Recently I have been wondering why some people could be so against of a church having a constitution. Their contention is that the Bible is the constitution and there should be none other. But notwithstanding that, there can still be many different views on Baptism, Holy Communion, salvation, etc ... Some people felt they're hurt by being caught in the "system" and believed that the way for them to get back on their feet is to leave the man-devised "system". Can we really get out of being in such a "system" as may be set by the Church Constitution?
Picture this:
Someone planted a church. The church grew; more and more people were added to the group. As the group got bigger, more things were needed, i.e. larger space & greater need for utilities, e.g. fans/air-conditioners, lightings, etc. for the crowd. As the church progressed further to achieve its mission to reach out, even more things were needed, e.g. stationeries, fax machine, telephones, projectors, etc. Soon people felt the need to have chairs, tables and other furniture. The church then started to get involved in bigger things to meet the needs of the community around them and more funds were needed to facilitate the efforts. As the group got bigger and chaotic, conflict and friction resulted. Each member had to have his or her own way and views on anything. On top of that, the group and its activities were required to be in compliance with the applicable regulations and laws of the land.
Arising from the above scenario, answers to queries, including but not limited to the following, are necessary for survival or preservation of the life of the church:
- who is in charge or makes the ultimate decision?
- who determines how the funds are spent?
- who holds the assets of the church and account for them?
- who determines what areas of development that the church should concentrate on?
- how are differences, disputes or disagreements between community members to be handled?
- what legal compliances are required from the group and from each member in respect of the activities being carried out?
In a civilized community, one cannot avoid being subjected to organizational rules or regulated processes or the feeling of being caught up in an institution. Take for example, even in a small family of 4, i.e. daddy, mommy, sister and brother, there are house or family rules to adhere to, e.g. no fighting over toys, no screaming at anyone, each to do chores as scheduled, etc.
One cannot run away from being “institutionalized”. Even for organic growth, like grapes in vineyards, there are structures, frameworks and trellises to hold the vines for them to grow.
Perhaps, with a Church Constitution, the following may help the church:
1) to survive for any length of time with proper organizational and administrative structure;
2) to have a vision for what kind of structure the church will embrace in the development of its core group or leaders;
3) to set out a common view and practice such items that are core beliefs in a church and/or reflecting congregational democracy under the leadership of Christ;
4) to avoid conflict and as such, less pressure, so that the church could move forward and not worry about having to put-off internal fires;
5) to have principles that will guide the church to accomplish the mission for which God has created it;
6) to make the church a legally-recognised entity, registered with the relevant authorities and able to contract for its needs and requirements;
7) to ensure that all members can participate in the decision-making process. The congregational polity of a church can embody democratic processes, delegating responsibilities to its leaders so as to be responsible to the lordship of Christ, and be guided by His authoritative Word.
A Constitution that seeks to control rather than facilitate the growth of the members should at all cost be avoided. A good Church Constitution would not cause the church to grow but a bad Church Constitution can prevent the church from growing.
So, can we do without a Church Constitution?
