Are our churches really churches if...

This Sunday night, I will be arguing that the central mission of a New Testament Church is the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ to sinners.

If your average church is filled with a majority of members who either will not share their faith with anyone in the next year or cannot share their faith with someone in the next year, then does a true New Testament Church really even exist?

It seems to me that after four years of pastoring, this seems to be the chief shortfall of many churches, namely the absence of church members sharing the gospel with unrepentant sinners. And if this is, as I argue, the chief mission of the Church, I do not think God's blessing will ever fall until the Church is willing to proclaim the gospel outside of our Sunday meeting places.

Priorities: American Patriotism or Zeal for God

This past July 4th, the blogosphere was alive with talk concerning the appropriateness and inappropriateness of Patriotic displays in Christian worship gatherings. Dr. Russell Moore, guest host of the Albert Mohler Radio Show, even dedicated an entire show to the debate with two guests who do not favor patriotic displays in corporate worship.

I may catch some heat for what I am about to say, but ultimately Christians are supposed to fear God more than they fear man, so here goes...

Personally, I am not in favor of grand displays of patriotism in Christian worship gatherings. I do not believe pledges of allegiance to the American Flag in Christian worship gatherings are helpful. I do not believe the Star Spangled Banner should be sung. I believe if I see one more power point of the American flag as the backdrop with an image of Jesus at the forefront I going to be sick.

I do believe in our Christian corporate worship gatherings we should give thanks unto God for the freedom we have in this country to worship freely and without governmental interference. We should pray for our governmental leaders, including the commander-in-chief. We should pray earnestly for the men and women and the families of those who serve our country admirably in the military. We should pray for peace.

But at the center of every Christian corporate worship gathering should be Jesus Christ. I know this is difficult for previous generations to believe, but people like myself who do not favor grand patriotic displays, are patriotic, however, I am much more zealous to see the Kingdom of Christ increase more than American zeal. I know you can have zeal for Christ and American patriotism, but the problem I see is that most people I run into have a far greater concern for America and its future than Christ's Kingdom and the future of their own local church.

For example...

You are far more likely to find in many Christian churches members who are talking about the increase of gas prices and its impact on Americans than the increase of unbelief in the community and its impact on God's glory.

You are far more likely if the subject of Hispanics is raised in many Christian churches to have members making comments about how Hispanics are taking jobs from Americans and how Hispanics need to learn English than how we might reach them for Christ and bring them into the fellowship of our churches.

You are more likely in many Christian churches to have members extremely more incensed when the nation is attacked than when the nation repeatedly attacks the character of God.

You are more likely in many Christian churches to have tears run down the cheek of a member's face or the stirring of a member's affections when God Bless America is sung than if the hymn There is a Fountain Filled with Blood is sung.

You are far more likely to have Christian members of your local church who will fight and die while serving in the military for their country than you will have members who will die while serving their Lord on the mission field in the hard places.

You are more likely to have many Christian members in your local church who celebrate July 4th weekend more than they celebrate Resurrection weekend.

In some Christian churches you are far more likely to hear a comment about "bombing those Muslims" than "preaching the gospel to those people of the Muslim faith."

You are far more likely in some Christian churches to hear conversations about the problems of America and how to fix them than to hear the problems in the local church and how to fix them.

You are far more likely to hear a heated conversation from a church member in many Christian churches over illegal immigration than a heated conversation about regenerate church membership.

You are far more likely in many Christian churches to hear conversations about the decline of the American economy than to hear conversations concerning the decline of baptisms.

How many readers can quote the pledge of allegiance to the American Flag? Now how many of you who quoted the pledge of allegiance to the American Flag can quote Matthew 22:37-38, Deuteronomy 6:4-5, or Acts 4:12?

When I see the day where more Christians are more concerned with the Lord's Kingdom than concern for the future of America I will be less concerned about songs like America the Beautiful being sung on July 4th weekend.

New Pictures III

The young ones at Little River Baptist Church

Franchising the Local Church

Over on Christianitytoday's Out of Ur blog a recent post has been added highlighting the trend to franchise local churches by using satellite campuses. One of two things usually occurs during this methodology.

First, the new plant or existing church seeking to become a part of a franchised network signs contracts obligating themselves to feed in the preaching from the lead pastor of whatever network they are joining. They do not use any local pastor for preaching. However the local church does have its own pastors who provide for various pastoral care ministries. They can have their own music, but when it comes to the preaching, they listen to a pastor from another location.

The second option is a little bit different. In this model, the new plant or existing church seeking to join the network contractually obligates itself under the rule of the pastors of the mother church. So it virtually becomes one church, several locations.

I find the trend troubling for several reasons.

1. It seems to say that only a few gifted individuals are qualified to preach.
2. It does not encourage younger men who are called to preach to have much of an opportunity if the pulpit can only be used by the lead pastor of the mother church.
3. Every church should have access to the ones who instructionally lead the local church, and this process negates this possibility.
4. The second form of this model seems Episcopal rather than congregational.
5. It discourages the development process whereby elders who can preach are trained and nurtured.

HT: Karisblog

Baptism, Communion, & Local Church Membership

A debate has been circling the blogs regarding the relationship between Baptism, Communion, and Local Church Membership. It began as far as I can tell when John Piper responded through the Desiring God Blog to the change made in Wayne Grudem's systematic theology textbook concerning baptism. Previously, Grudem wrote in favor of allowing both credobaptistic and paedobaptistic views to be allowed within a single denomination and its local churches. However, he has personally changed his view. The compromise within a local church to allow both seems to be too great for the credo-baptist.

The meat of Piper's response comes when he says:

When I weigh the kind of imperfection involved in tolerating an invalid baptism because some of our members are deeply persuaded that it is biblically valid, over against the kind of imperfection involved in saying to a son or daughter of the living God, “You are excluded from the local church,” my biblical sense is that the latter is more unthinkable than the former. The local church is a visible expression of the invisible, universal, body of Christ. To exclude from it is virtually the same as excommunication. And no serious church takes excommunication as an invitation to attend the church down the street.

You can find Grudem's response to Piper's here. It was both humorous and humble when Grudem said that his own wife found Piper's argument more persuasive. For a more comprehensive and detailed report of Piper's own understanding on this issue you can research these resources.

Since this foray, others have weighed in on the discussion. Over at 9 Marks Blog, you can find two entries by Mark Dever here and here. You can also find two good posts regarding this issue from a historical perspective written by Aaron Menikoff (Part 1 & Part 2).

In Menikoff's articles he references John Bunyan, author of of the famed Pilgrim's Progress, who made significant arguments why paedo-baptists should not be barred from the membership or communion of a local baptist church titled, Differences in Water Baptism No Bar to Communion (1673).

Sam Storms has weighed in with an article asking how these men (Piper, Dever, Mohler, Duncan) can really be Together for the Gospel if Dever and Mohler would not permit Duncan to receive communion at their church (because they do not believe infant baptism constitutes a real baptism and one must receive believer's baptism before one receives communion). Meanwhile, Ligon Duncan has stated that his response will be forthcoming.

My own view is fairly traditional within modern baptist circles. The church I pastor requires baptism by immersion after the evidence of genuine faith in Jesus Christ in order to become a member of the church and to participate in communion. However, we do not police the elements in such a way that a visiting Presbyterian could not participate although I would make it clear from the beginning before the elements are passed out what our church's view is.

Like Grudem's wife though, I find Piper and Bunyan's arguments to be weighty and biblical. I also find it contradictory to prohibit a Presbyterian from communion at the church I pastor, but would allow him to preach at the church I pastor, which I have done. This past summer I invited both a Presbyterian and Methodist to preach while I was out of town.

My hope is that this current debate will spark much fruit from future and current Ph.D students who will try to tackle these issues afresh in our day. Until then, I will be examining the more thorough writings that have been offered by Christians past.

Update: Ligon Duncan has begun his post series on why he, Piper, Mohler, and Dever can be Together for the Gospel but not together on various other doctrines.

Should Baptism Divide Us?

Dr. Greg Wills recently lectured and fielded questions on this topic at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary where he teaches Historical Theology. The title of his lecture is titled, Should the Water Divide Us? Baptism, Church Membership, and the Glory of Christ. Dr. Wills addresses the following three issues related to Baptism:

1. Is immersion essential to Baptism?
2. May we admit persons to church membership and the Lord's Supper who have not been immersed?
3. Does the administrator matter?

This is a timely address considering the many debates that have recently arisen in Baptist life such as Bethlehem Baptist Church's recent move in the direction (although not adopted to date) to allow for convinced Paedobaptists to join the church, the recent moves by some Baptist churches to accept believer's who were sprinkled instead of immersed into church membership, and the recent debate regarding the new IMB Baptism policy, specifically on the issue of whether or not a baptism is legitimate if the baptizing church did not endorse the doctrine of eternal security.

I will update the post with his answers after I listen to the address today.

Update

Question 1.
Dr. Wills argues that when we enter into a mode debate we are unnecessarily giving ground away in the debate. Wills argues that baptism is the immersion of a believer in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Therefore there is no other legitimate mode.

Question 2.
Dr. Wills argues that only those who have been properly baptized can be received into the local church membership and partake in the Lord's Supper. He says the one who has not been immersed or the one has never been baptized as a believer, or one who has misunderstood the doctrine of Baptism (those who claim Baptism is regenerative) are in unrepentant sin and therefore ought not be allowed to partake of the Lord's Supper.

Question 3.
Wills says the administrator does matter. His personal view is that the ordinances should be administered by the recognized ministers of the local church. However he does not teach the illegitimacy of a baptism administered by a lay-person if the local church approves of it. He thinks it is unwise.

Wills aptly prefaces his address by saying that Baptism is not on the same level as other doctrinal issues, but he believes the doctrine is important as all teachings of Christ are important. We should strive to submit correctly to every commandment given by Scripture.

Wills does answer a question pointed at the IMB issue. He is not personally convinced of the necessity on the policy concerning eternal security, but he does believe the IMB has the right to adopt it. Furthermore, he says that if his own church adopted the same policy, he would submit to it.

The Mission of the Church?

Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, the Presiding Bishop and Primate of the Episcopal Church, issued a statement at the Newsweek/Washingpost On Faith Blog addressing the withdraw of some Episcopal Churches in Virginia from the oversight of the American Bishop.

The most disturbing aspect of her statement is the lack of a clear articulation of the reconciliation found in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Her assessment of the church's agenda of reconciliation seems only to address human-to-human relationships, and how we treat one another.

She says, "The Episcopal Church continues to focus on its mission of reconciling the world, particularly as it cares for the least, the lost, and the left out." Furthermore she states, "Our mission as a Church is the reconciliation of the world. We will continue to feed the hungry, house the homeless, educate children, heal the sick, minister to those in prison, and speak good news to those who have only heard the world's bad news."

Jesus, most assuredly speaks to man's obligation to love fellow man. But the reconciliation found in the gospel of Jesus Christ chiefly concerns itself with man's reconciliation with God. Sadly, nothing in this article comes close to saying just how one is reconciled with God. One would think if a Christian were speaking to the mission of the Christian Church, he or she would have to address man's reconciliation with God through the blood of Jesus Christ.

Perhaps Romans 5:6-11 will clear the fog:
6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Local Church Membership

Mike Mckinley, pastor of Guilford Baptist Church in Sterling, VA and writer for 9Marks ministries, writes a helpful article on whether the the Bible really teaches Church Membership as it is often practiced today.

Regenerate Church Membership

Dr. Mark Dever, pastor at Capitol Hill Baptist Church, has contributed his thoughts concerning the failed resolution at the Southern Baptist Convention pertaining to regenerate church membership. The failed resolution encouraged Southern Baptist Churches to exercise integrity in maintaining accurate and responsible membership rolls.

One member from the resolution committee suggested that churches should not remove members from our rolls because these particular inactive members are prospects for the church.

Members should not be prospects. Members by definition are active, but Southern Baptists, by in large, are presently unwilling to remove these members from their rolls.

I think we should all work towards maintaining accurate and honest membership rolls.

Giving an Account

Hebrews 13:17 says, "Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you."

This highlighted portion of verse 17 should always be on the mind of the faithful pastor. Here is one question I find myself asking lately that is related to this truth: In order to give an account of those I shepherd to God, do I not have to know them?

This question is easy for me to answer. I believe I do have to know the flock which I shepherd. I believe I have to know their names. I believe I must have interaction with them.

Logically, I have come to the conclusion that churches can become to large. Churches can grow so much numerically that it really becomes an impossibility for a pastor/pastors to faithfully shepherd.

With many churches growing by adding satellite churches where the preaching pastor is electronically present, are they moving away from fidelity to Hebrews 13:17? Can a pastoral staff faithfully intercede personally for a congregation of 20,000 members?

As a pastor of a small rural church, I have not had to deal with this issue, but we all should be thinking and preparing for church plants.

Articles of Faith

I have been recently working on the development and adoption of a statement of faith for our church. I was not aware that we already had one, but when the church was established, Articles of Faith were adopted (in 1791). Some of our more interesting articles are as follows:

Point 12
We believe that none but regularly baptized members have the right to commune at the Lord's Table.

Many years ago the practice here was informally changed by the Pastor, but there has been no formal change. Since I became the Pastor we have practiced a form of close communion in violation of the Articles of Faith. This is evidence of the little value people today commonly place on statements of faith. Needless to say, we will shortly revise our Articles of Faith to coincide with our current practice. We do not wish to speak from both sides of our mouth.

Point 11
We believe that no minister has the right to administration of the ordinances, only such as are regularly baptized, called and come under the imposition of hands by the presbytery.

I am not even sure if I qualify to administer the ordinances under this existing article even as the Pastor. I was ordained by my home church. I was examined by elders and deacons. And the ordained men of the church placed hands on me and prayed for me during the service. But I am not sure this qualifies as "the presbytery." Needless to say, we will have to address this issue as well.

In my meetings with the pulpit committee, I was asked if I endorsed the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 (which I do), so my assumption was this statement of faith was established already in the church. I will take the blame though; I should have pressed the issue since I favor the active use of Statements of Faith in the local church.

Seth and Brent, do you local churches have and use statements of faith? Which ones?

Church Membership Rolls

An article published by Baptist Press illustrates the problem Southern Baptist Churches have when it comes to the accuracy of church membership rolls. Many churches have memberships which greatly exceed average attendance for the primary worship gathering. Many churches have members on their rolls who have not attended the church at which they are members for years. What does this say about church membership? What does this say about the integrity of the SBC when it reports that it has 16 million plus members? Unfortunately, it says that in many churches, an individual can can join a church one Sunday, and never return for the rest of his life, yet be considered a member.

Currently, I am having to deal with this issue in the church I pastor. Brent, you will probably face this situation in the near future as a Senior Pastor, and Seth you may have the opportunity from both the classroom and perhaps serving in a local church to address this issue. What basic steps would you guys take to correct this problem, and how slowly should a new pastor take on this problem?

Recently, a resolution was sent to the resolution committee of the Southern Baptist Convention regarding this very issue. It can be found here. Do you think this is a good start from a convention standpoint?