From a brief explanation of the Church Order by Johannes Jansen*

Previous article in this series: July 2025, p. 375.

Article 77: “After the suspension from the Lord’s table, and subsequent admonitions, and before proceeding to excommunication, the obstinacy of the sinner shall be publicly made known to the congregation; the offense explained, together with the care bestowed upon him, in reproof, suspension from the Lord’s Supper, and repeated admonition; and the congregation shall be exhorted to speak to him and to pray for him. There shall be three such admonitions. In the first the name of the sinner shall not be mentioned that he be somewhat spared. In the second, with the advice of the classis, his name shall be mentioned. In the third the congregation shall be informed that (unless he repent) he will be excluded from the fellowship of the church, so that his excommunication, in case he remains obstinate, may take place with the tacit approbation of the church. The interval between the admonitions shall be left to the discretion of the consistory.”

Article 76 deals with the “first act” of discipline. Article 77 leads to the “second act.” If the withholding of the Lord’s Supper and the admonitions that followed, according to Article 76, do not bear fruit, then discipline continues. Hence, Article 77 deals with the course of discipline (also called the “three stages of censure”) from the first to the second act, that is, from the withholding of the Lord’s Supper to excommunication, and finally about excommunication itself. This article is often misunderstood. It was then thought that the withholding of the Lord’s Supper according to Article 76 was the same as the “first stage” of censure in Article 77. To make this distinction clear now, the Synod of Utrecht (1905) added to the old edition the following words in italics: “After the suspension from the Lord’s table, and subsequent admonitions, and before proceeding to excommunication, the obstinacy of the sinner shall be publicly made known to the congregation….”1 Thus, first, the withholding of the Lord’s Supper without giving notice to the congregation (therefore called “silent censure”) must precede the various exhortations. This is followed first by the three exhortations (the so-called three stages of censure), and, if they do not help, finally excommunication itself according to Article 77. So we are dealing here with two things:

1. The course of discipline from censure to excommunication, or the so-called three stages of censure. The article begins with a brief description of the course of discipline after the withholding of the Lord’s Supper. This description includes three things:

First of all, an open statement of the reason why discipline must continue: “After the suspension from the Lord’s table, and subsequent admonitions, and before proceeding to excommunication, the obstinacy of the sinner shall be publicly made known to the congregation.” Not sin itself, but the stubbornness of the sinner, his unwillingness to break with sin, and his impenitence, are the reason that discipline must continue. Therefore, the notification to the congregation should not emphasize sin as such, but that stubbornness to confess that sin.

Furthermore, a statement of the right to continue with discipline: “the offense explained, together with the care bestowed upon him, in reproof, suspension from the Lord’s Supper, and repeated admonition.” That statement must not be made in particular, but must be made in general terms, e.g., that N.N. has sinned against the first, second, third commandments, etc.; not the manner in which it took place, but the kind of sin must be explained (Voetius). Furthermore, the consistory gives a brief explanation of the diligence shown to the sinner: a. in the rebukes already before the Lord’s Supper was denied him; b. in the withholding of the Lord’s Supper itself; and c. in the repeated admonitions that have been conferred upon him after the suspension. These declarations serve to assure the congregation of the good right of the ongoing discipline.

And finally, a reminder to the congregation “to speak to him and to pray for him.” This addressing cannot take place after the first stage, because the name of the sinner is still concealed. Therefore, this exhortation to address the sinner must first be inserted into the proclamation of the second stage. The congregation can pray for him, although it does not yet know the name of the sinner. What is meant here is that the members of the congregation pray separately for him. Too often we forget this. The congregation must therefore cooperate with the consistory. It must not leave discipline to the consistory. It is a member of her body that has sinned. And the hand must not say to the foot: I do not need you! When asked whether the words “the obstinacy of the sinner shall be publicly made known to the congregation” must be understood as referring to the confessing members alone or to the entire audience, the Synod of Middelburg (1581) already replied, “It is understood as [applying] to all those who are in attendance.”2

Then follow the three steps separately: “There shall be three such admonitions. In the first, the name of the sinner shall not be mentioned that he be somewhat spared. In the second, with the advice of the classis, his name shall be mentioned. In the third the congregation shall be informed that (unless he repent) he will be excluded from the fellowship of the church….” We speak of the three steps of censure. But the article speaks of three exhortations. Thus, in these “steps” of censure, we should not think of a certain ascent from the bottom up or from the lesser to the greater, but of three similar exhortations, distinguished only in degree; and we may, under that condition, continue to speak of “the three steps of censure.”

The first step is the admonition without the name. Already at the Synod in Emden (1571) the wording of this step was recorded, as is still the case in the church order: “In the first the sinner shall not be named that he be somewhat pardoned.”3 The peculiarity of this step is that only the sin is declared and the congregation is exhorted to pray for him. This admonition must be written in advance, approved by the consistory, and read accordingly. It must contain: a. the nature of the sin; b. the stubbornness of the sinner; c. the diligence of the consistory in rebuking, withholding the Lord’s Supper, and various admonitions followed thereafter; and d. the exhortation to the congregation to pray for him.

The second step is the admonition expressing the name of the sinner. The  same admonition is now repeated, but now two things are added, that is, the advice of the classis and the expression of the name of the sinner. In the first wording of the Synod at Emden (1571) it said only: “In the second he shall be named.”4 The churches were only then divided into classes, but the question would be whether they could come together because of the persecution. Only after freedom came did the Synod of Middelburg (1581) insert: “In the second with advice of the classis his name shall be mentioned.”5 She considered this necessary: a. to avoid partiality; b. to guarantee the righteousness of discipline; and c. for the information of consistories that were less aware of the course of discipline. With advice of the classis (ex classis judicio, i.e., in accordance with the judgment of the classis) does not mean: with leave or with the consent of the classis, so that the latter decides, for then the classis would abolish the independence of the local church; it also does not mean: after advice, so that it would be sufficient for the consistory only to ask for formal advice, without further disturbing itself; but it means: according to or in harmony with the judgment of the classis, so that the consistory adheres to the advice of the classis, according to the old rule that the minority conforms to the decision of the majority. The classis must convince itself by inquiring with the consistory a. that the sin is censurable; b. that the withholding of the Lord’s Supper with the admonitions, according to Article 76, took place; and c. that even after the first step the sinner persists in his impenitence. If the classis advises to proceed with the second step, the consistory will give notice of it to the person concerned. The form of the words must be carefully drawn up and approved by the consistory. It must not involve insult, because then it is punishable by law. It must contain: a. the name of the sinner and the nature of his sin; b. the stubborn impenitence since the first step; c. the admonition to the congregation to speak to him and pray for him.

The third step is a repetition of the second with the announcement of the resolution of the intended excommunication: “In the third the congregation shall be informed that (unless he repent) he will be excluded from the fellowship of the church.” This third admonition is not yet excommunication itself, but a final public admonition, and also the announcement that the excommunication will follow in three or four weeks, should no conversion take place in the meantime. The time must be long enough that the accused can seriously consider whether to repent or also to appeal. Also for this third step, the advice of the classis is, if not necessary, then desirable, because the end of Article 76 states that “no one shall be excommunicated except with advice of the classis.” Article 77 now goes on to say that this advice must already be requested at the second step, but this does not make it superfluous at the third step, because the circumstances between the second and third step may have changed so much that the classis must recommend some postponement.

2. At last then follows the excommunication itself: “so that his excommunication, in case he remains obstinate, may take place with the tacit approbation of the church.” The intention of the announcement is therefore that his cutting off be done with tacit approbation (Latin: tacitis ecclesiae suffragiis, i.e., with silent vote) of the congregation. The consistory is in charge, but the congregation tacitly gives its consent, according to the rule: that which is silent, agrees. If there is a complaint, the consistory must investigate it. If it is well-founded, the consistory must try to remove it, but if it is unfounded, they continue with discipline up to and including excommunication.

The word “excommunicate” means to cut off a member from the body. We find the clearest statement in 1 Corinthians 5:2, “might be taken away from among you,” and v. 13, “put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” The Latin word is: excommunicatio, i.e., ex communione ecclesiae cludere, mittere, i.e., to exclude, to send out of the communion of the church. The Dutch word “ban” means to ban someone from the congregation.

The Form of Excommunication describes the character of excommunication thus: “that for the aforesaid reasons we have excommunicated, and by these do excommunicate N. from the church of God, and from fellowship with Christ, and the holy sacraments, and from all the spiritual blessings and benefits which God promiseth to and bestows upon His church, so long as he obstinately and impenitently persists in his sins, and is therefore to be accounted by you as a heathen man and a publican, according to the command of Christ (Matt. 18), who saith that whatsoever His ministers bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.”6

The Heidelberg Catechism [in A. 85] defines excommunication as being “excluded from the Christian church, and by God himself from the kingdom of Christ.”

Excommunication is therefore a serious matter. It is not a handing over to Satan, for that was only an apostolic discipline; nor anathema or curse, for that word does not signify an act of ecclesiastical discipline; but it is a termination of brotherly fellowship and a withdrawal of the congregation from the excommunicated; a solemn declaration in the name of Christ that he is made manifest as not to be a brother; exclusion from the church and from all her benefits and gifts which God has given her; which exclusion, if it takes place according to the commission of Christ, will one day be followed by the exclusion from the kingdom of heaven by God himself, unless the sinner repent and the judgment to come be averted.

Finally, it says: “The interval between the admonitions shall be left to the discretion of the consistory.” A fixed determination cannot be made for it, because all cases are not the same. But it can be said that, as a rule, several months elapse between the various steps or public admonitions. The entire disciplinary action lasts two to three years. If it ends in a year, it was very quick. Only when all admonitions are exhausted and the sinner persists to the utmost in his impenitence should excommunication be applied.

* The following is a translation of Johannes Jansen, Korte Verklaring van de Kerkenordening [A Brief Explanation of the Church Order] (Amsterdam: J. H. Kok, 1923).
1 The church order of 1905 can be found online here: http:// www.kerkrecht.nl/node/177.
2 Question 69 put to the assembly reads: “Whether what is said in the 63rd article of the Church Order concerning public reconciliation, likewise above in the particular question concerning public presentation of the man for excommunication, is to be understood as a public action in the church before all listeners in general or before the congregation alone?” Quoted in Richard De Ridder, ed., The Church Orders of the Sixteenth Century Reformed Churches of the Netherlands Together with Their Social, Political, and Ecclesiastical Context (Grand Rapids: Calvin Theological Seminary, 1987), 300.
3 The quotation is from Article 31 of this synod. Cf. De Ridder, Church Orders, 119.
4 The quotation is from Article 31 of this synod. Cf. De Ridder, Church Orders, 119.
5 The quotation is from Question 39 put to this synod. Cf. De Ridder, Church Orders, 288-289.
6 From the Form of Excommunication in The Psalter (2024), 654-655.