This presentation explains the Cambridge Platform of 1648, which was written by early American church leaders as a foundational document for church governance, in terms that show its relevance to 21st century organizations.

1. THE CAMBRIDGE PLATFORM OF 1648
Eric Meade
www.ericmeade.com
ericmeade@gmail.com
May 6, 2013

2. Key Questions We’ll Try to Answer
1. What does the Cambridge
Platform say?
2. What is its relevance to 21st
century governance?

3. BACKGROUND
What is it?
• A church document created at the
request of a civil magistrate, approved
by a synod in 1648.
• Heavily cited from the Old and New
Testaments of the Bible
• Section 1 describes ecclesiastical
governance, and Section 2 (not
relevant to our discussion) is a
“confession of faith.”
• Still viewed by several Christian
denominations as a foundational
governance document.
• Also used by Boy Scouts, Alcoholics
Anonymous, and other groups where
participation is recognized as
intrinsically motivated.

4. BACKGROUND
Why are we talking about it?
• It offers principles for democratic self-
organization by people into local
nodes on a global network.
• It has a 365-year track record of
successful application.
• It could inform our thinking on 21st
century governance.

5. DEFINITION “A Congregational church is by the
institution of Christ a part of the militant
visible church, consisting of a company of
saints by calling, united into one body by
a holy covenant, for the public worship of
God, and the mutual edification one of
another, in the fellowship of the Lord
Jesus.”
My translation:
A TEAM is an entity consisting of a
company of good people united by a
voluntary covenant for the public and
manifest advancement of a shared vision,
and for the mutual edification of its
members.

6. TEAMS The TEAM is a fundamental unit of
organization. Each TEAM is autonomous
and distinct.
A TEAM should be big enough to do the
work, but not bigger than can
conveniently meet in one place.
Members of TEAMS are bound together
by a voluntary covenant whereby they
apply themselves toward the vision and
observe common ordinances.
The TEAM’s vision should be stated as
simply as possible so that:
• It is easily kept in mind, and
• It is clear who’s in and who’s out.
A TEAM continues to exist even when
things go wrong.

7. LEADERSHIP Three types of leaders:
• MENTORS (pastors/teachers) –
provide motivation, wisdom,
knowledge, and care; “called” by
members.
• GUIDES (elders) – provide general
administrative leadership (more on
this later); chosen by members.
• TREASURER (deacon) – manages
financial matters; chosen by
members.
Leaders should be “tested” and “proven”
before being placed in office.
No other officer positions should exist.

8. GUIDES
Responsibilities of GUIDES:
• Admission and dismissal
• Enforcement of discipline
• Convening TEAM meetings
• Handling private matters
• Attending to personal needs of TEAM
members
• Rendering other service as required
In general, GUIDES perform these
functions with the consent of the TEAM.

9. RECRUITMENT
Aspiring TEAM members must be
examined before being allowed to join.
Aspiring TEAM members must make a
public declaration of purpose (e.g., of
their alignment with the TEAM’s vision) to
the TEAM.

10. MOVEMENT
BETWEENTEAMS
Members cannot move between TEAMS
of their own accord.
A TEAM may recommend one of its own
members to another TEAM. That TEAM
makes its own decision as to whether or
not to accept the new member.
Everyone must be part of a TEAM.
Stand-alones are not allowed. If you
leave, you give up your membership
status.

11. CONFLICT
RESOLUTION
For private matters between members:
1. An offended party should confront
the offender and seek amends.
2. If that doesn’t work, the offended
party should bring along one or two
other members to confront the
offender.
3. If that doesn’t work, the offended
party should brief the GUIDES, who
will have the entire TEAM confront
the offender.
4. If that doesn’t work, the TEAM can
suspend the offender from key
privileges.
5. If that doesn’t work, the TEAM can
dismiss (fire) the offender.

12. CONFLICT
RESOLUTION
For public matters:
The TEAM may dismiss a member for an
act “of a more heinous and criminal
nature.”

13. CONFLICT
RESOLUTION The Cambridge Platform does not say
how a conflict would be resolved if the
“offender” and “offended” are not clearly
distinguished, or when the TEAM is
divided as to the proper resolution.
Discernment and humility are required in
the handling of offenses and conflicts.
• “The best of us have need of much
forgiveness from the Lord.”
• “On some have compassion, others
save with fear.”
At each step in the process, forgiveness
is available – even after dismissal
(excommunication).

14. NETWORK
GOVERNANCE
TEAMS are distinct and equal.
TEAMS interact voluntarily in the
following ways:
1. Mutual care and support
2. Mutual consultation – e.g., a TEAM
can seek advice from another TEAM
or from the entire NETWORK
3. Admonition of an TEAM that is
headed in the wrong direction
A. The admonished TEAM
remains autonomous
B. Other TEAMS can individually
and voluntarily break ties with
that TEAM
4. Mutual participation of members,
when appropriate
5. Mutual recommendation of members

15. EXPANSION
When a TEAM grows too big, some of its
members should break off to start a new
TEAM somewhere else.

16. QUESTIONS
1. How is this model similar/dissimilar
to other emerging governance
models like holacracy and peer
networks?
2. What elements of this model are
anachronistic?
3. What elements of this model are
timely?

17. QUESTIONS
Any other questions or comments?