholicity.They are indeed indispensable.The decisions o f the assemblies will be considered binding unless they are in conflict with the Word o f God, Thus, local churches as well as major assemblies have the responsibility and jurisdiction to adm inister (bedien) the authority o f Christ the Lord.

Conclusion
It is my conviction that it is o f vital importance to appreciate the contributions Calvin in particular made to Scriptural church government.
One must have a correct understanding o f the keys o f the kingdom and the call to build up the church.
Reformed church polity should not be regarded as a purely juridical subject which only concentrates on rules and regulations.
Reformed church polity must continue to maintain the principles in this regard and to provide the parameters for the continuation o f the proclaiming o f the Gospel o f the kingdom, the adm inistration o f the sacraments and the exercise o f church discipline.This is the basis or pillars upon which the church is built, because they are the hallmarks o f the true church.
There should develop a closer relationship and cooperation between church polity and the field o f practical theology with special reference to the task and obligation o f building up the church.
It has become clear that C alvin's vision o f the church conforms with that o f the New Testament.The church has neither a powerful secular structure under the supervision o f the pope, nor that o f a landskerk -(Luther) or volkskerkstructure.Moreover, it cannot tolerate interference by public (state) authorities (Zwingli, Erastus).According to Calvin, the offices have the function to administer the keys o f the kingdom in order to edify the church, and this is done mainly in, and on behalf of, the local church.This is the potestas ecclesiae as explained earlier when C alvin's exegesis o f St. M atthew 16:17-19 and 18:17 was dealt with.

I
regard questions such as the following as fictitious or false statements o f the problem: -Which institution has greater authority: the local church or the algemene kerk?The local church or the synod?-Does the presbyterial system o f church government imply a dualistic concept o f the church, i.e. local church versus the major assemblies (or synod) o f the so-called national church, or vice versa? 1 believe that Christ carries the keys in his hands.He is the only Head o f his church, and He has never transferred his authority to any human being, such as the pope, nor to a synod or the local church.W hat He did is the following: He instructed his church as his instrument to serve in his kingdom, and to adm inister the keys in the name o f Christ and in the strength o f the Holy Spirit on behalf o f the church.In the process o f fulfilling this function, the local churches should assist one another; they should help and support one another.Church polity is primarily a spiritual polity wiiich our Lord has taught us in his Word (see Confessio Belgica, art.30).A community or fellowship o f churches does not constitute a church (ecclesia instituta).Churches (in a local sense) which assist one another are doing so in obedience to Christ and their community, and co-operation rests on the basis o f love and faith (see Du Piooy, 1982:405-509).
V A N G IN K JE L , A .1975.D e o u d e rlin g .A m s te rd a m : T o n H o llan d.V A N T S P IJK E R , W . 1970.D e a m b te n bij M a rtin B u cer.K a m p e n : K ok.V A N T S P IJK E R , W . 1972.G o d d e lijk re c h t e n k e rk e lijk e o rd e bij M a rtin B ucer.K a m p e n : K ok.V A N T S P IJK E R , W . 1990a.A sp e c te n v a n g e m e e n te o p b o u w in d e R e fo rm a tie .T h e o lo g ia R e fo r m a la , 3 3 (4 ):3 0 9 -3 3 2 , D es.V A N T S P IJK E R , W . 1990b, D e o p v a ttin g e n v a n d e R efo rm a to re n .( /« V a n 't S p ijk er, W . & V a n D rim m e le n , L .C ., red.In le id in g to t d e s tu d ie v a n h e t k e rk re c h t.K a m p e n : K ok.p. 8 6 -1 0 3 .)V A N T S P IJK E R , W . 1990c.C o n g re g a tio n a lism e .(/n V a n 't S p ijk er, W ., B alk e, W , E x a lto , K .& V a n D rie l, L ., red.D e k e rk .W ez e n , w e g e n w e rk v a n d e k e rk n a a r reform a to risc h e o p v a ttin g .K a m p e n : D e G ro o t G o u d ria a n .p. 3 1 3 -3 2 5 .)V A N T S P IJK E R , W . 1993.R e fo rm a tie e n k e rk o rd e .T h e o lo g ia R e fo r m a la , 3 6 { 3 ): \l% -2 0 \, Sept. V A N W Y K , B .J. 1989.D ie p re s b ite ria a l-sin o d a le k e rk b e g rip m e t b e so n d e re v e rw > sin g na d ie k e rk w e t v a n d ie N e d e rd u itsc h H e rv o rm d e K e rk v a n A frik a. P re to ria : U P. (D .D .pro e fs k rif ).V E N T E R , C .J.H .1986.G e m e e n te -o p b o u in d ie lig v a n H e b re ërs.P o tc h e fs tro o m : P U v ir C H O .(R e e k s H : In o u g u rele re d e nr.13.) V E R S T E E G , J.P .1989.H e t k a ra k te r v a n h e t a m b t v o ig e n s E fe z ie rs 4 :7 -1 6 .(In R o sso u w , P .J., red.G e re fo rm e e rd e a m p sb e d ie n in g .P re to ria : N G K e rk b o e k h a n d e l. p. 4 9 -7 4 .)V IS S E R , J. 1982.D ie tu g o o r a m p sd rae rs.P o tc h e fs tro o m : P U v ir C H O .( T h .D .-pro e fs k rif) Bucer and Calvin laid the foundation for the further development o f the government o f the church during the 16th and early 17th centuries.The synod o f Dordrecht 1618/19 finalised and completed this development as far as the confession and church order are concerned.The confessions delineate the contours o f the church order {Confessio Gallicana o f 1559, art.29-31; Confessio Belgica o f 1561, art.30-32;